St. Cloud housing study

Document Sample
St. Cloud housing study Powered By Docstoc
					     2013 ST. CLOUD
COMMUNITY HOUSING STUDY




         DRAFT FOR PUBLIC REVIEW
             NOVEMBER 13, 2013
 2013 ST. CLOUD
COMMUNITY HOUSING STUDY




      Draft Report for Public Review
           November 13, 2013




            Prepared for the:
            City of St. Cloud
    Community Development Department


              Prepared by:
     Western Economic Services, LLC
           212 SE 18th Avenue
          Portland, OR 97214
         Phone: (503) 239-9091
       Toll Free: (866) 937-9437
          Fax: (503) 239-0236

    Website: http://www.westernes.com
TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY                                                                      1 
       A. Overview                                                                     1 
       B. Research Summary                                                             1 
       C. Conclusions and Recommendations                                              4 

I. INTRODUCTION                                                                       9 
        A. Purpose and Sponsorship of This Study                                      9 
        B. Research Methodology                                                      10 
        C. Summary                                                                   13 

II. DEMOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC INFLUENCES                                              15 
       A. Demographics                                                               15 
       B. Economics                                                                  28 
       C. Summary                                                                    37 

III. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT                                                        39 
       A. Housing Stock                                                              39 
       B. Housing Production and Affordability                                       44 
       C. 2013 St. Cloud Rental Survey                                               51 
       D. Housing Problems                                                           52 
       E. Zoned Residential Land Use Capacity                                        59 
       F. Summary                                                                    63 

IV. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT                                                               65 
       A. 2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey                                    65 
       B. Focus Groups and Public Input Meetings                                     72 
       C. Summary                                                                    74 

V. RESEARCH CONCLUSIONS                                                              75 
       A. Overview of Findings                                                       75 
       B. Conclusions and Recommendations                                            78 

VI. APPENDICES                                                                      81 
       A. Additional Census Bureau Data                                             81 
       B. Additional BLS and BEA Data                                               83 
       C. Additional 2013 Community Housing Survey Data                             88 
       D. Additional 2013 St. Cloud Rental Survey Data                             128 
       E. Additional Forecast Data                                                 134 
       F. Special Needs Population Housing Capacity 2013                           139 




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                       Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                       i                      November 13, 2013
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A. OVERVIEW
PURPOSE AND SPONSORSHIP OF THIS STUDY
The goals of the 2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Study are to enhance the understanding of
housing and homeless issues throughout the community of St. Cloud, including needs, gaps and
prospective priorities in the provision of housing and housing related services. This project has had
two main purposes: 1) collect and evaluate both quantitative and qualitative information about
housing and homeless needs in the City of St. Cloud; and 2) prepare a Community Housing
Assessment that can aid formulating local housing policy and support both implementation and
housing project decisions. While the City of St. Cloud served as the project manager and fiscal
agent for this project, the commitment that many community members have made in this process
has been demonstrated by both the contribution of in-kind advisory roles and direct financial
support to the research activities.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This evaluation represents a thorough examination of a variety of sources related to housing
and homeless needs within the City’s boundaries. This study involved primary research, which
was the creation and analysis of new data, such as that drawn from the 2013 Community
Housing Survey, the 2013 St. Cloud Rental Survey, and options expressed during a series of
public input meetings; it also includes the evaluation of secondary research, which entailed
the collection and analysis of existing data, such as post-secondary student enrollment at St.
Cloud State University, zoning and land use information, building permits, 2000 and 2010
Decennial Census data, the 2011 American Community Survey data, and employment and
income information from other federal data sources.

B. RESEARCH SUMMARY
DEMOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC BACKGROUND
According to the Census Bureau, between 2000 and 2010, the population in the City of St.
Cloud expanded 11.4 percent at the same time that the three-county region rose nearly 20
percent. However, the City of St. Cloud has experienced a significantly more diverse
population, with strong growth in minority populations. Several of these populations have led
to sharp rises in the number of persons per household, with households with six and seven or
more persons rising 26.9 and 53.2 percent, respectively. This seems to imply an expanding
need for larger dwellings with more bedrooms.
However, recent student enrollments at St. Cloud State University have reversed course and
have begun to unwind from a high in excess of 18,000 to fewer than 16,500 in the fall of
2012. As of the production of this report, the 30-day student enrollment data for the fall of
2013 was not available. Pressures on the rental market may have eased somewhat with this
lower level of student enrollment.
The City of St. Cloud is experiencing a rapid rise in its elderly population, with persons 65
years of age or older increasing 12.0 percent and those the age of 75 or older rising some 30.5



St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                         Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                           1                                    November 13, 2013
                                                                                     Executive Summary



percent. These two circumstances imply a rising need for aging-in-place housing options, as
well a likely rise in services for a larger frail elderly population.
Furthermore, while the number of persons per household remains small in historic terms, there
is appearing a turn-a-round in large families, due substantively to immigrant populations.
A reliable count of homeless persons remains elusive, at best. Various methods to estimate or
physically count this special needs population seem to wind up with drastically different
values, within some instances the count swinging from 26 to 146 persons in the City.
However, the public school system tends to have a more consistent, but far larger count, of
homeless enrolled school age children. Both sheltered and unsheltered homeless appears to
be expanding. Other special needs populations continue to expand, with consistent growth in
the transitional and permanent support special in-need populations.
Economic data for the City of St. Cloud, as well as the three-county region, indicates that
unemployment rates are lower than national norms and that employment has tended to expand
over the past several decades. Further, wage rates, while lower than the state average, have
not seen substantive declines during this past economic recession. Unfortunately, while the
share of households making incomes above $100,000 has risen appreciably, so have the
number of households with incomes less than $15,000. On the other hand, with the all-time
peak of SCSU student enrollment occurring at the same time as that large increase in the lowest
income households, this may be a data anomaly that will not repeat itself as the SCSU student
enrollment declines. This implies that some relief in the affordable rental market might be
occurring.
Still, the forecast of population and households indicates that the City of St. Cloud will
experience substantive growth over the next several years, or reaching some 80,000 people
and more than 34,000 households.
HOUSING AND HOMELESS NEEDS BACKGROUND
Total housing stock in the City of St. Cloud rose some 17.6 percent over the past decade at the
same time that the population rose just 11.4 percent. Consequently, the number of vacant
units rose from 597 in 2000 to 1,899 in 2010, reaching an 8.3 percent vacancy rate. Certainly
there were large increases in the number of units either for sale or for rent, but 320 units were
no longer available to the market place, a rise from 108 in 2000. These “other vacant” units
tend to be located in relative proximity to each other and may contribute to a blighting
influence.
Homeless and special needs housing capacity has expanded substantively over the last few
years, from a capacity of 789 persons to 1,069 persons. However, there appears to be more
demand for homeless and transitional housing than there is capacity at the same time that
sufficient capacity appears to exist for permanent supportive housing.
Housing production since the late 1990s has been dominated by single-family construction,
but from 2008 through 2011, there were only 159 units permitted, far fewer than the more
than 200 permitted per year in the previous decade. As well, while apartment permitting has
sometimes been very high, exceeding more than 600 units in a single year, there were none
permitted in 2010 and 100 in 2011, with 166 units in 2012, 131 in 2013 and 66 more
expected in 2014. Results of the 2013 St. Cloud Rental Survey indicate that the previous glut
of rental units has been absorbed and the vacancy rates are now about 3.8 percent. Realtors


St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                      Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                         2                                   November 13, 2013
                                                                                        Executive Summary



are reporting that average sale prices are strengthening as well, rising from about $120,000 in
early 2011 to nearly $160,000 today.
The number of households experiencing a housing cost burden, or spending from 30 to 50
percent of their income on housing, has risen appreciably over the last decade, from 14.4
percent in 2000 to 20.6 percent in 2011. The number of households experiencing a severe
cost burden, or spending more than 50 percent of their income on housing, has risen from 8.8
percent to 18.7 percent. Renters experience a much higher incidence of these cost burdens
than homeowners, with 23.3 percent and 33.0 percent experiencing a cost burden or severe
cost burden, respectively. There are 9,945 households experiencing some sort of housing
problem, of which 8,450 are households with incomes below 80 percent of median family
income. This group does include students housed off-campus.
Between 2010 and 2025, the City of St. Cloud will experience growth, with households rising
from 25,439 in 2010 to 34,002 in 2025, an increase of 8,563 households. It has been
assumed that the SCSU student enrollment ceases declining and stays constant over the
forecast horizon. Of the 34,002 total households, some 20,194 will be homeowners and
13,809 will be renters. Homeownership rises from 53.3 percent in 2010 to 59.4 percent by
2025. Of the 8,563 rise in households, some 2,510 will be households with incomes below
80 percent of median family income (MFI), and of that, 738 will be households with incomes
below 30 percent of MFI. The City appears to have sufficient land zoned for this level of
residential development.
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
The City of St. Cloud distributed the 2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey via an
electronic format, with selected number of paper instruments entered to the database by hand.
There were 353 respondents to the survey. The survey was intended to solicit responses from
stakeholders, as well as citizens of the City, about their opinions related to homeowner, rental,
and special population housing needs, as well as the needs for housing relates services. There
were 120 homeowners, 70 property management personnel, and a wide variety of other
respondents. The key findings, representing the strongest sentiments seen in the survey, or
those categories which solicited at least 100 high need responses, were as follows:
For Owner Occupied Housing:
      There is a high need for the rehabilitation of affordable and low-income housing
      There is a high need for housing rehabilitation assistance and access to low interest
       loans
For Renter Occupied Housing:
       There is a high need for the rehabilitation of low-income units
       There is a high need for new construction of low-income rentals
       There is a high need for the rehabilitation of affordable rental units
For Special Needs Populations:
       There is a high need for emergency housing and homeless shelters




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                         Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                           3                                    November 13, 2013
                                                                                        Executive Summary



When asked about factors that were influential in the housing location decision, sentiment was
somewhat more muted than that noted above, but the following responses which gained at
least 85 strongly positive or high need responses, were as follows:
       Quality K-12 schools were important
       Public safety, such as police and fire protection
       Crime awareness, prevention, and education
The survey also asked participants about the key barriers that exist in the City as it relates to the
preservation or production of housing. Of those that the City can influence, the factors most
often mentioned were community resistance, permitting process, and permitting and
construction fees.
The City also held a series of focus groups and public input meetings, from which several key
notions were expressed. These are:
       Need more units for homeless and emergency shelter space
       Need more units for large families
       Need more senior citizen housing options
       Need to improve image of City of St. Cloud, in part through improved K-12 schools

C. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The City of St. Cloud and its participating agencies undertook the Community Housing Study
to evaluate and address current and future housing and homeless needs in City of St. Cloud.
The goals of the study were to identify, measure, and predict housing needs for renters and
homeowners across a broad spectrum of income levels that will be faced by City’s residents, as
well as homeless persons within the City. The results are meant to aid the City and its
partnering agencies in better designing housing and homeless services and activities, as well as,
more efficiently use available housing and homeless resources. The analysis, which was
comprised of a set of robust primary and secondary research activities, was strengthened
through a large body of quantitative and qualitative data and enhanced through involvement
by both stakeholders and the public in the City of St. Cloud.
Consequently, the completion of this study puts the City and its partnering agencies in a much
stronger position to address the most critical housing and homeless needs for St. Cloud
residents. The list of recommended actions presented on the following pages is based on the
area’s identified housing challenges and will help the City enhance policy and programs to
address current and future affordable housing and homeless needs, thereby forming a strong
foundation for the City and its partnering agencies and its future decisions.
HOUSING CHALLENGES
The primary housing and homeless facility challenges facing the City of St. Cloud, as identified
in the study, fell into the following categories:
    1. Unmet Housing Needs for Many Households. Households with cost burdens, severe
       cost burdens, overcrowding, or inadequate facilities represent households with unmet
       housing needs. Some 9,945 households currently have some form of unmet housing
       need, of which 8,450 have incomes at 80 percent or less of MFI.



St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                         Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                           4                                    November 13, 2013
                                                                                      Executive Summary



    2. Strong demand for both rental units and homeownership housing over the next 10 to
       15 years. Recent permitted housing development activity will not be sufficient to
       satisfy the upcoming housing demand, both for rental units and homeowner units.
    3. Lack of Sufficient Senior Housing suitable for an aging population. Elderly households
       are expanding at a rapid rate in the City of St. Cloud and there appears to be a shortage
       of housing styles suitable for aging-in-place housing choices.
    4. Large Family Housing. Recently arriving immigrant populations are unable to find
       sufficient numbers of large family housing. This is causing an overcrowding difficulty
       for some populations.
    5. Special Needs Populations. The inventory of homeless and emergency housing
       facilities, as well as transitional housing situations, appear to be insufficient to house
       this particular population. Conversely, the permanent supportive housing facilities
       appear to have excess capacity.
    6. Desire for Additional Contemporary Housing and Neighborhood Features. Survey
       respondents noted the need for tools to improve and update the housing stock and
       make neighborhoods more desirable, such as safer and more pedestrian friendly, with
       nearby services, groceries, and retail establishments.
RECOMMENDATIONS TO ADDRESS HOUSING AND HOMELESS NEEDS
Each of the housing challenges indicates several major needs: some rehabilitation of existing
dwellings, new construction of a variety of housing styles, review and reallocation within the
special needs housing and housing related service delivery system, and the inclusion of more
contemporary housing and neighborhood features. The following recommendations are
designed to address the six housing and homeless needs cited above.
Recommendation 1: Conduct Rehabilitation
Survey data indicated strong sentiment for housing rehabilitation and the improvement of
existing housing. Properties that are most suitable for rehabilitation are units that are of above
average grade but below average condition. These could more likely be rehabilitated cost-
effectively. If neighborhoods and homes meeting these criteria are rehabilitated, their
architectural uniqueness and historic qualities can be not only preserved but also restored to
their previous vitality.
Actions:
    1. Identify opportunity areas for rehabilitation targets; direct resources toward:
       a. Purchasing and rehabilitating affordable rental homes in these areas to better serve
           future occupants, a portion of which will be directed to reducing overcrowding and
           allowing for large families;
       b. Conducting rehabilitation on existing homeowner homes so that seniors can age-in-
           place more easily, as well as making the home more marketable and more
           “visitable”.
    2. Partner with other agencies to identify, acquire, and rehabilitate rental housing that
       meets long-term neighborhood goals, as well as addressing the needs of large family
       households and elderly citizens who wish to age-in-place and be near medical and
       related services.
    3. Encourage and support the creation of policies that encourage both accessible and
       visitable housing for all rehabilitated housing.

St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                       Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                         5                                    November 13, 2013
                                                                                       Executive Summary



    4. Partner with local agencies to encourage or directly seek funding for energy efficient
       HVAC and other appliances for retrofitting during rehabilitation.
Recommendation 2: Produce New Construction
Forecast data indicated strong demand for both market rate and affordable housing units,
regardless of whether rental or homeowner. Survey data moderately supported the need for
new lower-income and affordable housing opportunities. Together, the City needs to facilitate
development of new affordable housing opportunities.
Actions:
1. Identify where permitting, construction, and development fees may be waived or reduced
   for appropriate affordable or senior aging-in-place new construction opportunities.
2. Consider options for the development of mixed-income new sub-development
   opportunities and locate some in geographic areas in the City where these would be close
   to public transit, services, and retail.
3. Encourage and support the creation of policies that encourage accessible and visitable
   housing for all newly constructed housing;
4. Convene a task force to conclude with recommendations to the Mayor about the best
   methods to enhance the St. Cloud K-12 schools and to which schools additional tax
   resources may be directed to foster renewed recognition of the quality of St. Cloud.
   Facilitate homeowner opportunities near these K-12 schools.
Recommendation 3: Facilitate More Comprehensive Special Needs Housing and
   Housing Services Funding Allocations
Point-in-Time emergency shelter counts, along with the implications of homeless student
estimates, indicate that insufficient capacity exists in this segment of the special needs category.
On the other hand, some elements of the special needs housing network appear to have excess
capacity, according to data released within this community. It may be useful to consider how
such resources may be allocated to better serve the entirety of the special needs groups.
Actions:
1. Review the detailed capacity data released and appearing in Appendix F, Special Needs
   Population – Housing Capacity 2013, of this document. Review the counts of people
   demanding homeless and special needs services to verify that the under capacity and over
   capacity issues are valid.
2. Consider options for converting or modifying the operation of some permanent supportive
   housing functions to more transitional or emergency housing operations, including the
   reallocation of funding received for such purposes.
Recommendation 4: Incorporate More Contemporary Housing and Neighborhood
   Design Features with All Rehab and New Construction
While many specific housing needs were addressed in the survey and identified in other data
sources, applying contemporary housing features to redevelopment or rehabilitation projects
would appeal to a broader audience, such as seniors, families, the disabled, and persons
interested in energy efficiency, community amenities, and pedestrian-friendly streets. The
addition of these housing and neighborhood features in such projects will increase quality of


St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                        Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                          6                                    November 13, 2013
                                                                                     Executive Summary



life for all residents and will increase both the value and desirability of neighborhoods
throughout St. Cloud.
Actions:
    1. Encourage the City to adopt “visitability” policies, thereby making all housing
       accessible for persons in need of wider doors or step-less access.
    2. Develop options within selected redevelopment projects for senior housing, such as
       patio homes, mixed or shared community housing projects, or rehabilitation programs
       that help seniors update and make safer their dwellings, allowing them to stay in their
       homes.
    3. Partner with local government and transportation agencies to connect neighborhoods
       with pedestrian, bicycle, and public transit routes as well as other urban design features
       that appeal to a variety of residents.
    4. Partner with local government and, particularly, neighborhood organizations to
       facilitate equitable distribution of quality community features such as schools, police,
       shopping, parks, grocery stores, pharmacies, and other social and retail amenities.
    5. Maintain current mixed-housing redevelopment from the Comprehensive Plan.




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                      Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                         7                                   November 13, 2013
I. INTRODUCTION
The goals of the 2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Study are to enhance the understanding of
housing and homeless issues throughout the community of St. Cloud, including needs, gaps and
prospective priorities. This evaluation encompasses an array of housing and housing related
services, such as emergency shelters, transitional housing, permanent supportive housing, shelter +
care, specialized housing, affordable housing, other targeted housing for special in-need
populations, as well as the identification of market rate and more affordable housing. With these
results, the City will be better able to reach commonly shared objectives and strategies for resolving
its housing challenges over the next several years, be better able to update its Comprehensive Plan,
the upcoming Consolidated Plan for Housing and Community Development, and more efficiently
apply its HUD allocated Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds.

A. PURPOSE AND SPONSORSHIP OF THIS STUDY

This project has had two main purposes: 1) collect and evaluate both quantitative and qualitative
information about housing and homeless needs in the City of St. Cloud; and 2) prepare a
Community Housing Assessment that can aid formulating local housing policy and support both
implementation and housing project decisions.

While one objective of this process is to prepare the housing needs assessment in a comprehensive
fashion, another is to review, develop, and refine the long-term community vision. This vision is
created out of the cooperative efforts of the City, stakeholders, and partners in the planning process.
While the City of St. Cloud served as the project manager and fiscal agent for this project, the
commitment that many community members have made in this process has been demonstrated by
both the contribution of in-kind advisory roles and direct financial support to the research activities.
The following represents a list of these Stakeholder and Financial Partners.

       Stakeholder Partners                            Financial Partners 
       Catholic Charities                              Catholic Charities 
       CentraCare Health Systems                       CentraCare Health Systems 
       Central MN Community Foundation                 Central MN Community Foundation 
       Central MN Habitat for Humanity                 Central MN Multihousing Association 
       Central MN Housing Partnership                  City of St. Cloud 
       City of St. Cloud                               St. Cloud HRA 
       Initiative Foundation                           Tri‐County Action Program 
       St. Cloud HRA                                   United Way of Central MN 
       Tri‐County Action Program                       HUD  – Community Development Block    
       United Way of Central MN                                      Grant Program 

The overriding mandate, then, has been to produce housing research and a planning document that
has sprung from a city-wide collaborative effort and that has drawn upon the diverse knowledge
and experiences present in the City of St. Cloud. The hope is that these results will unite people
and engender a shared community vision. Further, the findings in this research document contain
strategies that can be implemented to aid in moving the community along its desired housing
production path.


St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                           Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                            9                                     November 13, 2013
                                                                                            I. Introduction



Consequently, the study will be of use to the City of St. Cloud, the participating sponsors, as
well as for-profit and non-profit developers and other local entities interested in the viability
and the future of St. Cloud’s housing sector.

GEOGRAPHIC SCOPE OF THE PROJECT

The 2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Study most certainly addresses issues for the City of
St. Cloud. However, this study also recognizes that the factors that influence the City’s housing
markets include areas beyond the physical boundaries of the City of St. Cloud. For the
purposes of this evaluation, the sphere of influence is comprised of the three counties in which
the City of St. Cloud has a portion of its boundaries: Benton, Sherburne, and Stearns Counties,
as shown in Map I.1, on the following page.

B. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The 2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Study represents a thorough examination of a variety
of sources related to housing and homeless needs within the City’s boundaries. This study
involved primary research, which was the creation and analysis of new data, such as that
drawn from the 2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey, the 2013 St. Cloud Rental Survey,
and options expressed during a series of public input meetings. It also includes the evaluation
of secondary research, which entailed the collection and analysis of existing data, such as post-
secondary student enrollment at St. Cloud State University, zoning and land use information,
building permits, 2000 and 2010, Decennial Census data, 2011 American Community Survey
data, and employment and income information from other federal data sources. Each of these
are explored in greater detail below.

METHODOLOGY AND RESEARCH ACTIVITIES

The methodology employed comprised five key activities: primary research, secondary
research, quantitative analysis, qualitative analysis, and public involvement.

Primary Research is defined as the creation of data that did not exist. In general, such activities
involve using a survey instrument, whether implemented via the Internet, on-site visits, exit
interviews, telephone, mail, or video recording. For this study, primary data were collected
through extensive community surveying and analysis, using the web-based the 2013 St. Cloud
Community Housing Survey, the 2013 St. Cloud Rental Survey, and qualitative data collected
during various focus groups and public input meetings.

Secondary Research concerns the collection of information that already exists. Simple
examples include downloading data from the Census Bureau’s website, local planning
department information about land availability, and local Realtor MLS information.




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                        Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                         10                                    November 13, 2013
                                                                                            I. Introduction


City of St. Cloud Community Housing Study
                                            Three County Market Area
                   Map I.1




                                  St. Cloud, Minnesota                      Draft Report for Public Review
                                  Community Housing Study              11             November 13, 2013
                                                                                          I. Introduction


But the existing data that was collected and evaluated for this research project included
determinations of the existing housing stock and market, the number of persons with housing
problems, point-in-time counts of the number of homeless persons, the capacity of the
homeless and transitional housing infrastructure, and a prediction of the population, household
formation, and demand for housing in the future from the Minnesota State Demographic
Center.

Qualitative Analysis is the evaluation of subjective data related to non-numerical values such
as opinions, feelings, beliefs, and experiences. Much of the data for this research activity came
from the 2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey, noted above, as well as the public input
meetings and focus groups that were conducted during the development of this project.
Qualitative analysis is vital to the development of a comprehensive housing and homeless
needs study because opinions and feelings are often addressed in terms of their relative
importance to the community.

Quantitative Analysis results in numbers. Through econometric analysis and forecasting,
optimization, linear programming, cost/benefit analysis, or other types of evaluations, specific
values are identified. This type of analysis was used for the 2013 St. Cloud Community
Housing Study to describe the existing socio-economic context in the three-county region, as
extracted from a variety of trusted sources. It was also used in evaluating the housing market
demand patterns across a broad sector of demand parameters, as well as in the special needs
populations, particular for persons who are homeless and those in transition from homelessness
to permanent supportive housing.

Public Involvement, or participation from both citizens and stakeholders in the City, has been
essential for the 2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Study to be relevant and useful for the
wide array of prospective users of the results. This activity occurred through interaction,
cooperation, and coordination with stakeholders, partners, and the general public. This input
occurred during the survey process, where these groups were solicited to participate and
contribute to the data and knowledge development activities. Public involvement also included
a series of public input meetings and periodic focus groups with selected stakeholders and
representatives of traditionally underserved communities. These meetings were designed to
afford community members an opportunity to see the direction of the study and its preliminary
findings, as well as to offer perspective and commentary about the direction and outcome of
the 2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Study.

The philosophical approach the City, as project manager, has taken with this research project
can be summarized as one in which the identification of prospective housing and homeless
need flows logically from extensive analysis involving all of these steps.

RESEARCH PROCESS

This research project required a smooth and logical integration of the quantitative and
qualitative data and analysis. Development of the Community Housing Study covered six
general topic areas: depiction of the regional context, the economic and demographic picture
of the City and the three-county region, the St. Cloud housing inventory, the City’s housing
market conditions, current housing and homeless facility demands including homeless facility


St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                      Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                        12                                   November 13, 2013
                                                                                           I. Introduction


capacity, and emerging housing and homeless service provider problems, gaps, and estimated
housing and homeless needs in the City today and in the future. Information addressing the
prediction of future housing demand for the City, by tenure and income was derived from a
household formation prediction from the State Demographic Center, as previously noted. The
project unfolded in five distinct steps or phases.

Phase I began with an Orientation Meeting to confirm project goals. This included review of
several pieces of information, such as the draft survey instrument, available mapping data, and
partners that were interested in the results of the study.

Phase II included evaluation of regional and city economic, demographic, and housing
information from the 2000 and 2010 Censuses, the 2010 American Community Survey, the
Bureau of Economic Analysis, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and St. Cloud planning and
zoning data. Phase II incorporated a housing market evaluation, including the number of units
permitted, housing prices, rent levels, vacancy rates, the location and distribution of public
housing, and an assessment of housing demand over the next several years. Further, it also
included implementing the 2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey, a survey of selected
stakeholders and residents using a web-based survey instrument which gathered data about
housing as well as perceived special needs housing such for seniors, students, and other
special needs populations.

Phase III incorporated the preliminary quantitative and qualitative findings from Phase II and
offered them to the public in a set of public input meetings. Outreach and involvement of both
stakeholders to the housing needs evaluation, as well as the general public proved useful in
identifying a commonly held vision for the future of housing and homeless needs in the City of
St. Cloud. This phase also began development of the preliminary strategy issues associated with
the identified housing and homeless needs.

Phase IV represented the preparation of the initial draft documents and incorporation of
findings.

Phase V concluded the project, with a Draft Report for Public Review and formal presentation
of the findings. The Final Report was released on Month, day, 2013 and is available on the St.
Cloud website, located at www.ci.stcloud.mn.us.

C. SUMMARY
The City of St. Cloud and its partners undertook the 2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Study
to evaluate and address current and future housing and homeless needs in the City. The goals
of the study were to identify, measure, and predict housing needs faced by City residents, by
tenure and income, as well as review the capacity of the homeless service system compared
with demands placed on that system by homeless and at-risk persons. The results are meant to
aid the City in its affordable housing planning, community partners in their homeless needs
assessments and grant applications, as well as assist both for-profit and non-profit developers of
both affordable and market rate housing in the City. Consequently, the completion of this
study puts the City and its housing and homeless service providers in a much stronger position
to address critical housing and homeless needs today, as well as those needs in the future.


St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                       Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                         13                                   November 13, 2013
II. DEMOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC INFLUENCES
This section presents demographic and economic information collected from the Census
Bureau, the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and other sources in
regard to the three-county region as well as the City of St. Cloud. Data were used to analyze a
broad range of socio-economic characteristics, including population growth, St. Cloud student
enrollment, race, ethnicity, disability, employment, and poverty. Ultimately, the information
presented in this section helps illustrate the underlying conditions that have shaped housing
market behavior in the three-county region and the City of St. Cloud.

To supplement 2000 and 2010 Census data, information for this analysis was also gathered
from the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS). The ACS data covers similar
topics to the Decennial Census counts but include data not appearing in the 2010 Census, such
as household income, attributes of housing unit, household with housing problems, and
poverty. The key difference of these data sets is that ACS data represents a five-year average of
annual data estimates as opposed to a point-in-time 100 percent count; the ACS data reported
herein span from the years 2007 through 2011. The ACS figures are not directly comparable to
decennial Census counts because they do not account for certain population groups such as
the homeless. However, percentage distributions from the ACS data can be compared to
distributions from the 2000 and 2010 Censuses.

A. DEMOGRAPHICS

POPULATION DYNAMICS

The population in the City of St. Cloud has expanded at a moderate but relatively stable rate
over the last decade, rising from just over 59,000 people in 2000 to nearly 66,000 in 2011.

                                                  Diagram II.1
                                             Population Estimates
                                                  City of St. Cloud
                                     2000, 2010 Census and Intercensal Estimates
                  68,000
                                                                                            65,911
                                                                                   65,842
                  66,000

                  64,000

                  62,000

                  60,000
                           59,107
                  58,000

                  56,000

                  54,000
                           2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                    Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                15                                         November 13, 2013
                                                                                    II. Demographic and Economic Influences



Table II.1, at right, presents the population counts in                                       Table II.1
each of the years from 2000 to 2011, with both the                         Census and Intercensal Population
Decennial Census enumerations and the intercensal                                     Estimates
estimates. In total, population in the City grew                                         City of St. Cloud
                                                                            2000, 2010 Census and Intercensal Estimates
reasonably well over this period, by 11.5 percent.                        Year                                 Estimate
However the rate of population change in the three-                       Census 2000                           59,107
county region is considerably different.                                  July 2001 Est.                        60,671
                                                                          July 2002 Est.                        61,438
                                                                          July 2003 Est.                        61,978
For example, the 2000 and 2010 Decennial Census
                                                                          July 2004 Est.                        62,556
reports that the population grew 11.4 percent, but the                    July 2005 Est.                        63,237
three-county area of Benton, Sherburne, and Stearns                       July 2006 Est.                        64,090
Counties expanded nearly 20 percent. Furthermore, the                     July 2007 Est.                        64,861
white population in the City of St. Cloud rose a very                     July 2008 Est.                        65,386
                                                                          July 2009 Est.                        65,642
modest 2.7 percent over that decade, while it rose some                   Census 2010                           65,842
15.6 percent in the region. Hence the City’s white                        July 2011 Est.                        65,911
population is nearly 85 percent of the total, while the                   Change 00 - 11                        11.5%
region is nearly 93 percent white. Conversely, the City
is much more racially diverse than the region. Still, many racial and ethnic groups expanded
rapidly in both the region and the City, with the black population rising some 267.5 percent in
the City, comprising some 7.8 percent of the total population, and 268.4 percent in the region
and Hispanics jumping 103.7 percent in the City, but comprising only 2.4 percent of the total,
with a rise of 137.9 percent in the region, as seen in Table II.2, below.

                                                      Table II.2
                                             Population by Race
                                      City of St. Cloud and Three County Region
                                              2000 and 2010 Census Data
                                        City of St. Cloud                         Three-County Region
           Race                                             % Change                                 % Change
                             2000             2010                         2000         2010
                                                              00-10                                    00-10
           White             54,229          55,693              2.7     223,073       257,821          15.6
           Black              1,402           5,152            267.5      1,926         7,096          268.4
           American Indian     425             443               4.2       814          1,071           31.6
           Asian              1,839           2,419             31.5      2,868         4,538           58.2
           Native Hawaiian    37               16              -56.8        75           83             10.7
           Other              345             505              46.4       1,029         2,533          146.2
           Two or More        830            1,614             94.5       2,024         4,450          119.9
           Total             59,107          65,842            11.4      231,809       277,592          19.8
           Hispanic           784            1,597             103.7      2,843         6,763          137.9


It is interesting to investigate if communities are becoming more diverse and integrated over
time. A common measure is one of “disproportionate share”. If an area has more than 10
percentage points above the geographic average, then areas of over concentrations of selected
minorities are occurring. This would represent areas of the City that may have 17.8 percent
concentrations of blacks or 12.4 for Hispanics in 2010. This computation has been portrayed
for the City of St. Cloud in four geographic maps on the following pages, with change between
2000 and 2010 seen. In no case do we see that minorities in the City of St. Cloud are facing
disproportionate share or increasing shares, even though some areas of the city have slightly
higher rates of these minorities than others. This indicates diversity and integration in the City.

St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                           Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                   16                                             November 13, 2013
                                                             II. Demographic and Economic Influences



                                      Map II.1
                          Black Population by Census Tract
                                    City of St. Cloud
                                   2000 Census Data




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                  Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                   17                                    November 13, 2013
                                                             II. Demographic and Economic Influences



                                      Map II.2
                          Black Population by Census Tract
                                    City of St. Cloud
                                   2010 Census Data




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                  Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                   18                                    November 13, 2013
                                                                II. Demographic and Economic Influences



                                       Map II.3
                          Hispanic Population by Census Tract
                                     City of St. Cloud
                                    2000 Census Data




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                     Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                    19                                      November 13, 2013
                                                                II. Demographic and Economic Influences



                                       Map II.4
                          Hispanic Population by Census Tract
                                     City of St. Cloud
                                    2010 Census Data




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                     Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                    20                                      November 13, 2013
                                                                                               II. Demographic and Economic Influences



POPULATION BY AGE

Data on population by age as reported in the 2000 and 2010 Decennial Census showed some
substantive change for the City of St. Cloud over the last decade. Persons under the age of five
grew relatively rapidly, rising some 19.7 percent, with those from 5 to 19 declining slightly,
almost 2 percent. The group from the age of 55 to 64 rose the fastest of any group, expanding
more than 73 percent over the period, from 3,649 people to 6,321 persons, as seen in Table
II.3, below. With this group expanding so quickly, demand for senior housing options will
intensify.

                                                             Table II.3
                                                       Population by Age
                                                       City of Saint Cloud
                                                 2000 & 2010 Census SF1 Data
                                          2000 Census                   2010 Census                 % Change 00–
                       Age
                                    Population    % of Total     Population     % of Total               10
                   Under 5             3,265        5.5%             3,909        5.9%                  19.72%
                   5 to 19            12,852       21.7%            12,611       19.2%                  -1.88%
                   20 to 24           10,403       17.6%            11,660       17.7%                  12.08%
                   25 to 34            8,379       14.2%            10,230       15.5%                  22.09%
                   35 to 54           14,495       24.5%            14,318       21.7%                  -1.22%
                   55 to 64            3,649        6.2%             6,321        9.6%                  73.23%
                   65 or Older         6,064       10.3%             6,793       10.3%                  12.02%
                   Total              59,107          100.0%           65,842         100.0%            11.39%


As shown below in Table II.4, in both 2000 and 2010, the largest age cohorts among the
elderly population represented persons in the age ranges of 70 to 74 and 75 to 79. However,
the former decreased by 1.5 and the latter rose 8.5 percent. The age groups that showed the
largest percentage increases over the decade were those at the opposite ends of the spectrum,
or the populations aged 65 to 66 and 85 and over, rising 26.8 percent and 30.5 percent over
the decade.1 The results for such a rising population subgroup has implications for the types
of housing units that may be desired by a more elderly group of citizens, particularly the very
elderly which may require services.

                                                             Table II.4
                                                  Elderly Population by Age
                                                      City of Saint Cloud
                                                 2000 & 2010 Census SF1 Data
                           Age             2000 Census                  2010 Census                   % Change
                                      Population   % of Total     Population    % of Total             00–10
                     65 to 66            646         10.7%            819         12.1%                 26.78%
                     67 to 69            959         15.8%           1,042        15.3%                  8.65%
                     70 to 74           1,449        23.9%           1,427        21.0%                 -1.52%
                     75 to 79           1,256        20.7%           1,363        20.1%                  8.52%
                     80 to 84            935         15.4%           1,073        15.8%                 14.76%
                     85 or Older         819         13.5%           1,069        15.7%                 30.53%
                           Total         6,064          100.0%           6,793          100.0%          12.02%




1
 Members in the 85 and over age group are most likely to need assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs); those who need
assistance with multiple ADLs may require in-home care or an assisted living facility.


St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                    Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                           21                                              November 13, 2013
                                                                                         II. Demographic and Economic Influences



ST. CLOUD STATE UNIVERSITY ENROLLMENT

Established in 1869, St. Cloud State University (SCSU) has grown into the largest campus in the
Minnesota State Colleges and Universities system and the second largest public university in
the State. The school has nearly 200 majors, minors, and pre-professional programs, as well as
more than 50 graduate programs.
                                                                              Table II.5
This university has a tremendous impact on the City of             St Cloud State University
St. Cloud not only in terms of the positive economic           30-Day Headcount Enrollment Comparison
                                                             Office of Strategy, Planning and Effectiveness
stimulus it has on the city, but also in terms of the
                                                            Fall                             Headcount
demand for off-campus rental units. This demand for 2004                                       16,091
off-campus housing and the fluctuation in the rental 2005                                      15,964
markets that such demand may cause are key 2006                                                16.146
considerations for the 2013 St. Cloud Community             2007                               16,829
                                                            2008                               16,921
Housing Study.       Consequently, student enrollment 2009                                     17,685
statistics have been assembled and presented in Table 2010                                     18,319
II.5, at right. In 2009, the SCSU student enrollment 2011                                      17,231
exceeded the previous high of 17,076 set in 1990. Then      2012                               16,457

in 2010 enrollment reached 18,319, its highest student      2013                               16,245
                           2
enrollment ever recorded. However, student enrollment has declined appreciably in the last
few years, slipping 6.3 percent in 2011, 4.7 percent in 2012, and another 1.3 percent in 2013.
It is assumed that the student enrollment will recover slightly and remain constant at 16,500
persons over the forecast horizon.
                                                                       Table II.6
                                                                                      Disability by Age
DISABILITY STATUS                                                                      City of Saint Cloud
                                                                                     2000 Census SF3 Data
                                                                                                       Total
The Census Bureau defines disability as a                         Age                 Disabled                 Disability
lasting physical, mental, or emotional                                               Population                  Rate
condition that makes it difficult for a person                    5 to 15                372                     5.1%
                                                                  16 to 64              4,843                   11.8%
to conduct daily activities of living or                          65 and older          2,256                   40.3%
impedes him or her from being able to go                          Total                  7,471                   13.8%
outside the home alone or to work.3

As reported in the 2000 Census, the City of St.                                             Table II.7
Cloud has some 7,471 persons of the age of five                         Total Disabilities Tallied: Aged 5 and Older
or older whom were disabled. However, the                                                   City of Saint Cloud
                                                                                          2000 Census SF3 Data
disability rate for St. Cloud seniors, of the age of                 Disability Type                            Population
65 or older, was considerably higher, reaching                       Sensory disability                           1,589
just over 40 percent, as seen in Table II.6.                         Physical disability                          3,309
                                                                     Mental disability                            2,517
                                                                     Self-care disability                          757
As seen in Table II.7, of these same individuals,                    Employment disability                        2,885
who may have one or more disabilities, the                           Go-outside-home disability                   2,404
2000 Census reported that the 7,471 persons                          Total                                      13,461



2
  http://www.stcloudstate.edu/budgetadvisorygroup/pdfs/documents/Fall04-1230thDayTotalEnrollmentComparisonMnSCU-
PrintVersiononweb.pdf
3
  United States Census Bureau, http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/disability/disab_defn.html#ACS


St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                               Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                      22                                              November 13, 2013
                                                                                     II. Demographic and Economic Influences



with disabilities had 13,461 disabilities. The type of disability seen with the greatest frequency
was physical disabilities, followed by employment, mental and then ambulatory disabilities.

Among all persons, the City has a disability rate of 12.3 percent, as reported in the most recent
American Community Survey. This represents about 7,911 people, with the most of these
between the ages of 18 to 64. Still, the disability rate is the highest for elderly citizens, some
44.6 percent for males and 39.4 percent for females of the age of 75 or older, as seen in Table
II.8, below

                                                       Table II.8
                                                    Disability by Age
                                                    City of Saint Cloud
                                              2011 Three-Year ACS Data
                                    Male                          Female                      Total
             Age            Disabled     Disability      Disabled       Disability    Disabled      Disability
                           Population      Rate         Population        Rate       Population       Rate
             Under 5           30          1.7%              38           2.3%           68           2.0%
             5 to 17          592         13.9%             183           4.6%          775           9.4%
             18 to 34        1,104         8.6%             938           7.5%         2,042          8.1%
             35 to 64        1,663        16.0%            1,516         14.5%         3,179         15.2%
             65 to 74         324         24.7%             194          12.0%          518          17.7%
             75 or Older      588         44.6%             741          36.0%         1,329         39.4%
             Total           4,301          13.5%          3,610         11.2%         7,911         12.3%


HOMELESS AND SPECIAL NEEDS POPULATIONS

Homelessness can be categorized as either "situational", "temporary", or "chronic" based upon
the cause and duration of the individual’s experience. Greater understanding of these causes is
necessary to facilitate the identification and implementation of appropriate housing and social
service solutions:

Situational: Some examples include loss of job, loss of housing, a difficult health care
situation, or divorce. Typically, these individuals need assistance in identifying organizations
and resources that can provide specific opportunities. Once they receive support they tend to
return to permanent housing. An estimated time involved is 30-90 days. Members of the
Homeless Concerns Group estimate that 55-65% of the people in the St Cloud area
experiencing homelessness fit into this general category.

Temporary: Examples could include a person who needs treatment for physical/mental health
or chemical dependency, a person with poor credit who cannot find a place to rent, or families
affected by domestic violence. Often, this entails a period of time in transitional housing. An
estimated time involved is 6-24 months. Members of the Homeless Concerns Group estimate
that 25-35% of the people in the St Cloud area experiencing homelessness fit into this general
category.

Chronic: The factors that are involved are multiple, often including both mental illness and
chemical dependency. Emergency shelters or current transitional housing programs cannot
provide all of the services that these individuals need. Members of the Homeless Concerns



St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                           Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                     23                                           November 13, 2013
                                                                                   II. Demographic and Economic Influences



Group estimate that 10% of the people in the St Cloud area experiencing homelessness fit into
this general category.

The number of homeless and special needs persons in the City of St. Cloud is a notoriously
difficult population to establish a reliable baseline count. In the 2010 Census, the homeless
were included as a subset of the group quarters population, indicating a woefully limited
interpretation of homelessness, particularly unsheltered homelessness. The Central Minnesota
Continuum of Care conducts periodic point-in-time counts of unsheltered homeless
populations. The City and its stakeholders tabulated these homeless figures twice during the
data collection efforts associated with this project.
Table II.9 presents the first tabulation, comprising only                    Table II.9
                                                            Point-in-Time Unsheltered Homeless
the unsheltered population. As seen therein, the                                Count
homeless count fluctuated from 26 in January 2010 to                        City of St. Cloud
146 in July of 2012, but the data tend to indicate a              Central Minnesota Continuum of Care
                                                           Point in Time                 Homeless Persons
wildly seasonal fluctuation, with July data much            January 2010                        26
higher.                                                     January 2011                        58
                                                                          July 2011                          73
The second tabulation of the homeless count indicates                     January 2012                       32
                                                                          July 2012                         146
the number of homeless persons by type of facility,                       January 2013                       51
such as emergency, transitional, or permanent
supportive housing. As seen in Table II.10, below, this count also has fluctuated significantly
over the past few years; with emergency shelter counts falling from 115 persons in 2010 to 90
in 2012, but jumping right back up to 117 in January 2013. Those in transitional housing rose
continuously, from 113 in 2010 to 209 in 2013. Use of permanent supportive housing also
rose continuously, from 130 in 2010 to 243 in 2013. Overall, this tabulation shows that the
point-in-time counts in each of these four one-year time periods rose from 358 to 569.

                                                    Table II.10
                                    Point-in-Time Sheltered Homeless Count
                                          Central Minnesota Housing Partnership
                                              Point in Time Counts by Year
                          Shelter                                  2010    2011   2012   2013
                          Emergency Shelter                         115    103     90    117
                          Transitional Housing                      113    155    199    209
                          Total                                     228    258    289    326
                          Permanent Supportive Housing for
                                                                    130    189    190    243
                          homeless
                          Total                                     358    447    479    569

                                                             .




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                        Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                      24                                       November 13, 2013
                                                                        II. Demographic and Economic Influences



Each of these homeless counts have excluded any                                Table II.11
persons who are homeless but not sheltered in any                 Sheltered Homeless Youth Counts
way. In an attempt to capture a more complete picture                     K-12 including 4 year olds in
                                                                     School Readiness Preschool Program
of homelessness, the St. Cloud public school system                     Independent School District 742
attempts to count those enrolled students that appear to        Educational Year              Homeless Youth
lack a place of permanent residence. This count would            2007-08                             262
exclude any family members not enrolled in school.               2008-09                             265
                                                                 2009-10                             300
While only a snapshot of a portion of the total                  2010-11                             265
population, these data also fluctuate rather wildly, but         2011-12                             258
are significantly higher than the point-in-time count, as        2012-13                             357

noted in Table II.11, at right.

Furthermore, the range of challenges faced by the emergency shelter population is daunting.
From drug and alcohol dependence, victims of domestic violence, veterans, and others. The
attributes of the population are broad,                                Table II.12
and any one individual may have one or              Number of People in Homeless Shelters
more attributes, as noted in Table II.12 at                       by Select Attribute
right. Still, the most frequent challenge                             City of St. Cloud
                                                        Homeless Count- Night of January 23,2013
faced by this population is chronic Chronic Substance Abuse                                           96
substance abuse.      Consequently, this Veteran                                                      74
group, as in the other special needs Chronically Homeless without Children                            62
                                            Severely Mentally Ill                                     51
populations, tends to require services so Victims of Domestic Violence                                26
that these individuals can re-attain Number of Chronically Homeless Families                          11
normalcy in their daily activities of HIV/AIDS                                                         4
living.                                       Number of Individuals in Chronically Homeless Families: 28



HOUSEHOLDS AND HOUSEHOLD SIZE

The number of households in the City of St. Cloud expanded by 12.3 percent from 2000 to
2010. However, some households sizes grew much more quickly than others. Five person
households fell by 6.7 percent over the period, but one and two-person households grew by
14.6 and 16.3 percent, respectively. While a much smaller quantity, large households,
comprising six or seven or more persons per household rose very strongly, jumping 26.9 and
53.2 percent, respectively, as seen in Table II.13, on the following page. Given the rise in
immigrant populations in the region, as noted above in the discussion of rising racial and
ethnic diversity of the City, a continuing rise in large households is quite likely.




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                             Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                            25                                      November 13, 2013
                                                                                              II. Demographic and Economic Influences



                                                             Table II.13
                                               Households by Household Size
                                                         City of Saint Cloud
                                                   2000 & 2010 Census SF1 Data
                                                   2000 Census                  2010 Census                % Change
                  Size
                                              Households % of Total Households          % of Total          00–10
                  One Person                    6,841         30.2%          7,843       30.8%               14.6%
                  Two Persons                   7,548         33.3%          8,775       34.5%               16.3%
                  Three Persons                 3,358         14.8%          3,756       14.8%               11.9%
                  Four Persons                  3,100         13.7%          3,138       12.3%                1.2%
                  Five Persons                  1,241          5.5%          1,158        4.6%               -6.7%
                  Six Persons                    361           1.6%           458         1.8%               26.9%
                  Seven Persons or More          203            .9%           311         1.2%               53.2%
                  Total                          22,652        100.0%          25,439         100.0%         12.3%


Furthermore, the mix of types of households is also undergoing considerable change, with
single parent and non-family households making up a larger share of all households. As noted
in Table II.14, while total households grew some 12.3 percent, family households expanded
more slowly, at just 8.8 percent, and non-family households rose 16.4 percent. Owner-
occupied married-couple family households actually fell 0.4 percent. Other family households
expanded 30.7 percent, with rental occupied rising 66.4 percent.

                                                             Table II.14
                                                  Household Type by Tenure
                                                    City of Saint Cloud
                                               2000 & 2010 Census SF1 Data
                                                         2000 Census                          2010 Census             % Change
       Household Type
                                                  Households       % of Total           Households    % of Total        00–10
       Family Households                             12,263          54.1%                13,348       52.5%             8.8%
         Married-Couple Family                        9,374          76.4%                 9,573       71.7%             2.1%
           Owner-Occupied                             8,095          86.4%                 8,059       84.2%             -.4%
           Renter-Occupied                            1,279          13.6%                 1,514       15.8%            18.4%
         Other Family                                 2,889          23.6%                 3,775       28.3%            30.7%
           Male Householder, No Spouse Present         758           26.2%                 1,134       30.0%            49.6%
              Owner-Occupied                           383           50.5%                  510        45.0%            33.2%
              Renter-Occupied                          375           49.5%                  624        55.0%            66.4%
           Female Householder, No Spouse Present      2,131          73.8%                 2,641       70.0%            23.9%
              Owner-Occupied                           949           44.5%                 1,028       38.9%             8.3%
              Renter-Occupied                         1,182          55.5%                 1,613       61.1%            36.5%
       Non-Family Households                         10,389          45.9%                12,091       47.5%            16.4%
         Owner-Occupied                               3,244          31.2%                 3,975       32.9%            22.5%
         Renter-Occupied                              7,145          68.8%                 8,116       67.1%            13.6%
       Total                                               22,652         100.0%          25,439         100.0%         12.3%


FORECAST OF POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLDS

The population and household forecast is based on two main data sources, the U.S. Census
Bureau and the household projections reported by the Minnesota State Demographic Center4.
Since the Minnesota State Demographic Center estimates are only available at the county level
a few assumptions and technical considerations have been made to create population and
household projections for the City of St. Cloud.

4
    http://www.demography.state.mn.us/projections.html, January, 2013; Revised and Corrected April, 2013 estimates.



St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                    Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                             26                                            November 13, 2013
                                                                                        II. Demographic and Economic Influences




Using 2010 census data, the percent share of population and households within the City of St.
Cloud was computed for each of the three counties in which St. Cloud resides. Between the
2000 and 2010 census, due to population shifting out of the City of St. Cloud into the
surrounding counties, the city’s share of households within each of the three counties
decreased. However, it is being assumed that the 2010 city share of households remains
constant over the forecast horizon. This assumption takes into consideration that the trend
concludes, partly due to pro-active steps undertaken by the City of St. Cloud to reverse
population outflows and maintain a growth rate equal to the surrounding three-county region.
This causes both population and household formation to occur slightly faster that has been
seen over the past decade.

According to the Minnesota State Demographic Center, the City of St. Cloud will experience
substantive growth in the next ten to twenty years. However, the student population residing
in group quarters housing, such as student dormitories, sororities and fraternities, is excluded
from this prediction. Consequently, this non-group quarter population prediction is rising from
60,227 in 2010 to 80,542 by 2025, a rise in excess of 20,000 people.
                                                        Diagram II.2
                                                   Forecast of Population
                                                          City of St. Cloud
                                      2010 Census and Minnesota State Demographic Center Data
                   85,000

                   80,000

                   75,000
      Population




                   70,000

                   65,000

                   60,000

                   55,000

                   50,000
                            2010   2012     2014       2016      2018       2020      2022       2024


                                           Forecasted Population in Occupied Housing Units

This population forecast of persons residing in occupied housing units has been converted to
households. The distribution of owner-occupied and renter-occupied units was calculated
based on the tenure distribution reported in the 2010 census and the assumption that the
number of student rental units would remained fixed over the forecast period. The growth rate
of “all other” or non-student rental units is calculated by multiplying the number of projected
households for each projected year by the 2010 Census rental share for the City of St. Cloud.
Projected rentals are the sum of the fixed student housing and the number of non-student
housing units based on the calculated growth rate. Since only a portion of the rental housing
stock is assumed to grow, the overall distribution of rental and owner-occupied units changes
over the forecast horizon.



St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                             Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                         27                                         November 13, 2013
                                                                          II. Demographic and Economic Influences



                                                                     Table II.15
                                                      Forecasted Households by Tenure
As noted previously, the SCSU                                   City of St. Cloud
student population, which has               2010 Census and Minnesota State Demographic Center Data
been declining in the last few                  Renter Type
                                                                         Total          Total
years, has been assumed to           Year   Student      All Other      Renters        Owners
                                                                                                        Total

remain constant over the next               Rentals      Rentals

several years.        Given this     2010    6,099        5,768          11,867         13,572         25,439

scenario, the total number of        2011    6,099        5,894          11,993         14,002         25,994

households will still expand over    2012    6,099        6,020          12,119         14,431         26,550

the forecast horizon, as noted in    2013    6,099        6,146          12,245         14,861         27,105

Table II.15 at right.       While    2014    6,099        6,272          12,371         15,290         27,661
student rental units remain about    2015    6,099        6,398          12,497         15,720         28,216
6,100 occupied units, the total      2016    6,099        6,527          12,626         16,160         28,786
number of households rises from      2017    6,099        6,656          12,755         16,601         29,356
25,429 in 2010 to just over          2018    6,099        6,786          12,884         17,041         29,925
34,002 in 2025.         There are    2019    6,099        6,915          13,013         17,481         30,495
expected to be 13,809 renters        2020    6,099        7,044          13,143         17,922         31,065
and 20,194 homeowners, a             2021    6,099        7,177          13,276         18,376         31,652
growth of nearly 34 percent.         2022    6,099        7,310          13,409         18,831         32,240
This amounts to a demand for         2023    6,099        7,444          13,542         19,285         32,827
8,563 occupied housing units, or     2024    6,099        7,577          13,676         19,739         33,415
about 6,600 homeowner units          2025    6,099        7,710          13,809         20,194         34,002
and 1,942 rental units.

B. ECONOMICS

LABOR FORCE AND EMPLOYMENT

Data gathered from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) regarding the labor force, defined as the
total number of persons working or looking for work, are presented on the following page in
Table II.16. These statistics are derived from sampling, employer reporting, and statistical
estimation, and both the methodology and base reporting values are periodically revised.

Labor force figures in the City showed significant increases from 1990 through 2008, rising
from just over 28,200 to nearly 39,200. Unfortunately, the total labor force declined the next
few years. At this same time, the unemployment rate ebbed from 8.1 percent, falling back to
6.5 percent. This still is substantively higher than the low of 2.9 percent seen in 1999 and
2000. With the economy headed into a tailspin, St. Cloud was no different, with the number
of unemployed people jumping more than 1,000 between 2008 and 2009.




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                               Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                         28                                           November 13, 2013
                                                                                                       II. Demographic and Economic Influences



                                                                       Table II.16
                                                               Labor Force Statistics
                                                                      City of St. Cloud
                                                                    1990–2012 BLS Data
                                                Labor                                                Unemployment
                                        Year                 Employment      Unemployment
                                                Force                                                    Rate
                                        1990    28,208            26,569            1,639                5.8%
                                        1991    29,051            27,399            1,652                5.7%
                                        1992    29,246            27,822            1,424                4.9%
                                        1993    30,164            28,662            1,502                5.0%
                                        1994    30,738            29,437            1,301                4.2%
                                        1995    36,069            34,720            1,349                3.7%
                                        1996    37,063            35,186            1,877                5.1%
                                        1997    36,445            34,918            1,527                4.2%
                                        1998    36,617            35,459            1,158                3.2%
                                        1999    38,121            37,008            1,113                2.9%
                                        2000    35,863            34,817            1,046                2.9%
                                        2001    36,388            34,986            1,402                3.9%
                                        2002    36,560            34,900            1,660                4.5%
                                        2003    37,583            35,805            1,778                4.7%
                                        2004    37,991            36,233            1,758                4.6%
                                        2005    38,244            36,552            1,692                4.4%
                                        2006    38,580            37,067            1,513                3.9%
                                        2007    38,909            37,095            1,814                4.7%
                                        2008    39,161            36,965            2,196                5.6%
                                        2009    39,117            35,955            3,162                8.1%
                                        2010    38,236            35,346            2,890                7.6%
                                        2011    38,408            35,896            2,512                6.5%


Still, these data were significantly below the national average at the time of the most recent
recession, which hovered around 10 percent. Furthermore, the economic performance of the
three-county region was remarkably similar to the City. As noted in Diagram II.3, below, the
unemployment of the City was nearly identical to that of the three-county region during this
time period, including the slow but steady economic recovery that began in 2009.
                                                                     Diagram II.3
                                                                Unemployment Rate
                                                         City of St. Cloud and Three-County Region
                                                                           BLS Data
                           9.0

                           8.0
       Unemployment Rate




                           7.0

                           6.0

                           5.0

                           4.0

                           3.0

                           2.0
                                 1990    1992   1994       1996      1998    2000      2002     2004      2006     2008      2010
                                                       City of St. Cloud                       Three County Region




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                             Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                                     29                                             November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                                                                II. Demographic and Economic Influences



In fact, the City of St. Cloud has tracked the entire state of Minnesota quite closely over the past
few years, with St. Cloud having only a modestly higher unemployment rate for parts of the
year, as seen in Diagram II.4, below.

                                                                                                    Diagram II.4
                                                                                  Monthly Unemployment Rate
                                                                                              City of St. Cloud
                                                                                        2008–December 2012 BLS Data
                           11.0

                           10.0

                            9.0
       Unemployment Rate




                            8.0

                            7.0
                                                                                                                                                                                                                 5.5
                                                                                                                                                                                                                 5.4
                            6.0

                            5.0

                            4.0
                                                    Jul


                                                                Nov




                                                                                        Jul


                                                                                                    Nov




                                                                                                                            Jul


                                                                                                                                        Nov




                                                                                                                                                                 Jul


                                                                                                                                                                             Nov




                                                                                                                                                                                                     Jul


                                                                                                                                                                                                                 Nov
                                        Mar




                                                                            Mar




                                                                                                                Mar




                                                                                                                                                    Mar




                                                                                                                                                                                         Mar
                                  Jan




                                                          Sep


                                                                      Jan




                                                                                              Sep


                                                                                                          Jan




                                                                                                                                  Sep


                                                                                                                                              Jan




                                                                                                                                                                       Sep


                                                                                                                                                                                   Jan




                                                                                                                                                                                                           Sep
                                              May




                                                                                  May




                                                                                                                      May




                                                                                                                                                          May




                                                                                                                                                                                               May
                                               2008                                2009                                2010                                2011                                 2012

                                                                              St. Cloud                                                   State of Minnesota



FULL- AND PART-TIME EMPLOYMENT

The Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) provides an alternate view of employment: a count of
both full- and part-time jobs. Thus, a person working more than one job can be counted more
than once. Further, BEA data includes both earning and unearned income sources, with
examples of the latter including dividends, interest and rent. Unfortunately, BEA data are only
available by county. Consequently, the following narrative presents these economic indicators
for the entire three-county region.

As shown in Diagram II.5, on the following page, the total number of full- and part-time jobs in
the three-county region increased substantially from 1969 through 2011, from just over 40,000
jobs to slightly more than 160,000 in 2008 and 2009. While the total number of jobs slipped
slightly in 2009 and 2010, it had reached some 159,726 jobs in 2011.




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                                                                                           Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                                                                         30                                                                       November 13, 2013
                                                                        II. Demographic and Economic Influences



                                              Diagram II.5
                                    Full- and Part-Time Employment
                                        St. Cloud Three-County Region
                                             1969–2011 BEA Data
          180,000
                                                                                              159,726
          160,000

          140,000

          120,000

          100,000

           80,000

           60,000

           40,000
                    1969 1972 1975 1978 1981 1984 1987 1990 1993 1996 1999 2002 2005 2008 2011
                                                  Total Employment


REAL EARNINGS PER JOB

Using the BEA earned income data, one can derive real average earnings per job, by simply
dividing total earnings by the number of jobs and removing the effects of inflation, which
makes the data comparable over time. Average earnings per job have grown substantially in
the St. Cloud region, rising from $29,671 in 1969 to $42,340 in 2011. However, it had
reached a peak in 2004, when the real average earnings were $43,223. Unfortunately, it fell
for a few years and is now only beginning to rebound. Still, the St. Cloud region does not pay
at standards seen statewide. As noted in Diagram II.6, on the following page, real average
earnings of the State of Minnesota have been consistently higher over the last 40 years. In
1969, the state was about $5,000 higher and by 2011, the St. Cloud region was nearly $10,000
less than the statewide average.




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                             Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                              31                                    November 13, 2013
                                                                                                     II. Demographic and Economic Influences



                                                                        Diagram II.6
                                                             Real Average Earnings Per Job
                                                                 St. Cloud Three-County Region
                                                               1969–2011 BEA Data, 2011 Dollars
                                   55,000
                                                                                                                             53,105

                                   50,000


                                   45,000
               Real 2012 Dollars




                                                                                                                             42,340

                                   40,000


                                   35,000


                                   30,000


                                   25,000
                                            1969 1972 1975 1978 1981 1984 1987 1990 1993 1996 1999 2002 2005 2008 2011
                                                            St. Cloud                      State of Minnestoa


REAL PER CAPITA INCOME

Another gauge of economic health involves comparing the total of all forms of income: wages
earned, transfer payments, and property income such as dividends, interest, and rents. When
these data are added together and divided by population, per capita income is determined.
Diagram II.7 compares real per capita income in the region to that in the State of Minnesota
from 1969 through 2011. This diagram shows that per capita income in the region has been
consistently lower than in the entire state throughout the period, and this gap grew more
pronounced after the latter 1990s and was slightly more than $10,000 in 2011.

                                                                        Diagram II.7
                                                                 Real Per Capita Income
                                                                 St. Cloud Three-County Region
                                                               1969–2011 BEA Data, 2011 Dollars
                                   50,000
                                                                                                                              45,346



                                   40,000
                                                                                                                              35,296
       Real 2012 Dollars




                                   30,000




                                   20,000




                                   10,000
                                            1969 1972 1975 1978 1981 1984 1987 1990 1993 1996 1999 2002 2005 2008 2011
                                                            St. Cloud                      State of Minnestoa



St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                            Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                                      32                                           November 13, 2013
                                                                                 II. Demographic and Economic Influences



HOUSEHOLD INCOME

Table II.17, below, presents 2000 Census and the 2010 American Community Survey
information as it relates to the distribution of household incomes in both the City of St. Cloud
and the three-county region. While this table does not account for the change in the cost of
living or inflation, we see that the number of households with incomes of less than $15,000
grew nearly 25 percent over the decade, at the same time that the number of households
throughout the region expanded 4.4 percent. However, SCSU student enrollment was
reaching an all-time peak enrollment at this time and college students rarely make more than
$15,000 per year. Consequently, the student enrollment at SCSU may have accounted for
much of this substantive rise in lower income households.

                                                    Table II.17
                                          Income of Household Units
                                     City of St. Cloud and Three-County Region
                                          2000 Census and 2010 ACS Data
                                            City of St. Cloud               Three-County Region
              Income                                           %                                   %
                                   2000          2010       Change      2000       2010         Change
                                                             00-10                               00-10
              Less than $15,000    3,617         4,518        24.9      9,586     10,006          4.4
              $15,000 to $19,999   1,752         1,623        -7.4      4,557      4,554          -0.1
              $20,000 to $24,999   1,718         1,909        11.1      5,028      5,172          2.9
              $25,000 to $34,999   3,504         3,220        -8.1     10,297      9,371          -9.0
              $35,000 to $49,999   4,139         3,904          -5.7   15,347     13,805          -10.0
              $50,000 to $74,999   3,947         4,607          16.7   20,311     21,739           7.0
              $75,000 to $99,999   1,888         2,705          43.3   9,764      16,775          71.8
              $100,000 or More     2,015         3,464          71.9   7,429      19,758          166.0
              Total                22,580       25,950          14.9   82,319     101,180         22.9


On the other hand, households with much higher incomes, such as those with incomes of
$75,000 to $100,000, or more than $100,000, rose much higher in the region than in the City,
growing 43.3 and 71.9 in the City compared to 71.8 and 166 percent in the region,
respectively. Diagram II.8 presents this information pictorially, on the following page.

POVERTY

The Census Bureau uses a set of income thresholds that vary by family size and composition to
determine poverty status. If a family’s total income is less than the threshold for its size, then
that family, and every individual in it, is considered poor. The poverty thresholds do not vary
geographically, but they are updated annually for inflation using the Consumer Price Index.
The official poverty definition counts income before taxes and does not include capital gains
and non-cash benefits such as public housing, Medicaid, and food stamps. Poverty is not
defined for persons in military barracks, institutional group quarters, or for unrelated
individuals under age 15 such as foster children.




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                        Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                   33                                          November 13, 2013
                                                                                                       II. Demographic and Economic Influences




                                                                        Diagram II.8
                                                 Household Income Growth Rate: 2000 - 2010
                                                           City of St. Cloud and Three-County Region
                                                                   2000 and 2010 Census Data
                     180.0
                     160.0
                     140.0
                     120.0
       Growth Rate




                     100.0
                      80.0
                      60.0
                      40.0
                      20.0
                       0.0
                     -20.0
                             Less than     $15,000 to    $20,000 to   $25,000 to   $35,000 to $50,000 to     $75,000 to $100,000 or
                              $15,000       $19,999       $24,999      $34,999      $49,999    $74,999        $99,999      More
                                                    City of St. Cloud                      Three County Region

In the City of St. Cloud, the poverty rate in 2000 was 13.1 percent, with 7,171 persons
considered to be living in poverty, as shown below in Table II.18. More than 380 children
under the age of 6 were counted as living in poverty at that time, in addition to more than 553
persons aged 65 and older. The 2011 ACS data showed that poverty in St. Cloud increased to
23.9 percent, with the numbers of persons in poverty increasing for all groups under age 65.
The most dramatic increase was seen among persons aged 18 to 64, which rose some 76
percent. The total number of persons in poverty more than doubled. However, it must be
noted that a precise comparison of Census to ACS figures cannot be correctly done due to
differences in data collection methods, even though the ACS is the best method available at the
time for small geographic areas.

                                                                      Table II.18
                                                                  Poverty by Age
                                                                City of Saint Cloud
                                                    2000 Census SF3 & 2011 Five-Year ACS Data
                                                        2000 Census                       2011 Five-Year ACS
                             Age
                                               Persons in Poverty    % of Total     Persons in Poverty    % of Total
                             Under 6                  380               5.3%              1,058             7.3%
                             6 to 17                  469               6.5%              1,711            11.9%
                             18 to 64                5,769             80.4%             10,953            76.0%
                             65 or Older              553               7.7%               690              4.8%
                             Total                      7,171            100.0%             14,412               100.0%
                             Poverty Rate               13.1%               .               23.9%                   .


While poverty rates seemed to have changed dramatically, this did not turn out to be uniformly
true across the entire City of St. Cloud. As seen in Map II.5, on the following page, poverty
was more concentrated in selected areas of the core of the City, near the University. In Map
II.6, poverty became more concentrated in nearby areas. Still, the large increase in the student
population between 2000 and 2010 may have disproportionally contributed to the
concentrations of poverty in these particular areas.


St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                            Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                                    34                                             November 13, 2013
                                                         II. Demographic and Economic Influences



                                    Map II.5
                          Poverty Rate by Census Tract
                                  City of St. Cloud
                                 2000 Census Data




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                              Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                 35                                  November 13, 2013
                                                         II. Demographic and Economic Influences



                                    Map II.6
                          Poverty Rate by Census Tract
                                  City of St. Cloud
                              2011 Five-Year ACS Data




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                              Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                 36                                  November 13, 2013
                                                                 II. Demographic and Economic Influences




C. SUMMARY

According to the Census Bureau, between 2000 and 2010, the population in the City of St.
Cloud expanded 11.4 percent at the same time that the three-county region rose nearly 20
percent. However, the City of St. Cloud has experienced a significantly more diverse
population, with strong growth in minority populations. Several of these populations have led
to sharp rises in the number of persons per household, with households with six and seven or
more persons rising 26.9 and 53.2 percent, respectively. This seems to imply an expanding
need for larger dwellings with more bedrooms. Furthermore, while the number of persons per
household remains small in historic terms, there is appearing a turn-a-round in large families,
due substantively to immigrant populations.

However, recent student enrollments at St. Cloud State University have reversed course and
have begun to unwind from a high in excess of 18,000 to fewer than 16,500 in the fall of
2012. As of the production of this report, the 30-day student enrollment data for the fall of
2013 was not available. Pressures on the rental market may have eased somewhat with this
lower level of student enrollment.

The City of St. Cloud is experiencing a rapid rise in its elderly population, with persons 65
years of age or older increasing 12.0 percent and those the age of 75 or older rising some 30.5
percent. These two circumstances imply a rising need for aging-in-place housing options, as
well a likely rise in services for a larger frail elderly population.

A reliable count of homeless persons remains elusive, at best. Various methods to estimate or
physically count this special needs population seem to wind up with drastically different
values, within some instances the count swinging from 26 to 146 persons in the City.
However, the public school system tends to have a more consistent, but far larger count, of
homeless enrolled school age children. Both sheltered and unsheltered homeless appear to be
expanding. Other special needs populations continue to expand, with consistent growth in the
transitional and permanent supportive housing for special in-need populations.

Economic data for the City of St. Cloud, as well as the three-county region indicates that
unemployment rates are lower than national norms and that employment has tended to expand
over the past several decades. Further, wage rates, while lower than the state average, have
not seen substantive declines during this past economic recession. Unfortunately, while the
share of households making incomes above $100,000 has risen appreciably, so have the
number of households with incomes less than $15,000. On the other hand, with the all-time
peak of SCSU student enrollment occurring at the same time as that large increase in the lowest
income households, this may be a data anomaly that will not repeat itself as the SCSU student
enrollment declines. This implies that some relief in the affordable rental market might be
occurring.

Still, the forecast of population and households indicates that the City of St. Cloud will
experience substantive growth over the next several years, or reaching some 80,000 people
and more than 34,000 households.


St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                      Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                       37                                    November 13, 2013
III. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
The evaluation of the state of housing markets, as well as the need for housing and homeless
services came from the use and evaluation of a variety of sources of information. These
included the 2000 and 2010 Censuses, the 2007 through 2011 American Community Survey
(ACS) data, the Realtor’s MLS information, as well as the 2013 St. Cloud Community Housing
Needs Assessment Survey and the 2013 St. Cloud Rental Vacancy Survey. Each of these are
presented in this section.

A. HOUSING STOCK

OCCUPIED AND UNOCCUPIED HOUSING

The housing stock in the City of St. Cloud rose some 17.6 percent over the last decade, from
23,249 units to 27,338. This is a fairly aggressive rate of increase, given that population rose
just 11.4 percent over the same period. Furthermore, the three-county region, which had a
population increase of nearly 20.0 percent, had a total housing stock increase of 27.6 percent.
Again, the growth in the housing stock substantively outpaced the rate of increase in the
population, as seen in Table III.1.
                                                      Table III.1
                                                  Housing Units
                                    City of St. Cloud and Three-County Region
                                            2000 and 2010 Census Data
                                         City of St. Cloud               Three-County Region
                Housing Units                                %                                 %
                                2000          2010        Change     2000        2010       Change
                                                           00-10                             00-10
                Occupied        22,652       25,439         12.3     82,250     101,523       23.4
                  Owner         12,671       13,572          7.1     62,070      75,833       22.2
                  Renter         9,981       11,867         18.9     20,180      25,690       27.3
                Vacant            597         1,899        218.1      4,328       8,970      107.3
                Total Housing   23,249       27,338           17.6   86,578     110,493       27.6


In the City of St. Cloud homeownership actually declined over the period, from 55.9 percent to
53.4 percent. A similar, although not quite as strong, trend occurred region-wide with
homeownership falling from 75.5 to 74.7 percent. Rising renter rates occurred at the same
time that the number of renters rose some 18.9 percent and the SCSU student enrollment was
at an all-time high. SCSU enrollment has declined since that time. However, the number and
growth rate of vacant housing units was quite monumental over this Decennial Census period,
expanding 107.3 percent in the three-county region and 218.1 percent in the City of St. Cloud.

Certainly, there were extremely large increases in the number of vacant rental units available.
In St. Cloud, the number of for-rent vacant units rose from 289 in 2000 to 1,070 in 2010, a
jump of 270.2 percent and resulting in a rental vacancy rate of 8.3 percent in 2010, as seen in
Table III.2, on the following page. Rental vacancy rates region-wide were also very high, with
a rate of 8.5 percent and some 2,374 units available for rent. Furthermore, the City had a


St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                      Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                      39                                     November 13, 2013
                                                                                       III. Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment



vacant for-sale rate of 0.6, but that jumped to 2.2 percent by 2010 and the region went from
0.8 to 1.7 percent in this time period. Hence, the City had a relatively larger share of for-sale
homes. However, the more concerning component of vacant housing units are those that are
vacant but not available to the market place (not for-sale or for-rent), such as the “other vacant”
category, as reported by the Census Bureau. These types of units rose some 196.3 percent in
the City and 165.9 percent Region-wide, with 320 units empty in the City and 1,428 units
empty in the three-county region in 2010.

                                                        Table III.2
                                             Disposition of Vacant Units
                                           City of St. Cloud and Three-County Region
                                                   2000 and 2010 Census Data
                                                               City of St. Cloud                    Three-County Region
    Disposition                                                                  %                                     %
                                                        2000        2010      Change            2000       2010     Change
                                                                               00-10                                 00-10
    For Rent                                            289         1,070      270.2             681       2,374     248.6
    For Sale                                             74          309       317.6             478       1,299     171.8
    Rented or Sold, Not Occupied                         64          104        62.5             295        372       26.1
    For Seasonal, Recreational, or Occasional Use        62           96        54.8            2,295      3,487      51.9
    For Migrant Workers                                  0             0           .             42           10         -76.2
    Other Vacant                                        108           320      196.3            537         1,428        165.9
    Total                                               597         1,899      218.1            4,328       8,970        107.3


Both the vacant housing, and particularly the “other vacant” housing units, tend to have been
located in particular areas of the City, as noted in Map III.1 and Map III.2, on the following two
pages.

HOUSING UNITS BY TYPE OF UNIT

As measured between the 2000 Census and the 2011 ACS five year averages, the types of
housing units in the City of St. Cloud comprised about 56 percent single-family homes and
another 35 to 36 percent apartments. Duplex, tri- or four-plex units comprised another 6 to 6.5
percent, as noted in Table III.3, below. Consequently, the share of housing units by type
changed very little over the last decade.

                                                        Table III.3
                                                Housing Units by Type
                                                    City of Saint Cloud
                                        2000 Census SF3 & 2011 Five-Year ACS Data
                                            2000 Census                              2011 Five-Year ACS
      Unit Type
                                   Units                 % of Total             Units             % of Total
      Single-Family               13,186                   56.8%               15,669                55.9%
      Duplex                        806                     3.5%                 932                  3.3%
      Tri- or Four-Plex             686                     3.0%                 792                  2.8%
      Apartment                    8,182                   35.3%               10,142                36.2%
      Mobile Home                   351                     1.5%                 478                  1.7%
      Boat, RV, Van, Etc.            0                      0.0%                  0                   0.0%
      Total                       23,211                     100.0%                    28,013                   100.0%




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                    Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                        40                                                 November 13, 2013
                                                  III. Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment



                                Map III.1
                          Vacant Housing Units
                              City of St. Cloud
                             2010 Census Data




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                          Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study             41                                  November 13, 2013
                                                         III. Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment



                                    Map III.2
                          “Other Vacant” Housing Units
                                  City of St. Cloud
                                 2010 Census Data




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                 Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                 42                                     November 13, 2013
                                                                                  III. Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment



HOMELESS AND SPECIAL NEEDS HOUSING STOCK AND CAPACITY

Transitional Housing – Provides temporary housing for homeless individuals and families in a
safe living environment to facilitate their transition to permanent housing..

Permanent Supportive Housing – Provides affordable housing with occasional services to help
stabilize and facilitate productive lives for those facing serious, persistent issues such as
substance use, mental illness, and HIV/AIDS.

Transitional Halfway Housing – Provides temporary housing for individuals after release from
institutionalization (as for mental disorder, drug addiction, or criminal activity) to facilitate their
transition to permanent housing.

Permanent Specialized Housing – Provides independent living situations for adults with
developmental disabilities, learning disabilities, traumatic brain injuries, and some physical
disabilities requiring professional support on a consistent basis.

Between 2009 and 2013, the capacity of homeless and special needs housing existing in the
City of St. Cloud has expanded nearly 36 percent, as presented in Table III.4, below. This
summary of capacity data has been derived from an inventory of all such facilities in the City of
St. Cloud and their respective inventories, identified by facility, capacity, and clientele served,
as presented in Appendix F, Special Needs Population Housing Capacity, at the end of this
document. It includes such agencies as the Salvation Army, Central Minnesota Transitional
Housing, HUD’s VASH Program, and the VA Medical Center. The large increase in capacity
was mainly attributable to HOPE on Ninth, HUD VASH, the VA, and three additional groups
having permanent specialized housing facilities.

                                                      Table III.4
                           Homeless and Special Needs Housing Units by Type
                                                    City of Saint Cloud
                     Units By Type                           2009         2013         % Change
                     Homeless                                    77       100            29.9%
                     Transitional                             157         187            19.1%
                     Permanent Supportive                     300         395            31.7%
                     Transitional/Halfway                     255         308            20.8%
                     Permanent Specialized                       0         79              na
                     Total Special Needs Capacity             789         1,069          35.5%


However, the point-in-time homeless count presented in Table II.10, noted in the previous
section, appears to be greater than the current capacity, as is also true for transitional housing.
On the other hand, permanent supportive housing capacity appears to be in excess of the level
of reported demand.




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                            Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                     43                                            November 13, 2013
                                                                                  III. Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment




B. HOUSING PRODUCTION AND AFFORDABILITY

HOUSING PRODUCTION

The Census Bureau reports the number of residential building permits issued each year for
permit issuing places, including those in the City of St. Cloud. Reported data are single-family
units, duplexes, tri- and four-plex units, and all units within facilities comprising five or more
units. The number of building permits and valuation of constructed units from 1980 through
2011 are presented in Table III.5, below. The number of permits issued for construction for all
units in the City was highest in 1984 and 1988 when 616 and 697 units were placed into
service, respectively. Most of these were rental units.

                                                     Table III.5
                                         Building Permits and Valuation
                                                    City of St. Cloud
                                            U.S. Census Bureau, 1980 - 2011
                                                                                                  Per Unit
                                                                                                 Valuation
                                Authorized Construction in Permit Issuing Areas
                                                                                                 Real 2011
             Year                                                                                 Dollars
                                                       Tri and       Multi-
                    Single Family                                                   Total      Single Family
                                      Duplex Units    Four Plex      Family
                        Units                                                       Units          Units
                                                        Units         Units
             1980         122               .             4            340           466           90,826
             1981          63              10            24            102           199           88,175
             1982          52               4            20             86           162          109,085
             1983          68               6            24            448           546          106,181
             1984          67               6            32            511           616          101,306
             1985          66               6            16            423           511          104,661
             1986          88               2            18            321           429          105,722
             1987         140               4             4            415           563          104,935
             1988          92               .              .           605           697           99,158
             1989          91               6              .           392           489           96,112
             1990          92               2              .           323           417           87,874
             1991          79               .              .            12            91           96,145
             1992          97               .              .            90           187           96,039
             1993          91               2              .           200           293           95,078
             1994          92               2              .           237           331           93,115
             1995          84               2              .           237           323           91,214
             1996          93               .              .           263           356           89,511
             1997          86               .              .           224           310           97,320
             1998         174               .              .            40           214          153,221
             1999         207               .              .            24           231          153,875
             2000         185               .              .            35           220          150,020
             2001         195               .              .            30           225          146,828
             2002         205               .              .            55           260          144,465
             2003         222               .              .            45           267          141,493
             2004         224               .              .            55           279          137,617
             2005         209               .              .            61           270          133,194
             2006         152               .              .            63           215          129,025
             2007         110               .              .            63           173          125,386
             2008          40               .              .            55            95          166,212
             2009          51               .              .            57           108          150,154
             2010          42               .              .             .            42          152,719
             2011          26               .              .           100           126          169,846




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                          Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                   44                                            November 13, 2013
                                                                                        III. Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment



However, in the last few years, particularly since the Census was taken in March and April of
2010, there appears to have been very little construction occurring in the marketplace, with the
number of single-family units permitted in the last two years, 42 and 26 and only 100
multifamily units permitted in 2011. The City has calculated that 166 were added in 2012,
131 in 2013, and 66 more units are expected in 2014. Diagram III.1 presents the annual
production of housing from 1980 through 2011. Quite obviously, production has not kept
pace with trends that were set over the previous decade, when single-family unit production
was high, nor the decade before that when multi-family production was quite high. This may
imply that demand may be once again approaching supply.

                                                              Diagram III.1
                                                          Total Permitted Units
                                                              City of St. Cloud
                                                           2004–2011 Census Data
                        800

                        700

                        600

                        500

                        400
      Number of Units




                        300

                        200

                        100

                          0
                              1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
                                                 Single Family Units           Multi-Family Units



HOUSING COSTS

As shown in Table III.5 presented on the previous page, the Census Bureau also reports the
value of construction appearing on a building permit, excluding the cost of land and related
land development. The valuation of single-family units was actually highest in the lowest ever
production year, 2011, with the value of construction at $166,846.

Diagram III.2, on the following page, shows graphically the value of construction of single-
family dwellings as well as the permits that were issued for single-family production. From
1998 through 2005, single-family production was very high, even in historic terms, with
production and prices much lower prior to that year. Unfortunately, even with the sharp
decline in housing production, the cost of building a housing unit has not subsided. In fact, in
recent years, it has continued to climb appreciably.




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                                45                                     November 13, 2013
                                                                                               III. Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment




                                                                   Diagram III.2
                                                           Single Family Permits Issued
                                                                       City of St. Cloud
                                                                        Census Data
                            250                                                                                      180,000

                                                                                                                     160,000
      Single Family Units




                                                                                                                               Real 2012 Dollars
                            200                                                                                      140,000

                                                                                                                     120,000
                            150
                                                                                                                     100,000

                                                                                                                     80,000
                            100
                                                                                                                     60,000

                             50                                                                                      40,000

                                                                                                                     20,000

                              0                                                                                      0
                                  1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010




Further, the Census Bureau reports the median home value. As seen in Table III.6, the median
value has risen appreciably since the 2000 Census, rising from $94,300 to $155,000 over the
11 year period. The current locations of these high home values appear to be in the Benton
County portion of the City and in the central core of the City, as seen in Map III.3, on the
following page.

                                                                      Table III.6
                                                               Median Housing Costs
                                                                   City of Saint Cloud
                                                       2000 Census SF3 & 2011 Five-Year ACS Data
                                             Housing Cost                  2000                  2011
                                             Median Home Value           $94,300              $155,000


St. Cloud Association of REALTORS

The St. Cloud Association of Realtors were gracious to share some monthly statistics over the
period from February of 2010 through July of 2013. As seen in Diagram III.3, on page 47, the
number of listed and sold listings has a significant level of seasonality, but conditions are such
that the number of listings and sold properties appear to be once again on the rise.




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                       Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                                     46                                       November 13, 2013
                                                    III. Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment



                                Map III.3
                          Median Home Value
                              City of St. Cloud
                          2011 Five-Year ACS Data




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                            Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study             47                                    November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                                                III. Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment




                                                                                     Diagram III.3
                                                        Number of New and Closed Listings
                                                                  City of St. Cloud
                                             2010 – July 2013 St. Cloud Area Association of REALTORS
               350

               300

               250

               200

               150

               100

                 50

                  0
                               Apr




                                                                               Apr




                                                                                                                                Apr




                                                                                                                                                                                Apr
                       Feb


                                       Jun
                                               Aug
                                                       Oct


                                                                       Feb


                                                                                       Jun
                                                                                               Aug
                                                                                                       Oct


                                                                                                                        Feb


                                                                                                                                        Jun
                                                                                                                                                Aug
                                                                                                                                                        Oct


                                                                                                                                                                        Feb


                                                                                                                                                                                        Jun
                                                               Dec




                                                                                                                Dec




                                                                                                                                                                Dec
                                       2010                                          2011                                             2012                                    2013
                                                                     New Listings                                             Closed Sales
                                                                                                                                                                                                 

As well, the sale prices of existing and new homes, as is the blended values seen in the Realtor
database, is again climbing, as seen in Diagram III.4, below. These two sources of data point
to a rise in housing purchase activity and pricing in the short run.

                                                                                     Diagram III.4
                                                                             Median Sales Price
                                                                  City of St. Cloud
                                             2010 – July 2013 St. Cloud Area Association of REALTORS
             180,000

             170,000

             160,000

             150,000

             140,000

             130,000

             120,000

             110,000

             100,000
                                 Apr




                                                                                 Apr




                                                                                                                                  Apr




                                                                                                                                                                                  Apr
                         Feb


                                         Jun
                                                 Aug
                                                         Oct


                                                                         Feb


                                                                                         Jun
                                                                                                 Aug
                                                                                                          Oct


                                                                                                                          Feb


                                                                                                                                          Jun
                                                                                                                                                  Aug
                                                                                                                                                          Oct


                                                                                                                                                                          Feb


                                                                                                                                                                                          Jun
                                                                 Dec




                                                                                                                  Dec




                                                                                                                                                                  Dec




                                             2010                                       2011                                             2012                                   2013

                                                                 Average Sale Price                                                      Median Sale Price




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                                                                                     Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                                                              48                                                                            November 13, 2013
                                                                              III. Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment



Rental Housing

The Decennial Census, as well as the 2011 ACS have collected and reported median rents for
the City of St. Cloud. Median rent data from the Census Bureau seem to indicate that the
median rents had risen about 33.8 percent over the decade, from $470 per month to $629 per
month, as noted in Table III.7. However, recall that the Census estimates for vacancy rates.
Being over 8 percent would normally indicate a weak rental market.

                                                    Table III.7
                                             Median Housing Costs
                                                  City of Saint Cloud
                                      2000 Census SF3 & 2011 Five-Year ACS Data
                          Housing Cost                    2000                  2011
                          Median Contract Rent            $470                  $629


The geographic distribution of median rents for 2011 by Census Tract are presented in Map
III.4 on the following page. Most of the lowest cost rentals are in the core of the City, with one
Census Tract missing rental data, and the highest median rents located on the far eastern edge
of the City.




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                      Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                  49                                         November 13, 2013
                                                     III. Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment



                                 Map III.4
                          Median Contract Rent
                               City of St. Cloud
                           2011 Five-Year ACS Data




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                             Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study              50                                    November 13, 2013
                                                                                           III. Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment




C. 2013 ST. CLOUD RENTAL SURVEY

To better assess the rental housing market in the City of St. Cloud, the 2013 St Cloud Rental
Survey was implemented. The City of St. Cloud provided a list of legally registered rental
properties and their management contact information. From this list were drawn a randomly
selected set of respondents to participate in the rental vacancy survey. The survey was done
entirely by telephone in late August and early September of 2013, just as students were
returning to school. As noted in Table III.8, there were 371 completed surveys that covered
more than 9,076 of the City’s roughly 20,000 rental units. While there tended to be a high
vacancy rate for single-family rental homes, rental apartment housing is now quite tight, with a
low 3.2 percent vacancy rate.

                                                           Table III.8
                                           Rental Vacancy Survey by Type
                                                          City of St. Cloud
                                                    2013 St. Cloud Rental Survey

                      Place                                Total Units      Vacant Units         Vacancy Rate

                      Single Family                            622                  74               11.9%
                      Apartments                              7,858                250               3.2%
                      Mobile Homes                              8                   0                 .0%
                      “Other” Units or Don’t Know              591                  24               4.1%
                      Total                                   9,079                348               3.8%


For the purposes of this research, rental single-family homes and rental apartments will be
inspected in greater detail. Recall that large family households were growing significantly, with
six and seven member households expanding roughly 27 and 53 percent, respectively, over
the last decade. This would imply that there would be sufficient demand for these rental units
for these larger families. Table III.9 seems to indicate that for-rent single-family homes with
four or more bedrooms have an 8.9 percent vacancy rate. The vacancy rate is a whopping
19.8 percent for apartments with this many bedrooms.

                                                           Table III.9
                              Single Family and Apartment Units by Bedroom Size
                                                          City of St. Cloud
                                                    2013 St. Cloud Rental Survey
                                       Single Family Rentals                                 Apartment Rental
       Number of
       Bedrooms                              Available         Vacancy                           Available          Vacancy
                               Units                                               Units
                                              Units             Rates                             Units              Rates
       Efficiency                  2                0           0.0%               185               3                1.6%
       One                      17                  2           11.8%              1,724             17               1.0%
       Two                      72              14              19.4%              1,615             56               3.5%
       Three                    188             25              13.3%              586               18               3.1%
       Four or more             256             22              8.6%               116               23              19.8%
       Don’t know               87              10              11.5%              3,632            133               3.7%
       Total                    622             74              11.9%              7,858            250               3.2%




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                      Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                         51                                                  November 13, 2013
                                                                                          III. Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment



The survey also inquired about the costs of rental housing, by size and type of unit, with the
average of all single-family homes renting for $998 per month and apartments renting for $638
per month. Where apartments are really quite less expensive is for those of two or more
bedrooms, with single family homes with four or more bedrooms renting for an average of
$1,210.10, as seen in Table III.10, below.

                                                            Table III.10
                                                Average Market Rental Rates
                                                            City of St. Cloud
                                                      2013 St. Cloud Rental Survey
                   Number of
                                        Single Family       Apartment        Mobile Homes            “Other”
                   Bedrooms
                   Efficiency              $400.0             $460.5                 .                   .
                   One                     $517.3             $514.6                 .                $438.8
                   Two                     $729.7             $643.1             $550.0               $640.3
                   Three                   $974.6             $830.7                 .                $875.3
                   Four or more            $1,210.1           $994.2                 .               $1,153.9
                   Total                   $998.0             $638.6             $566.7               $792.5


Unfortunately, very few of these rental units have any form of rental assistance. Just about 13.6
percent of the total units, or 10.6 percent of single-family homes and 12.3 percent of the
apartments have rental assistance available, as noted in Table III.11, below.

                                                            Table III.11
                                   Rental Units with Some Sort of Rental Assistance
                                                            City of St. Cloud
                                                      2013 St. Cloud Rental Survey
                                                                                     Percentage of Units
                           Place                         Total Assisted Units
                                                                                      with Assistance
                           Single Family                          66                        10.6%
                           Apartments                             964                       12.3%
                           Mobile Homes                            0                         0.0%
                           “Other” Units                          207                       35.0%
                           Total                                 1,237                      13.6%



D. HOUSING PROBLEMS

While the 2000 Census did not report significant details regarding the physical condition of
housing units, some information can be derived from the one-in-six sample, which is also
called SF3 data.5 These data relate to overcrowding, incomplete plumbing or kitchen facilities,
and cost burdens. While these data were not collected during the course of the 2010 Census,
data was available for comparison from the 2011 ACS averages. More detailed data on cost



5
 Summary File 3 (SF3) consists of 813 detailed tables of the 2000 Census’ social, economic, and housing characteristics compiled from a
sample of approximately 19 million housing units (about one in six households) that received the 2000 Census long-form questionnaire.
Source: http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/2002/sumfile3.html. These sample data include sampling error and may not sum
precisely to the 100 percent sample typically presented in the 2000 Census.


St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                   Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                           52                                             November 13, 2013
                                                                               III. Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment



burdens and all housing problems are presented, using these data as well as the 2007 to 2011
CHAS counts.

OVERCROWDING

A housing unit is defined as overcrowded if it has more than one but not more than 1.5
persons per room, and is defined as severely overcrowded if it has more than 1.5 persons per
room. At the time of the 2000 Census, 300 units, or 1.3 percent of households, were
overcrowded, and another 188 units, or 0.8 percent of households, were severely
overcrowded, as shown in Table III.12. This housing problem was far more prevalent in renter-
occupied households compared to owner-occupied households, with 1.6 percent of renters
severely overcrowded in 2000. While lower figures were found in the more recent ACS data,
with the share of overcrowded and severely overcrowded households improving in both renter
and owner situations, renters were still more often overcrowded.

                                                     Table III.12
                                    Overcrowding and Severe Overcrowding
                                                   City of Saint Cloud
                                       2000 Census SF3 & 2011 Five-Year ACS Data
                             No Overcrowding              Overcrowding           Severe Overcrowding
     Data Source                                                                                              Total
                          Households % of Total    Households        % of Total Households   % of Total
                                                         Owner
  2000 Census               12,529       98.9%          107             .8%         27          .2%          12,663
  2011 Five-Year ACS        13,751       98.9%          134            1.0%         15          .1%          13,900
                                                         Renter
  2000 Census                9,594       96.4%          193            1.9%        161         1.6%           9,948
  2011 Five-Year ACS        11,783       97.8%          166            1.4%        101         0.8%          12,050
                                                          Total
  2000 Census               22,123       97.8%          300            1.3%        188          .8%          22,611
  2011 Five-Year ACS        25,534       98.4%          300            1.2%        116          .4%          25,950


INCOMPLETE FACILITIES

Incomplete plumbing and kitchen facilities are another set of indicators of potential housing
problems. According to the Census Bureau, a housing unit is classified as lacking complete
plumbing facilities when any of the following are not present: piped hot and cold water, a flush
toilet, and a bathtub or shower. Likewise, a unit is categorized as deficient when any of the
following are missing from the kitchen: a sink with piped hot and cold water, a range or cook
top and oven, and a refrigerator.

At the time of the 2000 Census, a                                   Table III.13
                                            Households with Incomplete Plumbing Facilities
total of 55 units, or 0.2 percent of                              City of Saint Cloud
all housing units in the City, were                 2000 Census SF3 & 2011 Five-Year ACS Data
counted as lacking complete Households                                      2000 Census 2011 Five-Year ACS
                                     With Complete Plumbing Facilities          22,556        25,845
plumbing facilities, as shown in Lacking Complete Plumbing Facilities             55            105
Table III.13. The ACS data Total Households                                     22,611        25,950
averages     showed       that  the Percent Lacking                              0.2%          0.4%
percentage of units with this
housing problem also doubled, increasing to 0.4 percent, or 105 units.


St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                       Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                    53                                        November 13, 2013
                                                                        III. Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment



Table III.14 shows the number of                                      Table III.14
housing units that were counted to             Households with Incomplete Kitchen Facilities
                                                                     City of Saint Cloud
be with incomplete kitchen                           2000 Census SF3 & 2011 Five-Year ACS Data
facilities in the City. In both 2000 Households                                2000 Census 2011 Five-Year ACS
and 2010, the incidence of these       With Complete Kitchen Facilities            22,505        25,763
                                       Lacking Complete Kitchen Facilities          106            187
units was higher than the rate of
                                       Total Households                            22,611        25,950
units missing plumbing facilities. In Percent Lacking                               .5%            .7%
2000, 0.5 percent of units were
counted by this classification, or 106 housing units. ACS data averages showed that the
percentage of these units increased to 0.7 percent, or 187 housing units.

COST BURDEN

The third type of housing problem reported in the Census is cost burden, which is defined as
gross housing costs that range from 30 to 49.9 percent of gross household income. Severe cost
burden is defined as gross housing costs of 50 percent or above gross household income. For
homeowners, gross housing costs include property taxes, insurance, energy payments, water
and sewer service, and refuse collection. If the homeowner has a mortgage, the determination
also includes principal and interest payments on the mortgage loan. For renters, this figure
represents monthly rent and electricity or natural gas energy charges.

Renters with a severe cost burden are at risk of homelessness. Often, cost-burdened renters
who experience one financial setback must choose between rent and food or rent and health
care for their families. Homeowners with a mortgage who have just one unforeseen financial
constraint, such as temporary illness, divorce, or the loss of employment, may face foreclosure
or bankruptcy. Furthermore, households that no longer have a mortgage but still experience a
severe cost burden may be unable to conduct periodic maintenance and repair of their homes,
and in turn, could contribute to a dilapidation and blight problem. All three of these situations
should be of concern to policymakers and program managers.

Table III.15 on the following page shows that 14.4 percent of households were cost burdened
and 8.8 percent were severely cost burdened in 2000. These figures were lower than the
national averages of 20.8 percent and 19.1 percent, respectively, at that time. Fourteen percent
of homeowners with a mortgage had a cost burden and 4.8 percent had a severe cost burden,
while 18.3 percent of renters had a cost burden and 14.3 percent had a severe cost burden.

The 2011 ACS data showed that the overall percentage of cost burden or severe cost burden
increased dramatically, to 20.6 and 18.7 percent, respectively. The rates also increased for
most subcategories. For example, the rate of cost burden and severe cost burden for renters
rose to 23.3 and 33.0 percent, respectively, combined representing more than 56 percent of all
renters. The rate of cost burden for owners with a mortgage increased to 23.6 percent, and the
same rate for owners without a mortgage increased to 6.5 percent.




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                              54                                       November 13, 2013
                                                                                              III. Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment



                                                                 Table III.15
                                          Cost Burden and Severe Cost Burden by Tenure
                                                               City of Saint Cloud
                                                     2000 Census & 2011 Five-Year ACS Data
                           Less Than 30%                    31%-50%                    Above 50%                 Not Computed
Data Source                                                                                                                                Total
                       Households   % of Total      Households % of Total        Households % of Total       Households % of Total
                                                             Owner With a Mortgage
2000 Census               6,424         81.0%          1,107         14.0%          377         4.8%              21            .3%        7,929
2011 Five-Year ACS        6,570         69.3%          2,236         23.6%          662         7.0%              19           0.2%        9,487
                                                           Owner Without a Mortgage
2000 Census               3,096         92.8%           129           3.9%           68         2.0%              42           1.3%        3,335
2011 Five-Year ACS        3,896         88.3%           289           6.5%          216         4.9%              12            .3%        4,413
                                                                     Renter
2000 Census               6,334         63.8%          1,821         18.3%         1,424       14.3%             352           3.5%         9,931
2011 Five-Year ACS        4,820         40.0%          2,809         23.3%         3,971       33.0%             450           3.7%        12,050
                                                                      Total
2000 Census              15,854         74.8%          3,057         14.4%         1,869        8.8%             415           2.0%        21,195
2011 Five-Year ACS       15,286         58.9%          5,334         20.6%         4,849       18.7%             481           1.9%        25,950


        CURRENT UNMET HOUSING NEED BY INCOME AND TENURE

        More data on the details associated with these housing problems are provided by the 2006 to
        2010 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data, customized for HUD. CHAS
        data are created to demonstrate the extent of housing problems and housing needs, particularly
        among low-income households who may need housing assistance. The CHAS data also
        segment households by HUD Area Median Family Income (HAMFI). HUD calculates HAMFI
        for each jurisdiction in order to establish Fair Market Rent values and income limits for HUD
        programs, making a series of adjustments that tailor the figure to each area.6

        Households that experience one or more of the housing problems described in the previous
        section are considered to have unmet housing needs. Such householders can be of any income
        level, race, ethnicity or family type. For the purposes presented herein, these data have been
        segmented by tenure (renters and homeowners) and by percent of HAMFI.

        Unmet housing needs include the previously defined housing problems of cost burden or
        severe cost burden, lack of complete plumbing or kitchen facilities, and overcrowding or
        severe overcrowding. Households with one or more housing problems are considered to have
        unmet housing needs. While 2000 and 2010 Census data presented above quantified the
        numbers of households with such housing problems, CHAS data segment these households by
        range of income defined by HUD as well as type of family for use with the Consolidated Plan.

        When households are examined by HAMFI, the level of need created by the existence of
        housing problems can be more clearly measured. For example, cost burden problems have a
        more significant effect on lower-income households, who may have fewer resources available
        to them in time of need. While accounting for HAMFI level, households with housing
        problems can also be segmented by household type. Households in the lower HAMFI
        categories are more severely affected by the presence of any housing problem, and are often



        6
            HUD, “CHAS: Background”, http://www.huduser.org/portal/datasets/cp/CHAS/bg_chas.html


        St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                              Draft Report for Public Review
        Community Housing Study                                         55                                          November 13, 2013
                                                                            III. Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment



more likely to live in substandard housing. Thus, these households may have more unmet
needs than households earning close to or more than HAMFI.

Table III.16 shows households with housing problems by tenure and household type,
segmented by HAMFI level. Of the 9,945 households with housing problems in 2010, 2,965
were small family households, 4,895 were other households, and 1,130 were elderly non-
family households. The slight majority of all households with housing problems were renter-
occupied (6,485), and the majority of these (3,330) earned 30 percent or less of HAMFI. An
additional 2,285 earned 30.1 to 50 percent of HAMFI. These numbers suggest that much of
the rental housing stock occupied by very low-income families was inadequate, either through
overcrowding, inadequate facilities, or cost. Among owner households, however, the majority
earned more than 50 percent of HAMFI, with 1,395 earning more than 80 percent of HAMFI.
When only those households with incomes of 80 percent or less of HAMFI are considered,
6,385 renter and 2,065 owner-occupied households had housing problems. These households
have fewer resources and may be more affected by these problems. These 8,450 households,
representing the sum of households with housing problems earning 80 percent or less of
HAMFI, may be considered to be of highest priority for the City of St. Cloud.

                                               Table III.16
                   Households with Housing Problems by Income and Family Status
                                               City of St. Cloud
                                            2006-2010 CHAS Data
                                  Elderly    Small            Large      Elderly        Other
         Income                                                                                       Total
                                  Family     Family           Family   Non-Family     Household
                                                     Owners
         30 % HAMFI                 70         155             30         215            190          660
         30.1-50% HAMFI             60         80              75         85              60          360
         50.1-80% HAMFI            140         355             90         70             390         1,045
         80.1 % HAMFI and above     50         780             100        50             415         1,395

         Total                     320        1,370            295        420            1,055       3,460
                                                     Renters
         30 % HAMFI                 15         830             190        325            1,970       3,330
         30.1-50% HAMFI             15         600             90         275            1,305       2,285
         50.1-80% HAMFI             0          95              20         110            545          770
         80.1 % HAMFI and above     10         70               0          0              20          100

         Total                      40        1,595            300        710            3,840       6,485
                                                      Total
         30 % HAMFI                 85         985             220        540            2,160       3,990
         30.1-50% HAMFI             75         680             165        360            1,365       2,645
         50.1-80% HAMFI            140         450             110        180            935         1,815
         80.1 % HAMFI and above     60         850             100        50             435         1,495

         Total                     360        2,965            595       1,130           4,895       9,945




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                    Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                56                                         November 13, 2013
                                                                               III. Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment



FUTURE HOUSING NEEDS BY INCOME AND TENURE

The unfolding housing needs, presented previously as a prediction of household formation
over the future for both renters and homeowners has been segmented into upcoming housing
demand by both tenure and by income. The income categories are similar to those presented
above and generally adhere to typical housing program guidelines, or 0 to 30 percent of
Median Family income (MFI), 30 to 50 percent, 50 to 80 percent, and 80 percent or more.
However, one additional category was included, which represents those households from 80 to
95 percent of MFI, and those above 95 percent MFI. The category from 80 to 95 percent is
often a guide for those designing homeownership programs.

As seen in Table III.17, in five year increments, a large number of rental units are occupied by
households having incomes less than 30 percent of MFI, with significantly greater numbers of
homeowners having incomes above 95 percent of MFI. While each of these groups tend to
rise over time, homeownership, representing some 53.3 percent of all households in 2010
tends to rise appreciably over the forecast horizon. By 2025, homeowners are predicted to
comprise 59.4 percent of all households. While this is still substantially below current national
norms of about 67 percent, this is a strong advance for the City of St. Cloud. Due partly to a
stall in the growth of the student population, it tends to portend a more optimistic future for
housing expansion in the City.

                                                      Table III.17
                                Forecasted Households by Tenure by Income
                                                    City of St. Cloud
                           2010 Census, CHAS Data and Minnesota State Demographic Center Data

   Year     Tenure        Less Than 30%    30% - 50%      50% - 80%      80% - 95%     Above 95%           Total

           Owner               517             558          1,461           884           10,152           13,572
   2010    Renter             2,968           2,145         2,667           818           3,269            11,867
           Total              3,485           2,704         4,127          1,702          13,421           25,439
           Owner               599             647          1,692          1,023          11,759           15,720
   2015    Renter             3,126           2,259         2,808           862           3,443            12,497
           Total              3,725           2,906         4,500          1,885          15,201           28,216
           Owner               683             737          1,929          1,167          13,406           17,922
   2020    Renter             3,287           2,376         2,953           906           3,620            13,143
           Total              3,970           3,113         4,882          2,073          17,026           31,065
           Owner               770             831          2,173          1,315          15,105           20,194
   2025    Renter             3,454           2,496         3,103           952           3,804            13,809
           Total              4,223           3,327         5,276          2,267          18,909           34,002


To better see these relationships, a graphic image has been prepared to better represent these
growth trends. Diagram III.4, on the following page, offers a good picture of how these
income segments expand over the forecast. Across the entire market, for persons with incomes
in excess of 95 percent of MFI, growth is good in both the rental and homeownership markets.




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                       Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                    57                                        November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                                                                                      III. Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment



                                                                                                                 Diagram III.4
                                                                Forecasted Households by Tenure by Income
                                                                            City of St. Cloud
                                                    2010 Census, 2011 ACS and Minnesota State Demographic Center Data 

20,000
18,000
16,000
14,000
12,000
10,000
 8,000
 6,000
 4,000
 2,000
     0
                                        50% ‐ 80%

                                                    80% ‐ 95%




                                                                                                         50% ‐ 80%

                                                                                                                      80% ‐ 95%




                                                                                                                                                                          50% ‐ 80%

                                                                                                                                                                                       80% ‐ 95%




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           50% ‐ 80%

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         80% ‐ 95%
            30% and Less




                                                                            30% and Less




                                                                                                                                              30% and Less




                                                                                                                                                                                                               30% and Less
                                                                Above 95%




                                                                                                                                  Above 95%




                                                                                                                                                                                                   Above 95%




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     Above 95%
                           30% ‐ 50%




                                                                                             30% ‐ 50%




                                                                                                                                                             30% ‐ 50%




                                                                                                                                                                                                                              30% ‐ 50%
                                       2010                                                    2015                                                                      2020                                                             2025
                                                                                           Owner                                                                         Renters
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  
However, the information being communicated to persons interested in affordable housing
production, and the need for additional units, is being somewhat clouded by student rental
housing. Consequently, such housing units have been explicitly identified in Table III.18,
below. Across all income groups, student renter households are being assumed to remain
constant. Affordable rentals for other members of the community can be easily identified.

                                                                                                                     Table III.18
                                                                Forecasted Households by Tenure by Income
                                                       City of St. Cloud
                              2010 Census, CHAS Data and Minnesota State Demographic Center Data
                                        Less Than       30% -          50% -     80% -        Above
     Year               Tenure                                                                                                                                                                                                                         Total
                                            30%           50%            80%      95%           95%
                  Owner                     517           558           1,461     884         10,152                                                                                                                                                   13,572
                  Non-Student Renters                                               1,443                             1,043                          1,296                            398                        1,589                                 5,768
     2010
                  Student Renters                                                   1,525                             1,102                          1,370                            420                        1,680                                 6,099
                  Total                                                             3,485                             2,704                          4,127                            1,702                    13,421                                  25,439
                  Owner                                                                    599                          647                          1,692                            1,023                    11,759                                  15,720
                  Non-Student Renters                                               1,600                             1,157                          1,438                            441                        1,763                                 6,398
     2015
                  Student Renters                                                   1,525                             1,102                          1,370                            420                        1,680                                 6,099
                  Total                                                             3,725                             2,906                          4,500                            1,885                    15,201                                  28,216
                  Owner                                                                    683                          737                          1,929                            1,167                    13,406                                  17,922
                  Non-Student Renters                                               1,762                             1,273                          1,583                            486                        1,940                                 7,044
     2020
                  Student Renters                                                   1,525                             1,102                          1,370                            420                        1,680                                 6,099
                  Total                                                             3,970                             3,113                          4,882                            2,073                    17,026                                  31,065
                  Owner                                                                    770                          831                          2,173                            1,315                    15,105                                  20,194
                  Non-Student Renters                                               1,928                             1,394                          1,732                            532                        2,124                                 7,710
     2025
                  Student Renters                                                   1,525                             1,102                          1,370                            420                        1,680                                 6,099
                  Total                                                             3,454                             2,496                          3,103                            952                        3,804                                 34,002




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                                                                                                                           Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                                                                                           58                                                                                     November 13, 2013
                                                                            III. Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment



What the City may wish to review are the incremental increases in household formation by
income and tenure, given that the City’s HUD funded programs are designed to address
households within certain income groups. The incremental demands for housing stock over
the forecast horizon are identified below in Table III.19. Needed additional affordable non-
student rental units for households with incomes below 80 percent of MFI are predicted to be
413 units by 2015, 836 units by 2020, and 1,212 units by 2025. Additional rental units above
these lower income households still represent another 220 units every five years. This
translates into a total needed addition to the rental stock of nearly 630 units every five years, or
about 125 units every year.

                                                  Table III.19
                                  Needed Housing Units by Tenure by Income
                                                 City of St. Cloud
                        2010 Census, CHAS Data and Minnesota State Demographic Center Data
                                  Less Than       30% -          50% -     80% -        Above
     Year         Tenure                                                                               Total
                                      30%           50%            80%      95%           95%
            Owner                      82            89            231      139          1,607         2,148
            Non-Student Renters        157          114          142         43           174           630
     2015
            Student Renters             0            0            0          0             0             0
            Total                      239          203          373        182          1,781         2,778
            Owner                      166          179          468        283          3,254         4,350
            Non-Student Renters        319          230          287         88           351          1,275
     2020
            Student Renters             0            0            0          0             0             0
            Total                      485          409          755        371          3,605         5,625
            Owner                      253          273          712        431          4,953         6,622
            Non-Student Renters        485          351          436        134           535          1,941
     2025
            Student Renters             0            0            0          0             0             0
            Total                      738          624        1,148        565          5,488         8,563


Demand for market rate homeowner housing units are expected to comprise 1,607 units
between 2010 and 2015, and 3,254 units between 2010 and 2020, with a total of 4,953 units
by 2025.

Given the level of permitting in the last few years, neither apartment nor single-family
construction will be able to supply this level of demand, even if homes and apartment rentals
are recaptured from the previously noted “other vacant” category. Tightening supply and rising
prices are a likely outcome of this market pressure.

E. ZONED RESIDENTIAL LAND USE CAPACITY

To review the land capacity in the City of St. Cloud, current zoning areas, as seen in Map III.4
on the following page, have been overlaid with vacant residential parcels as well as vacant
areas with future residential uses, as seen in Maps III.5 and III.6. In both cases, it appears that
sufficient land has been zoned for the variety of residential uses that are unfolding.




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                    Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                   59                                      November 13, 2013
                                                           III. Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment



                                   Map III.4
                          St Cloud Zoning Districts
                           City of St. Cloud – June 2013




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                   Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                 60                                       November 13, 2013
                                                                        III. Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment



                                                Map II.6
                          Vacant Parcels Currently Zoned for Residential Use
                                        City of St. Cloud – June 2013




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                              61                                       November 13, 2013
                                                                       III. Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment



                                               Map II.6
                          Vacant Parcels Zoned for Residential Development
                                       City of St. Cloud – June 2013




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                               Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                             62                                       November 13, 2013
                                                                III. Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment




F. SUMMARY

Total housing stock in the City of St. Cloud rose some 17.6 percent over the past decade at the
same time that the population rose just 11.4 percent. Consequently, the number of vacant
units rose from 597 in 2000 to 1,899 in 2010, reaching an 8.3 percent vacancy rate. Certainly
there were large increases in the number of units either for sale or for rent, but 320 units were
no longer available to the market place, a rise from 108 in 2000. These “other vacant” units
tend to be located in relative proximity to each other and may contribute to a blighting
influence.

Homeless and special needs housing has expanded substantively over the last few years, from
a capacity of 789 persons to 1,069 persons. However, there appears to be more demand for
homeless and transitional housing than there is capacity at the same time that sufficient
capacity appears to exist for permanent supportive housing.

Housing production since the late 1990s has been dominated by single-family construction,
but from 2008 through 2011, there were only 159 units permitted, far fewer than the more
than 200 permitted per year in the previous decade. As well, while apartment permitting has
sometimes been very high, exceeding more than 600 units in a single year, there were none
permitted in 2010 and 100 in 2011. Results of the 2013 St. Cloud Rental Survey indicate that
the previous glut of rental units has been absorbed and the vacancy rates are now about 3.8
percent. Realtors are reporting that average sale prices are strengthening as well, rising from
about $120,000 in early 2011 to nearly $160,000 today.

The number of households experiencing a housing cost burden, or spending from 30 to 50
percent of their income on housing, has risen appreciably over the last decade, from 14.4
percent in 2000 to 20.6 percent in 2011. The number of households experiencing a severe
cost burden, or spending more than 50 percent of their income on housing, has risen from 8.8
percent to 18.7 percent. Renters experience a much higher incidence of these cost burdens
than homeowners, with 23.3 percent and 33.0 percent experiencing a cost burden or severe
cost burden, respectively. There are 9,945 householders experiencing some sort of housing
problem, of which 8,450 are households with incomes below 80 percent of median family
income. This group does include students housed off-campus.

Between 2010 and 2025, the City of St. Cloud will experience growth, with households rising
from 25,439 in 2010 to 34,002 in 2025, an increase of 8,563 households. It has been
assumed that the SCSU student enrollment ceases declining and stays constant over the
forecast horizon. Of the 34,002 total households, some 20,194 will be homeowners and
13,809 will be renters. Homeownership rises from 53.3 percent in 2010 to 59.4 percent by
2025. Of the 8,563 rise in households, some 2,510 will be households with incomes below
80 percent of median family income (MFI), and of that, 738 will be households with incomes
below 30 percent of MFI. The city appears to have sufficient land zoned for this level of
residential development.




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                        Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                        63                                     November 13, 2013
IV. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
This section addresses housing needs in the City as identified through the 2013 St. Cloud
Community Housing, public input meetings, and consultation with representatives of various
local agencies throughout the City. Each of these is reviewed below.

A. 2013 ST. CLOUD COMMUNITY HOUSING SURVEY

The 2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey, distributed by the City of St. Cloud, asked
respondents for their observations about the perceived needs of housing within four sections of
the City: North side, South side, the eastern portion in Benton and the eastern portion in
Sherburne County, as well as if the individual was responding to the entire City. While the a
city-wide set of responses are reported here, the details associated with each of these
geographic areas are presented in Appendix C, Additional 2013 St. Cloud Community Housing
Survey Data.

The survey consisted of a series of questions in which the respondent was asked to rank the
importance of the particular housing need. The levels of the ranking were listed as “no need”,
“little need”, “medium need”, or “high need”, as well as “Don’t Know”. These types of
categories have guided housing and community development activity rankings when
attempting to prioritize actions to be
undertaken with the City’s CDBG funding.                                Table IV.1
Topics on the survey included housing                             Role of Respondent
                                                                    Total St. Cloud Survey
production, needs for rental housing,                     2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
homeownership         opportunities,     special Primary Role                                   Total
                                                 Homeowner                                       120
population housing (such as homeless or Property Management                                       70
transitional housing), student housing, and the Local Government                                  21
need for housing related services. The City Advocate                                              20
was looking for guidance and input on ways to    Other Role                                       20
                                                 Homeless service provider                        15
promote additional housing, services to Real Estate                                               13
promote better and more suitable housing, and Renter/Tenant                                       10
identification   of     barriers  to    housing Construction/Development                           7
production.                                      Law/Legal Services                                7
                                                      Banking/Finance                             2
                                                      Missing                                    42
Overall, some 353 citizens responded to the Total                                   353
survey, with a large number of homeowners
involved, as noted in Table IV.1, above at right. Still, many property management personnel
replied to the survey.

OWNER-OCCUPIED HOUSING NEEDS

One of the first questions on the survey pertained to how respondents to the survey viewed the
importance of owner-occupied housing and, considering the needs within the owner-occupied
housing market segment, what types of activities were needed most. It is interesting what
people noted, as they seem to most frequently view cite rehabilitation as a more pressing need.

St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                         Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                          65                                    November 13, 2013
                                                                                                             IV. Public Involvement



 Of the 353 persons who completed the survey, 111 cited rehabilitation of affordable housing
 units and another 110 cited the rehabilitation of low-income homes, as seen in Table IV.2,
 below. This is significantly greater than those who cited either new affordable homes or new
 moderate-income homes, which generated some 766 and 53 “high need” votes, respectively.
 Generally, the community of respondents did not espouse any particular support for new
 market rate or new higher-income housing, giving these a frequently noted low or no need
 vote.
                                            Table IV.2
                                  The Need for Owner-Occupied Housing Activities
                                                         Total St. Cloud Survey
                                               2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                           No      Low          Medium      High    Don’t
Question                                                                                                       Missing      Total
                                                          Need     Need          Need       Need    Know
Rehabilitated affordable homes                             12         19          69        111      33         109          353
Rehabilitated low-income homes                             18         22          54        110      36         113          353
New low-income homes                                       36         41          43         82      42         109          353
Rehabilitated moderate-income and workforce homes           8         25          87         80      42         111          353
New affordable homes                                       24         43          62         76      38         110          353
New moderate-income and workforce homes                    18         32          95         53      42         113          353
Rehabilitated market-rate homes                            17         49          81         43      51         112          353
New market-rate homes                                      24         71          67         26      51         114          353
New higher-end homes                                       53         98          20         17      49         116          353
Rehabilitated higher-end homes                             52         90          27         17      52         115          353


 In fact, when asked about specific activities designed to assist owners, the following responses
 were noted most frequently: rehabilitation assistance and access to low-interest rate loans, as
 seen in Table IV.3, below.

                                                            Table IV.3
                            The Need for Owner-Occupied Housing Financing Options
                                                       Total St. Cloud Survey
                                             2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                 No       Low        Medium    High         Don’t
           Question                                                                                  Missing      Total
                                                Need      Need        Need    Need          Know
           Housing rehabilitation assistance      15       14           64     110           29        121         353
           Access to low interest rate loans       15       21             62      109        23       123         353
           First-time homebuyer assistance         16       23             75          90     28       121         353
           Down payment assistance                 20       28             65          90     28       122         353
           Other                                    7        2                         5      46       293         353




 Of course, the City could conceivably choose other activities to support and enhance the
 desirability of owner occupied housing. There were several actions expressed in the survey
 that the City could take that might contribute to this housing option. One particular aspect that
 was noted was the need to improve the energy efficiency of existing buildings through the
 retrofitting of existing facilities, as seen in Table IV.4, on the following page. This might
 involve lower cost options, such as light bulb replacements, but could more feasibly involve
 the replacement of old and antiquated water heating and space heating equipment. Another
 desirable activity that respondents favored to better promote owner occupied housing
 pertained to the incorporation of pedestrian-friendly community design elements. Some folks



 St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                Draft Report for Public Review
 Community Housing Study                                         66                                            November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                IV. Public Involvement



 also believe that the demolition of some dilapidated single-family units might enhance some
 neighborhoods in the City.

                                                               Table IV.4
                        The Need for Services to Better Promote Owner-Occupied Housing
                                                          Total St. Cloud Survey
                                                2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                           No        Low      Medium    High     Don’t
    Question                                                                                                 Missing           Total
                                                          Need      Need       Need    Need      Know
    Energy efficient retrofitting                           10        18         72      95       32              126          353
    Pedestrian-friendly community design elements         18          29        50        91         33           132          353
    Demolition of dilapidated single-family units         11          36        68        80         31           127          353
    Retrofitting of homes for senior needs                10          35        73        62         42           131          353
    More enforcement of building codes                    22          54        58        56         34           129          353
    Lead-based paint abatement                            17          52        64        46         45           129          353
    Other                                                  5          2         1         7          43           295          353


 RENTER-OCCUPIED HOUSING NEEDS

 Another question asked about the needs for selected rental housing activities, particularly rehab
 and new construction of various market segments of rental units, such as affordable or market
 rate. These responses are presented below in Table IV.5. Sentiment for rehabilitation was
 again quite strong, with lower-income rental units being favored by the most respondents.
 However, development of new low-income rental units was also acknowledged in this group
 of respondents. Again, the need for market rate rehab or new construction was seen as a low
 need, or viewed as no need at all.

                                                               Table IV.5
                                             The Need for Rental Housing Activities
                                                          Total St. Cloud Survey
                                                2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                                  No       Low   Medium        High       Don’t
Question                                                                                                                Missing      Total
                                                                 Need     Need    Need         Need       Know
Rehabilitated low-income rental units                             29        22      45          109        31            117           353
New low-income rental units                                      31        36        39        103         33            111           353
Rehabilitated affordable rental units                            21        19        67        101         31            114           353
New affordable rental units                                      29        33        58         91         27            115           353
Rehabilitated moderate-income and workforce rental units         20        34        83         66         36            114           353
New moderate-income and workforce rental units                   24        44        77         55         34            119           353
Rehabilitated market-rate rental units                           25        55        78         31         48            116           353
New market-rate rental units                                     34        80        61         19         43            116           353
New higher-end rental units                                      50        91        29         16         51            116           353
Rehabilitated higher-end rental units                            54        87        32         12         54            114           353


 When the respondents to the survey were asked about the types of financing options that might
 best contribute to the preservation and production of rental housing, sentiment was not as
 clear. The highest needs came in just over 80 respondents offering a high need and these
 responses were directed to two types of program activities: the Low-Income Housing Tax
 Credit (LIHTC) Program administered by Minnesota Housing and the City’s CDBG program, as
 noted in Table IV.6, on the following page. While securing HOME Investment Partnerships
 Program funds, LIHTC, or gaining access to low interest commercial loans are activities that the


 St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                 Draft Report for Public Review
 Community Housing Study                                           67                                           November 13, 2013
                                                                                                        IV. Public Involvement



City may have difficultly securing, the waiving or discounting of permitting and development
fees are indeed activities that the City has the power to review and enact. If so desired, these
actions could enhance the production or rehabilitation of a portion of the rental stock.

                                                            Table IV.6
                                  The Need for Rental Housing Financing Options
                                                   Total St. Cloud Survey
                                         2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                    No        Low      Medium    High        Don’t
   Question                                                                                            Missing     Total
                                                   Need      Need       Need    Need         Know
   Low Income Housing Tax Credit Projects            23        34         48      83          40         125        353
   Community Development Block Grant funding           19       26         62        80       43         123        353
   Access to low interest commercial loans             16       28         62        72       50         125        353
   Waiving or discounting of permitting fees           29       27         48        65       58         126        353
   HOME Investment Partnership Act funding             20       23         54        57       75         124        353
   Waiving or discounting of development fees          31       34         48        57       59         124        353
   Other                                                5        3         2          2       48         293        353


SPECIAL POPULATION HOUSING NEEDS

Another question on the survey asked the respondent to rank the need for other types of
housing activities, such as the provision of emergency, transitional and other special needs
housing, as well as mixed use, mixed income, downtown, and student housing. A substantive
number of respondents ranked the need for homeless and emergency shelter needs with a high
need, with over 100 of the respondents so indicating a high need, as presented in Table IV.7,
below. Transitional and supportive housing were the next most highly ranked as being
needed, with senior housing slightly less, but still viewed as a predominately higher need.
Housing for the disabled is seen more as a medium need. Downtown, mixed-income, mixed-
use, and student housing all ranked considerably lower, with student housing appearing as a
distant last. The number of respondents ranking this as “no need” was higher than those
ranking it as “high need”.

                                                            Table IV.7
                                         The Need for Other Housing Activities
                                                       Total St. Cloud Survey
                                             2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                              No       Low       Medium       High   Don’t
              Question                                                                       Missing     Total
                                             Need      Need        Need       Need  Know
              Emergency housing               17        25          49         102    48       112        353
              Homeless shelters                17      25            49     102       48       112        353
              Transitional housing             20      25            60     90        47       111        353
              Supportive housing               19      26            56     81        55       116        353
              Housing for seniors              12      26            74     76        47       118        353
              Housing for the disabled         14      21            82     67        55       114        353
              Downtown housing                 25      51            59     41        59       118        353
              Mixed-income housing             27      47            68     37        55       119        353
              Mixed use housing                26      51            65     31        66       114        353
              Student housing                  36      61            60     23        58       115        353
              Other                            9        3                   18        60       263        353




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                            Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                         68                                        November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                    IV. Public Involvement



One particular question on the survey did inquire about the types of senior housing, as often
senior housing is viewed as a desirable housing type, since our population is aging and an
emerging desire represents an aging-in-place scenario. However, sentiment was somewhat
weak, as noted in Table IV.8, below, the three more traditional options, independent living,
assisted living, and nursing homes, each ranked as only a medium need.

                                                              Table IV.8
                                          What Types of Senior Housing Are Needed
                                                           Total St. Cloud Survey
                                                 2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                No     Low        Medium       High  Don’t
                     Question                                                                   Missing         Total
                                               Need    Need         Need       Need  Know
                     Independent living         11       17          77         76     63           109          353
                     Assisted living            7       26         72        72        64           112          353
                     Nursing home               10      51         61        29        81           121          353
                     Other                      7        2         3          7        56           278          353


INFLUENTIAL FACTORS IN HOUSING DESIRABILITY AND PRODUCTION

It is important to consider the value that other factors have in affecting the desirability of a
neighborhood or area of the City. These factors might include the location of grocery stores,
perceived public safety, and pedestrian friendliness of the community. Enhancing their
production can help create a more vibrant and healthy community. To that effect, several
questions on the 2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey were asked to help the City
understand the relative ranking and perceived importance of such influential housing factors,
as well as to aid in decision making regarding prospective community investments.

Survey respondents were asked to rank their option of the level of influence certain types of
neighborhood amenities have on housing, such as the value of being in close proximity to the
amenity. These have been ranked in descending order from a strongly positive affect in Table
IV.9, below.
                                        Table IV.9
                        The Influence of the Following Amenities Being in Close Proximity
                                                          Total St. Cloud Survey
                                                2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                        Strong     Moderate                     Moderate     Strong
                                                                                                                          Don’t
Question                               Negative     Negative      No Affect      Positive    Positive       Missing                 Total
                                                                                                                          Know
                                        Affect       Affect                       Affect      Affect
Quality K-12 public schools                4            4              36          69          87               7          146       353
Public transportation                     13            17             52         68           53               5          145       353
Park and recreational facilities           6            22             61         65           50               4          145       353
Grocery stores                             2            15             58         79           49               5          145       353
Day care                                  10            17             63         65           41              12          145       353
Medical facilities                         8            21             69         70           37               4          144       353
Pharmacies                                12            35             70         57           26               7          146       353
Retail shopping                           12            36             87         46           20               7          145       353
Highway access                             6            43             72         60           19               7          146       353
Entertainment facilities                  11            47             87         38           18               7          145       353
Restaurants                               13            46             89         38           15               7          145       353
Other                                      2                            1          3            3              34          310       353




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                      Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                            69                                               November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                    IV. Public Involvement



     As seen, quality K-12 public schools ranked by far the most influential, but other factors were
     also considered to have at least a moderately positive affect. Those with the highest
     moderately positive affect are grocery stores, medical facilities, public transportation, and park
     and recreational facilities; the latter of these are eligible activities under the CDBG program.

     Another question dealt more directly with a wide array of activities that are clearly more
     commonly funded through CDBG program resources. These activities are ranked in terms of
     their moderately positive affect in Table IV.10, below. Seen therein, public transportation,
     bridges, sidewalks and walkability were viewed to all have relatively higher rankings.
     However, one of the highest “no affect” rankings was also bridge capacity, and water and
     sewer capacity and quality. Oddly, water and sewer system quality were also ranked as
     strongly positive by 50 respondents to the survey.

                                                               Table IV.10
                 The Influence of the Following Infrastructure Components on Housing Production
                                                             Total St. Cloud Survey
                                                   2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                               Strong      Moderate                  Moderate       Strong
                                                                                                                Don’t
Question                                      Negative      Negative      No Affect  Positive       Positive                Missing     Total
                                                                                                                Know
                                               Affect        Affect                   Affect         Affect
Public transportation quality                     9            19             32        59            52            31        151        353
Public transportation capacity                   11            17             38        56            45            33        153        353
Bridge capacity                                   4             7             60        51            30            45        156        353
Sidewalk conditions                               8            31             41        50            37            33        153        353
Pedestrian-friendly places/walkability           10            25             37        49            51            30        151        353
City and county road conditions                  13            33             32        45            41            36        153        353
Water system capacity                             1             6             55        38            48            55        150        353
Sewer system capacity                             3             7             53        38            46            54        152        353
Water system quality                              2             6             58        37            50            49        151        353
Sewer system quality                              2             6             56        35            50            52        152        353
Storm water run-off capacity                                   18             53        35            38            54        155        353
Other                                             4                            4         1             4            39        301        353


     Respondents were also asked about the degree of need for selected types of housing services,
     some of which are required to be provided through the CDBG program, such as a certification
     to affirmatively further fair housing. Still, most respondents spoke of public safety and crime
     awareness as substantively high needs, with landlord/tenant counseling, fair housing education,
     and fair housing activities all facing medium needs, as noted in Table IV.11, below.

                                                               Table IV.11
                              The Need for Housing-Related Services in the City of St. Cloud
                                                              Total St. Cloud Survey
                                                    2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                                                   Medium                      Don’t                    Don’t
Question                                              No Need       Low Need                High Need                      Missing
                                                                                     Need                      know                     Know
Public safety, such as police and fire protection        5              18            72       101              14            143        353
Crime awareness, prevention, and education               4           26           74            92              14            143        353
Public transportation                                    9           29           85            79              7             144        353
First-time homebuyer education                          10           35           65            78              21            144        353
Landlord/tenant counseling                              15           43           70            64              16            145        353
Fair housing education                                  15           53           65            54              23            143        353
Fair housing activities                                 17           55           64            48              26            143        353
Other services                                           3           1                          1               37            311        353



     St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                Draft Report for Public Review
     Community Housing Study                                         70                                            November 13, 2013
                                                                                                  IV. Public Involvement



BARRIERS AND EFFECTS ON HOUSING PRODUCTION

The survey also provided respondents with a list of a number of possible barriers to the
development or preservation of housing and asked participants to select any barriers that they
felt existed in the City. The results are presented below in Table IV.12. As shown, several
things that are completely beyond the control of the City were cited most frequently, such as
“state of the housing market”, “cost of materials”, and “cost of labor”. However, such answers
as “community resistance”, “permitting process”, and “permitting fees” are barriers that the City
has some level of influence to control. These are matters that the City may wish to consider
influencing for both the preservation of existing housing and the production of new housing.

                                                      Table IV.12
                                            Barriers to the Development
                                            or Preservation of Housing
                                                  Total St. Cloud Survey
                                        2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                                              Number of
                          Barrier
                                                                              Citations
                          Current state of the housing market                    83
                          Cost of materials                                     72
                          Cost of labor                                         72
                          Community resistance                                  66
                          Cost of land or lot                                   60
                          Lack of access to home loans                          58
                          Lack of access to capital for construction            57
                          Permitting process                                    50
                          Permitting fees                                       47
                          Construction fees                                     41
                          Density of other zoning requirements                  40
                          Lack of adequate public transportation services       38
                          Building codes                                        36
                          Lack of quality public schools                        35
                          Lack of available land                                34
                          Lack of housing development policies                  22
                          Lot size                                              18
                          Other Barrier                                         18
                          Lack of adequate public safety services               14
                          Lack of qualified contractors or builders             10
                          Accessible construction standards                     10


ADDITIONAL COMMENTS FROM SURVEY PARTICIPANTS

Throughout the 2013 Community Housing Survey, survey participants were provided with
opportunities to voice additional housing needs and concerns. There were four main issues
voiced:
   1. Need more downtown housing
   2. Need more units for large families
   3. Need more units for multigenerational families
   4. Transitions from nursing care to assisted housing for seniors will cause increases in
       demand for such housing products. Hence, need for more senior housing options.


St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                      Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                       71                                    November 13, 2013
                                                                                    IV. Public Involvement




B. FOCUS GROUPS AND PUBLIC INPUT MEETINGS

During June 3 and 4, 2013, the City held four focus groups concerning emergency shelter and
homelessness, senior housing, large family housing and new construction. Concerns and
comments arising from these topic oriented meetings were enlightening and are succinctly
summarized below.

EMERGENCY SHELTER AND HOMELESSNESS

The needs expressed during this focus group related to the notion that while the homeless
population is notoriously difficult to count well, that the twice-yearly count is often unreliable,
the demand for homeless facilities and services is increasing. Consequently, more facilities
need to be provided for this population.

SENIOR HOUSING

This focus group addressed rising needs for the City’s older citizens. Demographic trends seen
in the City of St. Cloud reflect the larger demographic trends seen throughout the United States,
with the older population expanding rapidly and wishing to be located closer to medical and
related services. Consequently, shortages of homes designed for the elderly, especially aging-
in-place options are desired.

LARGE FAMILY HOUSING

The City of St. Cloud has been experiencing a large influx in immigrant families. These
families are typically much larger than what the available affordable housing stock can supply,
especially in the rental markets. Consequently, there is expected to continue to be an
expanding need for housing for larger families, with four, five, six, or more bedrooms in the
dwelling unit.

NEW CONSTRUCTION

In the new construction focus group, participants seemed to address the notion that the K-12
schools played a large role in the valuation and placement of new construction. If schools
were of lower quality, the homes would be more difficult to sell. Consequently, the City of St.
Cloud is competing with neighboring communities due to lack of sufficiently good K-12
educational opportunities, or at least the perception of good educational opportunities.

However, there tends to be a substantive lack of sales inventory. Hence, there is a need to
develop more own-occupied housing across the entire marketplace, with this including
housing designs suited to seniors, such as patio homes.

Another criticism noted during this focus group was the lack of sufficient public transit in the
City of St. Cloud. As seen in Map IV.1, on the following page, this may be a matter of
perception rather than reality.


St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                        Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                         72                                    November 13, 2013
                                                                            IV. Public Involvement



                                         Map IV.1
                          Public Transit Routes and Poverty Rates
                                        City of St. Cloud
                                   2013 City of St. Cloud Data




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                        73                             November 13, 2013
                                                                                     IV. Public Involvement




C. SUMMARY

The City of St. Cloud distributed the 2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey via an
electronic format, with selected number of paper instruments entered to the database by hand.
There were 353 respondents to the survey. The survey was intended to solicit responses from
stakeholders, as well as citizens of the City, about their opinions related to homeowner, rental,
and special population housing needs, as well as the needs for housing relates services. There
were 120 homeowners, 70 property management personnel, and a wide variety of other
respondents. The key findings, representing the strongest sentiments seen in the survey, or
those categories which solicited at least 100 high need responses, were as follows:

For Owner Occupied Housing:
     There is a high need for the rehabilitation of affordable and low-income housing
     There is a high need for housing rehabilitation assistance and access to low interest
      loans

For Renter Occupied Housing:
     There is a high need for the rehabilitation of low-income units
     There is a high need for new construction of low-income rentals
     There is a high need for the rehabilitation of affordable rental units

For Special Needs Populations:
     There is a high need for emergency housing and homeless shelters

When asked about factors that were influential in the housing location decision, sentiment was
somewhat more muted than that noted above, but the following responses which gained at
least 85 strongly positive or high need responses, were as follows:

       Quality K-12 schools were important
       Public safety, such as police and fire protection
       Crime awareness, prevention, and education

The survey also asked participants about the key barriers that exist in the City as it relates to the
preservation or production of housing. Of those that the City can influence, the factors most
often mentioned were community resistance, permitting process, and permitting and
construction fees.

The City also held a series of focus groups and public input meetings, from which several key
notions were expressed. These are:

       Need more units for homeless and emergency shelter space
       Need more units for large families
       Need more senior citizen housing options
       Need to improve image of City of St. Cloud, in part through improved K-12 schools



St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                         Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                          74                                    November 13, 2013
V. RESEARCH CONCLUSIONS
This analysis of the Community Housing Needs in the City of St. Cloud has been based upon
the collection and evaluation of both quantitative data, such as examinations of current
housing stock, its use, current vacancy rates, as well as predictions of housing demand in the
future. The evaluation was also influenced by perceptions of housing needs as shared with the
City through the 2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey and a series of focus groups and
public input meetings. The overview of these findings is summarized here.

A. OVERVIEW OF FINDINGS

DEMOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC BACKGROUND
According to the Census Bureau, between 2000 and 2010, the population in the City of St.
Cloud expanded 11.4 percent at the same time that the three-county region rose nearly 20
percent. However, the City of St. Cloud has experienced a significantly more diverse
population, with strong growth in minority populations. Several of these populations have led
to sharp rises in the number of persons per household, with households with six and seven or
more persons rising 26.9 and 53.2 percent, respectively. This seems to imply an expanding
need for larger dwellings with more bedrooms. Furthermore, while the number of persons per
household remains small in historic terms, there is appearing a turn-a-round in large families,
due substantively to immigrant populations.
However, recent student enrollments at St. Cloud State University have reversed course and
have begun to unwind from a high in excess of 18,000 to fewer than 16,500 in the fall of
2012. As of the production of this report, the 30-day student enrollment data for the fall of
2013 was not available. Pressures on the rental market may have eased somewhat with this
lower level of student enrollment.
The City of St. Cloud is experiencing a rapid rise in its elderly population, with persons 65
years of age or older increasing 12.0 percent and those the age of 75 or older rising some 30.5
percent. These two circumstances imply a rising need for aging-in-place housing options, as
well a likely rise in services for a larger frail elderly population.
A reliable count of homeless persons remains elusive, at best. Various methods to estimate or
physically count this special needs population seem to wind up with drastically different
values, within some instances the count swinging from 26 to 146 persons in the City.
However, the public school system tends to have a more consistent, but far larger count, of
homeless enrolled school age children. Both sheltered and unsheltered homeless appears to
be expanding. Other special needs populations continue to expand, with consistent growth in
the transitional and permanent support special in-need populations.
Economic data for the City of St. Cloud, as well as the three-county region, indicates that
unemployment rates are lower than national norms and that employment has tended to expand
over the past several decades. Further, wage rates, while lower than the state average, have
not seen substantive declines during this past economic recession. Unfortunately, while the
share of households making incomes above $100,000 has risen appreciably, so have the


St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                     Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                       75                                   November 13, 2013
                                                                                V. Research Conclusions



number of households with incomes less than $15,000. On the other hand, with the all-time
peak of SCSU student enrollment occurring at the same time as that large increase in the lowest
income households, this may be a data anomaly that will not repeat itself as the SCSU student
enrollment declines. This implies that some relief in the affordable rental market might be
occurring.
Still, the forecast of population and households indicates that the City of St. Cloud will
experience substantive growth over the next several years, or reaching some 80,000 people
and more than 34,000 households.
HOUSING AND HOMELESS NEEDS BACKGROUND
Total housing stock in the City of St. Cloud rose some 17.6 percent over the past decade at the
same time that the population rose just 11.4 percent. Consequently, the number of vacant
units rose from 597 in 2000 to 1,899 in 2010, reaching an 8.3 percent vacancy rate. Certainly
there were large increases in the number of units either for sale or for rent, but 320 units were
no longer available to the market place, a rise from 108 in 2000. These “other vacant” units
tend to be located in relative proximity to each other and may contribute to a blighting
influence.
Homeless and special needs housing capacity has expanded substantively over the last few
years, from a capacity of 789 persons to 1,069 persons. However, there appears to be more
demand for homeless and transitional housing than there is capacity at the same time that
sufficient capacity appears to exist for permanent supportive housing.
Housing production since the late 1990s has been dominated by single-family construction,
but from 2008 through 2011, there were only 159 units permitted, far fewer than the more
than 200 permitted per year in the previous decade. As well, while apartment permitting has
sometimes been very high, exceeding more than 600 units in a single year, there were none
permitted in 2010 and 100 in 2011, with 166 units in 2012, 131 in 2013 and 66 more
expected in 2014. Results of the 2013 St. Cloud Rental Survey indicate that the previous glut
of rental units has been absorbed and the vacancy rates are now about 3.8 percent. Realtors
are reporting that average sale prices are strengthening as well, rising from about $120,000 in
early 2011 to nearly $160,000 today.
The number of households experiencing a housing cost burden, or spending from 30 to 50
percent of their income on housing, has risen appreciably over the last decade, from 14.4
percent in 2000 to 20.6 percent in 2011. The number of households experiencing a severe
cost burden, or spending more than 50 percent of their income on housing, has risen from 8.8
percent to 18.7 percent. Renters experience a much higher incidence of these cost burdens
than homeowners, with 23.3 percent and 33.0 percent experiencing a cost burden or severe
cost burden, respectively. There are 9,945 households experiencing some sort of housing
problem, of which 8,450 are households with incomes below 80 percent of median family
income. This group does include students housed off-campus.
Between 2010 and 2025, the City of St. Cloud will experience growth, with households rising
from 25,439 in 2010 to 34,002 in 2025, an increase of 8,563 households. It has been
assumed that the SCSU student enrollment ceases declining and stays constant over the
forecast horizon. Of the 34,002 total households, some 20,194 will be homeowners and
13,809 will be renters. Homeownership rises from 53.3 percent in 2010 to 59.4 percent by


St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                      Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                        76                                   November 13, 2013
                                                                                   V. Research Conclusions



2025. Of the 8,563 rise in households, some 2,510 will be households with incomes below
80 percent of median family income (MFI), and of that, 738 will be households with incomes
below 30 percent of MFI. The city appears to have sufficient land zoned for this level of
residential development.
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
The City of St. Cloud distributed the 2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey via an
electronic format, with selected number of paper instruments entered to the database by hand.
There were 353 respondents to the survey. The survey was intended to solicit responses from
stakeholders, as well as citizens of the City, about their opinions related to homeowner, rental,
and special population housing needs, as well as the needs for housing relates services. There
were 120 homeowners, 70 property management personnel, and a wide variety of other
respondents. The key findings, representing the strongest sentiments seen in the survey, or
those categories which solicited at least 100 high need responses, were as follows:
For Owner Occupied Housing:
      There is a high need for the rehabilitation of affordable and low-income housing
      There is a high need for housing rehabilitation assistance and access to low interest
       loans
For Renter Occupied Housing:
       There is a high need for the rehabilitation of low-income units
       There is a high need for new construction of low-income rentals
       There is a high need for the rehabilitation of affordable rental units
For Special Needs Populations:
       There is a high need for emergency housing and homeless shelters
When asked about factors that were influential in the housing location decision, sentiment was
somewhat more muted than that noted above, but the following responses which gained at
least 85 strongly positive or high need responses, were as follows:
       Quality K-12 schools were important
       Public safety, such as police and fire protection
       Crime awareness, prevention, and education
The survey also asked participants about the key barriers that exist in the City as it relates to the
preservation or production of housing. Of those that the City can influence, the factors most
often mentioned were community resistance, permitting process, and permitting and
construction fees.
The City also held a series of focus groups and public input meetings, from which several key
notions were expressed. These are:
       Need more units for homeless and emergency shelter space
       Need more units for large families
       Need more senior citizen housing options
       Need to improve image of City of St. Cloud, in part through improved K-12 schools




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                         Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                          77                                    November 13, 2013
                                                                                V. Research Conclusions




B. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The City of St. Cloud and its participating agencies undertook the Community Housing Study
to evaluate and address current and future housing and homeless needs in City of St. Cloud.
The goals of the study were to identify, measure, and predict housing needs for renters and
homeowners across a broad spectrum of income levels that will be faced by City’s residents, as
well as homeless persons within the City. The results are meant to aid the City and its
partnering agencies in better designing its housing and homeless services and activities, as well
as, more efficiently use available housing and homeless resources. The analysis, which was
comprised of a set of primary and secondary research activities, was strengthened through a
large body of quantitative and qualitative data and enhanced through involvement by both
stakeholders and the public in the City of St. Cloud.
Consequently, the completion of this study puts the City and its partnering agencies in a much
stronger position to address the most critical housing and homeless needs for St. Cloud
residents. The list of recommended actions presented on the following pages is based on the
area’s identified housing challenges and will help the City enhance policy and programs to
address current and future affordable housing and homeless needs, thereby forming a strong
foundation for the City and its partnering agencies and its future decisions.
HOUSING CHALLENGES
The primary housing and homeless facility challenges facing the City of St. Cloud, as identified
in the study, fell into the following categories:
1. Unmet Housing Needs for Many Households. Households with cost burdens, severe cost
   burdens, overcrowding, or inadequate facilities represent households with unmet housing
   needs. Some 9,945 households currently have some form of unmet housing need, of which
   8,450 have incomes at 80 percent or less of MFI.
2. Strong demand for both rental units and homeownership housing over the next 10 to 15
   years. Recent permitted housing development activity will not be sufficient to satisfy the
   upcoming housing demand, both for rental units and homeowner units.
3. Lack of Sufficient Senior Housing suitable for an aging population. Elderly households are
   expanding at a rapid rate in the City of St. Cloud and there appears to be a shortage of
   housing styles suitable for aging-in-place housing choices.
4. Large Family Housing. Recently arriving immigrant populations are unable to find sufficient
   numbers of large family housing. This is causing an overcrowding difficulty for some
   populations.
5. Special Needs Populations. The inventory of homeless and emergency housing facilities,
   as well as transitional housing situations, appear to be insufficient to house this particular
   population. Conversely, the permanent supportive housing facilities appear to have excess
   capacity.
6. Desire for Additional Contemporary Housing and Neighborhood Features. Survey
   respondents noted the need for tools to improve and update the housing stock and make
   neighborhoods more desirable, such as safer and more pedestrian friendly, with nearby
   services, groceries, and retail establishments.




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                      Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                        78                                   November 13, 2013
                                                                                 V. Research Conclusions



RECOMMENDATIONS TO ADDRESS HOUSING AND HOMELESS NEEDS
Each of the housing challenges indicates several major needs: some rehabilitation of existing
dwellings, new construction of a variety of housing styles, review and reallocation within the
special needs housing and housing related service delivery system, and the inclusion of more
contemporary housing and neighborhood features. The following recommendations are
designed to address the six housing and homeless needs cited above.
Recommendation 1: Conduct Rehabilitation
Survey data indicated strong sentiment for housing rehabilitation and the improvement of
existing housing. Properties that are most suitable for rehabilitation are units that are of above
average grade but below average condition. These could more likely be rehabilitated cost-
effectively. If neighborhoods and homes meeting these criteria are rehabilitated, their
architectural uniqueness and historic qualities can be not only preserved but also restored to
their previous vitality.
Actions:
1. Identify opportunity areas for rehabilitation targets; direct resources toward:
       a. Purchasing and rehabilitating affordable rental homes in these areas to better serve
           future occupants, a portion of which will be directed to reducing overcrowding and
           allowing for large families;
       b. Conducting rehabilitation on existing homeowner homes so that seniors can age-in-
           place more easily, as well as making the home more marketable and more
           “visitable”.
2. Partner with other agencies to identify, acquire, and rehabilitate rental housing that meets
   long-term neighborhood goals, as well as addressing the needs of large family households
   and elderly citizens who wish to age-in-place and be near medical and related services.
3. Encourage and support the creation of policies that encourage both accessible and visitable
   housing for all rehabilitated housing.
4. Partner with local agencies to encourage or directly seek funding for energy efficient HVAC
   and other appliances for retrofitting during rehabilitation.
Recommendation 2: Produce New Construction
Forecast data indicated strong demand for both market rate and affordable housing units,
regardless of whether rental or homeowner. Survey data moderately supported the need for
new lower-income and affordable housing opportunities. Together, the City needs to facilitate
development of new affordable housing opportunities.
Actions:
1. Identify where permitting, construction, and development fees may be waived or reduced
   for appropriate affordable or senior aging-in-place new construction opportunities.
2. Consider options for the development of mixed-income new sub-development
   opportunities and locate some in geographic areas in the City where these would be close
   to public transit, services, and retail.
3. Encourage and support the creation of policies that encourage accessible and visitable
   housing for all newly constructed housing.



St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                       Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                         79                                   November 13, 2013
                                                                                  V. Research Conclusions



4. Convene a task force to conclude with recommendations to the Mayor about the best
   methods to enhance the St. Cloud K-12 schools and to which schools additional tax
   resources may be directed to foster renewed recognition of the quality of St. Cloud.
   Facilitate homeowner opportunities near these K-12 schools.
Recommendation 3: Facilitate More Comprehensive Special Needs Housing and
   Housing Services Funding Allocations
Point-in-Time emergency shelter counts, along with the implications of homeless student
estimates, indicate that insufficient capacity exists in this segment of the special needs category.
On the other hand, some elements of the special needs housing network appear to have excess
capacity, according to data released within this community. It may be useful to consider how
such resources may be allocated to better serve the entirety of the special needs groups.
Actions:
1. Review the detailed capacity data released and appearing in Appendix F, Special Needs
   Population – Housing Capacity 2013, of this document. Review the counts of people
   demanding homeless and special needs services to verify that the under capacity and over
   capacity issues are valid.
2. Consider options for converting or modifying the operation of some permanent supportive
   housing functions to more transitional or emergency housing operations, including the
   reallocation of funding received for such purposes.
Recommendation 4: Incorporate More Contemporary Housing and Neighborhood
   Design Features with All Rehab and New Construction
While many specific housing needs were addressed in the survey and identified in other data
sources, applying contemporary housing features to redevelopment or rehabilitation projects
would appeal to a broader audience, such as seniors, families, the disabled, and persons
interested in energy efficiency, community amenities, and pedestrian-friendly streets. The
addition of these housing and neighborhood features in such projects will increase quality of
life for all residents and will increase both the value and desirability of neighborhoods
throughout St. Cloud.
Actions:
1. Encourage the City to adopt “visitability” policies, thereby making all housing accessible for
   persons in need of wider doors or step-less access.
2. Develop options within selected redevelopment projects for senior housing, such as patio
   homes, mixed or shared community housing projects, or rehabilitation programs that help
   seniors update and make safer their dwellings, allowing them to stay in their homes.
3. Partner with local government and transportation agencies to connect neighborhoods with
   pedestrian, bicycle, and public transit routes as well as other urban design features that
   appeal to a variety of residents.
4. Partner with local government and, particularly, neighborhood organizations to facilitate
   equitable distribution of quality community features such as schools, police, shopping,
   parks, grocery stores, pharmacies, and other social and retail amenities.
5. Maintain current mixed-housing redevelopment from the Comprehensive Plan.




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                        Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                          80                                   November 13, 2013
VI. APPENDICES

A. ADDITIONAL CENSUS BUREAU DATA

                                                 Table A.1
                           Total Disabilities Tallied: Aged 5 and Older
                                                 City of Saint Cloud
                                               2000 Census SF3 Data
                          Disability Type                            Population
                          Sensory disability                           1,589
                          Physical disability                          3,309
                          Mental disability                            2,517
                          Self-care disability                          757
                          Employment disability                        2,885
                          Go-outside-home disability                   2,404
                          Total                                      13,461


                                                 Table A.2
                                  Employment Status by Disability and
                                         Type: Age 18 to 64
                                                City of Saint Cloud
                                           2011 Three-Year ACS Data
                            Disability Status                          Population
                            Employed:                                    31,849
                              With a disability:                          1,920
                                 With a hearing difficulty                 595
                                 With a vision difficulty                  104
                                 With a cognitive difficulty               975
                                 With an ambulatory difficulty             320
                                 With a self-care difficulty               158
                                 With an independent living difficulty     294
                              No disability                              29,929
                            Unemployed:                                   3,981
                              With a disability:                           523
                                 With a hearing difficulty                 103
                                 With a vision difficulty                   81
                                 With a cognitive difficulty               247
                                 With an ambulatory difficulty             165
                                 With a self-care difficulty                 5
                                 With an independent living difficulty      30
                              No disability                               3,458
                            Not in labor force:                          10,389
                              With a disability:                          2,778
                                 With a hearing difficulty                 598
                                 With a vision difficulty                  275
                                 With a cognitive difficulty              1,730
                                 With an ambulatory difficulty            1,446
                                 With a self-care difficulty               220
                                 With an independent living difficulty     704
                              No disability                               7,611
                            Total                                         46,219




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                81                                     November 13, 2013
                                                                                                               VI. Appendices




                                                       Table A.3
                                             Household Type by Tenure
                                                 City of Saint Cloud
                                            2000 & 2010 Census SF1 Data
                                                      2000 Census                      2010 Census            % Change
    Household Type
                                               Households       % of Total       Households    % of Total       00–10
    Family Households                             12,263          54.1%            13,348       52.5%            8.8%
      Married-Couple Family                        9,374          76.4%             9,573       71.7%            2.1%
        Owner-Occupied                             8,095          86.4%             8,059       84.2%            -.4%
        Renter-Occupied                            1,279          13.6%             1,514       15.8%           18.4%
      Other Family                                 2,889          23.6%             3,775       28.3%           30.7%
        Male Householder, No Spouse Present         758           26.2%             1,134       30.0%           49.6%
           Owner-Occupied                           383           50.5%              510        45.0%           33.2%
           Renter-Occupied                          375           49.5%              624        55.0%           66.4%
        Female Householder, No Spouse Present      2,131          73.8%             2,641       70.0%           23.9%
           Owner-Occupied                           949           44.5%             1,028       38.9%            8.3%
           Renter-Occupied                         1,182          55.5%             1,613       61.1%           36.5%
    Non-Family Households                         10,389          45.9%            12,091       47.5%           16.4%
      Owner-Occupied                               3,244          31.2%             3,975       32.9%           22.5%
      Renter-Occupied                              7,145          68.8%             8,116       67.1%           13.6%
    Total                                            22,652        100.0%          25,439        100.0%        012.3%


                                                       Table A.4
                                             Group Quarters Population
                                                     City of Saint Cloud
                                               2000 & 2010 Census SF1 Data
                                                2000 Census                 2010 Census          % Change
               Group Quarters Type
                                           Population    % of Total    Population  % of Total      00–10
                                                      Institutionalized
               Correctional Institutions      912          54.9%         1,149       68.0%         26.0%
               Juvenile Facilities             .              .            61         3.6%            .
               Nursing Homes                  506          30.5%          448        26.5%         -11.5%
               Other Institutions             243          14.6%           32         1.9%         -86.8%
               Total                         1,661       100.0%          1,690        100.0%        1.7%
                                                   Non-institutionalized
               College Dormitories           2,489        81.3%          2,897         73.8%        16.4%
               Military Quarters               0           .0%             0            .0%           %
               Other Non-institutional        574         18.7%          1,028         26.2%        79.1%
               Total                         3,063        64.8%         3,925          69.9%        28.1%
               Group Quarters
                                             4,724        100.0%        5,615         100.0%        18.9%
               Population




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                            Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                       82                                          November 13, 2013
                                                                                           VI. Appendices




B. ADDITIONAL BLS AND BEA DATA

                                             Table B.1
                                       Labor Force Statistics
                                            City of St. Cloud
                                          1990–2012 BLS Data
                             Labor                                 Unemployment
                      Year            Employment    Unemployment
                             Force                                     Rate
                      1990   28,208     26,569          1,639          5.8%
                      1991   29,051     27,399          1,652          5.7%
                      1992   29,246     27,822          1,424          4.9%
                      1993   30,164     28,662          1,502          5.0%
                      1994   30,738     29,437          1,301          4.2%
                      1995   36,069     34,720          1,349          3.7%
                      1996   37,063     35,186          1,877          5.1%
                      1997   36,445     34,918          1,527          4.2%
                      1998   36,617     35,459          1,158          3.2%
                      1999   38,121     37,008          1,113          2.9%
                      2000   35,863     34,817          1,046          2.9%
                      2001   36,388     34,986          1,402          3.9%
                      2002   36,560     34,900          1,660          4.5%
                      2003   37,583     35,805          1,778          4.7%
                      2004   37,991     36,233          1,758          4.6%
                      2005   38,244     36,552          1,692          4.4%
                      2006   38,580     37,067          1,513          3.9%
                      2007   38,909     37,095          1,814          4.7%
                      2008   39,161     36,965          2,196          5.6%
                      2009   39,117     35,955          3,162          8.1%
                      2010   38,236     35,346          2,890          7.6%
                      2011   38,408     35,896          2,512          6.5%




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                        Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                            83                                 November 13, 2013
                                                                                                            VI. Appendices




                                                       Table B.2
                                   Total Employment and Real Personal Income
                                                St. Cloud Three-County Region
                                              1969–2011 BEA Data, 2012 Dollars
                                    1,000s of 2012 Dollars                                                           Average
                                                                                             Per
                      Social                        Dividends,                                         Total           Real
Year                                Residents                     Transfer     Personal     Capita
       Earnings      Security                        Interest,                                       Employment      Earnings
                                   Adjustments                   Payments       Income     Income
                   Contributions                      Rents                                                          Per Job
1969   1,428,575      87,791           90,096        226,908      165,064      1,822,852   14,318       48,147        29,671
1970   1,517,677      91,589           92,471        240,323      185,250      1,944,132   14,364       49,768        30,495
1971   1,539,041      98,020          106,516        249,599      208,424      2,005,559   14,512       51,549        29,856
1972   1,637,349     108,250          124,370        259,061      220,836      2,133,366   15,252       54,789        29,885
1973   1,886,814     134,946          142,105        279,199      243,898      2,417,070   16,804       58,915        32,026
1974   1,890,352     149,186          149,141        297,102      267,106      2,454,514   16,733       61,953        30,513
1975   1,853,796     148,270          146,756        311,597      301,733      2,465,612   16,408       63,019        29,416
1976   1,940,636     160,638          159,794        328,574      328,269      2,596,634   17,049       64,640        30,022
1977   2,091,438     167,695          176,834        359,310      325,129      2,785,014   17,876       67,240        31,104
1978   2,224,176     189,021          188,433        380,978      329,036      2,933,602   18,508       70,409        31,589
1979   2,326,604     210,373          216,315        415,123      344,826      3,092,495   19,172       74,966        31,035
1980   2,292,215     210,685          233,530        480,966      382,657      3,178,682   19,391       76,303        30,041
1981   2,313,543     228,698          224,026        542,664      410,046      3,261,581   19,623       76,528        30,231
1982   2,294,850     231,244          221,493        620,640      434,902      3,340,641   19,886       76,235        30,102
1983   2,261,660     238,536          232,717        658,876      454,675      3,369,392   19,878       78,118        28,952
1984   2,542,496     263,496          250,945        702,356      464,634      3,696,935   21,585       82,019        30,999
1985   2,634,075     277,369          258,074        720,912      477,156      3,812,848   21,937       85,173        30,926
1986   2,844,017     305,969          259,330        753,549      483,979      4,034,906   22,878       89,387        31,817
1987   2,984,302     322,342          276,290        759,224      486,554      4,184,027   23,338       93,929        31,772
1988   3,121,011     358,943          282,910        767,345      495,881      4,308,204   23,492       98,937        31,545
1989   3,339,032     378,690          287,257        823,039      526,703      4,597,341   24,540      103,138        32,374
1990   3,438,913     396,182          274,192        859,785      543,424      4,720,132   24,533      106,541        32,278
1991   3,453,730     411,350          294,956        871,623      573,402      4,782,360   24,456      109,599        31,512
1992   3,699,525     437,485          325,830        851,858      608,727      5,048,454   25,376      112,131        32,993
1993   3,809,109     460,749          346,199        862,495      626,340      5,183,395   25,505      115,435        32,998
1994   4,027,392     490,027          372,995        916,800      640,980      5,468,139   26,406      119,813        33,614
1995   4,101,585     507,186          404,793       1,027,540     673,100      5,699,832   26,976      126,163        32,510
1996   4,402,546     529,560          449,109       1,125,661     709,227      6,156,984   28,654      129,497        33,997
1997   4,495,162     546,279          504,127       1,215,926     715,498      6,384,433   29,139      130,379        34,478
1998   5,068,343     605,152          554,797       1,350,017     740,310      7,108,315   31,960      133,742        37,896
1999   5,247,572     625,153          622,194       1,368,972     774,471      7,388,055   32,485      136,965        38,313
2000   5,469,723     651,657          705,343       1,443,525     821,291      7,788,224   33,354      141,234        38,728
2001   5,795,205     686,067          688,670       1,410,306     916,076      8,124,190   34,020      146,981        39,428
2002   6,177,979     719,896          667,563       1,359,080    1,001,847     8,486,573   34,640      149,109        41,433
2003   6,395,288     739,673          658,097       1,396,908    1,048,383     8,759,003   35,046      150,668        42,446
2004   6,639,204     766,864          666,410       1,319,727    1,076,051     8,934,527   35,044      153,604        43,223
2005   6,606,696     771,417          670,712       1,289,401    1,113,458     8,908,850   34,212      157,529        41,940
2006   6,701,576     792,951          657,683       1,458,318    1,207,294     9,231,920   34,713      160,164        41,842
2007   6,686,169     803,065          665,783       1,631,093    1,301,019     9,480,998   35,041      163,334        40,936
2008   6,734,487     803,099          658,652       1,719,196    1,405,621     9,714,856   35,455      162,840        41,356
2009   6,475,049     789,390          571,399       1,449,512    1,648,290     9,354,860   33,895      158,460        40,862
2010   6,541,140     784,856          579,801       1,415,218    1,753,040     9,504,342   34,190      157,030        41,655
2011   6,762,767     731,048          609,181       1,473,739    1,744,834     9,859,473   35,296      159,726        42,340




   St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                      Draft Report for Public Review
   Community Housing Study                                  84                                         November 13, 2013
                                                                                Table B.3
                                                                       Employment by Industry
                                                                       St. Cloud Three-County Region
                                                                      Select Years 2001–2011 BEA Data
                                                                                                                                                 % Change
         NAICS Categories                                    2001      2005      2006       2007         2008      2009      2010      2011
                                                                                                                                                   01-11
         Farm employment                                     6,408     5,705     5,478       5,563       5,367     5,797     5,871     5,565      -13.2%
         Forestry, fishing, related activities, and other     290       347       442         353         357       375       386       408        40.7%
         Mining                                               126       154       174         171         192       250       260       266       111.1%
         Utilities                                                       97       950         211         243       238                 246           %
         Construction                                        9,502    11,234    11,236      10,897       9,941     9,043     8,691     9,179       -3.4%
         Manufacturing                                      20,942    21,143    21,070      21,322      20,544    18,424    17,983    18,483      -11.7%
         Wholesale trade                                     5,057     5,021     5,979       5,469       4,472     5,407     4,314     4,476      -11.5%
         Retail trade                                       21,699    20,105    20,440      20,045      19,905    19,165    19,047    19,075      -12.1%
         Transportation and warehousing                      1,769     4,987     5,160       4,329       5,622     4,231     5,471     5,727      223.7%
         Information                                         2,198     1,966     1,877       2,573       2,500     2,282      636      2,061       -6.2%
         Finance and insurance                               4,639     5,593     5,694       6,068       6,197     6,473     6,193     6,437       38.8%
         Real estate and rental and leasing                  3,786     5,087     5,344       5,445       5,471     5,497     5,643     5,663       49.6%
         Professional and technical services                 3,638     4,206     5,441       5,828       5,933     5,926     4,015     4,128       13.5%
         Management of companies and enterprises              398       529       797         769        1,160     1,170      910       967       143.0%
         Administrative and waste services                   6,712     7,327     7,675       7,431       7,702     7,123     7,560     7,731       15.2%
         Educational services                                3,110     3,873     3,967       3,875       4,068     3,925     4,144     4,294       38.1%
         Health care and social assistance                  12,743    17,512    18,298      20,354      20,921    21,242    20,994    21,312       67.2%
         Arts, entertainment, and recreation                 2,071     2,662     2,721       2,833       2,898     2,796     2,835     2,911       40.6%
         Accommodation and food services                     8,991    10,313    10,425      10,628      10,279     9,722     9,520     9,781        8.8%
         Other services, except public administration        7,954     8,711     8,884       8,248       8,134     7,975     7,901     7,954         .0%
         Government and government enterprises              16,621    17,500    17,883      18,107      18,406    18,793    19,001    18,944       14.0%
         Total                                              146,981   157,529   160,164    163,334      162,840   158,460   157,030   159,726      8.7%




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                                                     Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                                             85                                                             November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                                                               VI. Appendices




                                                                                   Table B.4
                                                                           Real Earnings by Industry
                                                                           St. Cloud Three-County Region
                                                                Select Years 2001–2011 BEA Data, Real 2012 Dollars
                                                                                                                                                                   % Change
NAICS Categories                                     2001        2005           2006             2007        2008        2009        2010            2011
                                                                                                                                                                      01-10
Farm earnings                                        87,070     191,125        181,729          158,625     280,932     173,937     204,518         263,421         202.5%
Forestry, fishing, related activities, and other      8,941       8,014          8,911            7,912       9,244      10,728      12,433          13,929          55.8%
Mining                                                6,548       8,245          8,789            8,401       7,920       7,494       7,526           7,759          18.5%
Utilities                                              243        7,863        117,729           19,929      22,692      22,332        202           25,403        10,359.9%
Construction                                        567,466     644,658        631,906          598,244     518,489     482,517     502,210         528,228          -6.9%
Manufacturing                                      1,080,160   1,157,623      1,173,178        1,162,597   1,128,549   1,006,847   1,003,658       1,040,980         -3.6%
Wholesale trade                                     281,475     269,110        322,673          278,827     229,162     279,000     234,530         252,254         -10.4%
Retail trade                                        582,011     537,685        532,617          507,699     484,251     481,045     482,021         487,685         -16.2%
Transportation and warehousing                       71,010     218,551        226,682          174,555     236,102     176,327     222,857         240,919         239.3%
Information                                         101,213     122,194        113,226          171,604     146,619     141,540      34,629         134,886          33.3%
Finance and insurance                               205,446     263,887        270,872          270,749     240,230     233,646     239,411         245,580          19.5%
Real estate and rental and leasing                   90,187     101,758         95,411           74,372      93,610      86,888      88,804          89,731           -.5%
Professional and technical services                 158,248     176,586        205,138          211,406     233,012     213,133     167,443         178,719          12.9%
Management of companies and enterprises              27,636      37,452         56,475           62,588      80,005      80,031      73,760          71,215         157.7%
Administrative and waste services                   147,569     177,483        179,968          179,895     199,121     192,187     198,857         207,935          40.9%
Educational services                                100,476     119,228        121,992          124,818     134,802     135,601     135,024         136,865          36.2%
Health care and social assistance                   579,700     872,386        930,148          973,496     989,091    1,021,658   1,033,051       1,045,842         80.4%
Arts, entertainment, and recreation                  23,307      31,305         33,232           33,326      32,015      30,645      31,318          31,815          36.5%
Accommodation and food services                     142,195     160,332        156,244          161,674     151,844     143,027     145,679         152,271           7.1%
Other services, except public administration        266,705     294,730        295,112          273,656     240,928     242,001     248,782         251,870          -5.6%
Government and government enterprises               898,650    1,007,801      1,027,661        1,050,428   1,101,659   1,158,139   1,128,394       1,124,625         25.1%
Total                                              5,795,205   6,606,696      6,701,576        6,686,169   6,734,487   6,475,049   6,541,140       6,762,767         16.7%




  St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                                                         Draft Report for Public Review
  Community Housing Study                                                                 86                                                             November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                                                                 VI. Appendices




                                                                                    Table B.5
                                                                      Real Earnings Per Job by Industry
                                                                            St. Cloud Three-County Region
                                                            Select Years 2001–2011 BEA Data, 1,000’s of Real 2012 Dollars
                                                                                                                                                       % Change
         NAICS Categories                                     2001        2005        2006       2007        2008           2009   2010      2011
                                                                                                                                                          01-10
         Farm earnings                                       13,588      33,501      33,174     28,514      52,344      30,005     34,835    47,335     248.4%
         Forestry, fishing, related activities, and other    30,832      23,095      20,160     22,415      25,894      28,609     32,209    34,139      10.7%
         Mining                                              51,970      53,538      50,512     49,129      41,252      29,975     28,946    29,168     -43.9%
         Utilities                                             (D)       81,061     123,925     94,449      93,384      93,831       (D)    103,263          .
         Construction                                        59,721      57,385      56,239     54,900      52,157      53,358     57,785    57,547      -3.6%
         Manufacturing                                       51,579      54,752      55,680     54,526      54,933      54,649     55,811    56,321       9.2%
         Wholesale trade                                     55,660      53,597      53,968     50,983      51,244      51,600     54,365    56,357       1.3%
         %Retail trade                                       26,822      26,744      26,058     25,328      24,328      25,100     25,307    25,567      -4.7%
         Transportation and warehousing                      40,141      43,824      43,931     40,322      41,996      41,675     40,734    42,067       4.8%
         Information                                         46,048      62,154      60,323     66,694      58,647      62,025     54,448    65,447      42.1%
         Finance and insurance                               44,287      47,182      47,571     44,619      38,765      36,095     38,658    38,151     -13.9%
         Real estate and rental and leasing                  23,821      20,004      17,854     13,659      17,110      15,806     15,737    15,845     -33.5%
         Professional and technical services                 43,499      41,984      37,702     36,274      39,274      35,966     41,704    43,294       -.5%
         Management of companies and enterprises             69,438      70,797      70,859     81,389      68,970      68,403     81,055    73,646       6.1%
         Administrative and waste services                   21,986      24,223      23,449     24,209      25,853      26,981     26,304    26,896      22.3%
         Educational services                                32,307      30,784      30,752     32,211      33,137      34,548     32,583    31,874      -1.3%
         Health care and social assistance                   45,492      49,816      50,833     47,828      47,277      48,096     49,207    49,073       7.9%
         Arts, entertainment, and recreation                 11,254      11,760      12,213     11,764      11,047      10,960     11,047    10,929      -2.9%
         Accommodation and food services                     15,815      15,547      14,987     15,212      14,772      14,712     15,302    15,568      -1.6%
         Other services, except public administration        33,531      33,834      33,218     33,178      29,620      30,345     31,487    31,666      -5.6%
         Government and government enterprises               54,067      57,589      57,466     58,012      59,853      61,626     59,386    59,366       9.8%
         Total                                               39,428      41,940      41,842     40,936      41,356      40,862     41,655   42,340        7.4%




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                                                            Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                                                  87                                                               November 13, 2013
 C. ADDITIONAL 2013 COMMUNITY HOUSING SURVEY DATA

 The tables presented in this section have been segmented by specific geographic area
 presented by the survey respondent. Data specified by “City of St. Cloud” represents those
 who wished to address the entire city, aside from the four subsections of the City. Tables
 presented earlier in this report, offered a summary of all tabulated responses to the 2013 St.
 Cloud Community Housing Survey and they are reproduced here as the first set of tables.



                                                       Table C.1.1
                                                    Role of Respondent
                                                    Total St. Cloud Survey
                                          2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                 Primary Role                                   Total
                                 Advocate                                         20
                                 Banking/Finance                                   2
                                 Construction/Development                          7
                                 Homeowner                                       120
                                 Homeless service provider                        15
                                 Insurance
                                 Law/Legal Services                                7
                                 Local Government                                 21
                                 Property Management                              70
                                 Real Estate                                      13
                                 Renter/Tenant                                    10
                                 Other Role                                       20
                                 Missing                                          42
                                 Total                                          353




                                                       Table C.1.2
                 Please rate the need for the following types of Owner-Occupied housing
                                                   Total St. Cloud Survey
                                         2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                       No     Low      Medium      High      Don’t
Question                                                                                               Missing       Total
                                                      Need    Need      Need       Need      Know
New low-income homes                                   36         41      43            82    42         109          353
New affordable homes                                   24         43      62           76     38         110          353
New moderate-income and workforce homes                18         32      95           53     42         113          353
New market-rate homes                                  24         71      67           26     51         114          353
New higher-end homes                                   53         98      20           17     49         116          353
Rehabilitated low-income homes                         18         22      54          110     36         113          353
Rehabilitated affordable homes                         12         19      69          111     33         109          353
Rehabilitated moderate-income and workforce homes       8         25      87           80     42         111          353
Rehabilitated market-rate homes                        17         49      81           43     51         112          353
Rehabilitated higher-end homes                         52         90      27           17     52         115          353




 St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                         Draft Report for Public Review
 Community Housing Study                                     88                                         November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                                 VI. Appendices




                                                           Table C.1.3
                         Please rate the need for the following types of Rental housing
                                                      Total St. Cloud Survey
                                            2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                              No         Low      Medium            High         Don’t
Question                                                                                                                    Missing       Total
                                                             Need        Need      Need             Need         Know
New low-income rental units                                   31          36           39           103           33             111       353
New affordable rental units                                   29          33           58            91           27             115       353
New moderate-income and workforce rental units                24          44           77            55           34             119       353
New market-rate rental units                                  34          80           61            19           43             116       353
New higher-end rental units                                   50          91           29            16           51             116       353
Rehabilitated low-income rental units                         29          22           45           109           31             117       353
Rehabilitated affordable rental units                         21          19           67           101           31             114       353
Rehabilitated moderate-income and workforce rental units      20          34           83            66           36             114       353
Rehabilitated market-rate rental units                        25          55           78            31           48             116       353
Rehabilitated higher-end rental units                         54          87           32            12           54             114       353




                                                           Table C.1.4
                           Please rate the need for the following types of Other housing
                                                      Total St. Cloud Survey
                                            2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                             No       Low      Medium           High        Don’t
                Question                                                                              Missing            Total
                                            Need      Need      Need            Need        Know
                Mixed use housing             26       51           65           31          66            114           353
                Mixed-income housing          27       47           68           37          55            119           353
                Downtown housing              25       51           59           41          59            118           353
                Housing for seniors           12       26           74           76          47            118           353
                Student housing               36       61           60           23          58            115           353
                Housing for the disabled      14       21           82           67          55            114           353
                Supportive housing            19       26           56           81          55            116           353
                Transitional housing          20       25           60           90          47            111           353
                Emergency housing             17       25           49          102          48            112           353
                Homeless shelters             17       25           49          102          48            112           353
                Other                          9        3                        18          60            263           353




 St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                      Draft Report for Public Review
 Community Housing Study                                       89                                                    November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                                    VI. Appendices




                                                           Table C.1.5
                              In terms of senior housing, what types are in need
                                                      Total St. Cloud Survey
                                            2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                        No        Low           Medium          High     Don’t
                Question                                                                                Missing         Total
                                       Need       Need           Need           Need     Know
                Independent living        11         17             77           76          63             109           353
                Assisted living            7         26             72           72          64             112           353
                Nursing home              10         51             61           29          81             121           353
                Other                      7          2              3            7          56             278           353



                                                           Table C.1.6
              Please rate the need for the following activities for Owner-Occupied housing
                                                 financing
                                                      Total St. Cloud Survey
                                            2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                No         Low           Medium        High        Don’t
        Question                                                                                                  Missing         Total
                                               Need        Need           Need         Need        Know
        First-time homebuyer assistance         16             23          75           90             28           121           353
        Access to low interest rate loans       15             21          62          109             23           123           353
        Down payment assistance                 20             28          65           90             28           122           353
        Housing rehabilitation assistance       15             14          64          110             29           121           353
        Other                                    7              2                        5             46           293           353




                                                           Table C.1.7
               Please rate the need for the following Rental housing financing activities
                                                      Total St. Cloud Survey
                                            2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                       No           Low         Medium        High          Don’t
   Question                                                                                                               Missing         Total
                                                      Need          Need         Need         Need          Know
   Low Income Housing Tax Credit Projects                 23         34           48              83         40             125           353
   Community Development Block Grant funding              19         26           62              80         43             123           353
   HOME Investment Partnership Act funding                20         23           54              57         75             124           353
   Access to low interest commercial loans                16         28           62              72         50             125           353
   Waiving or discounting of development fees             31         34           48              57         59             124           353
   Waiving or discounting of permitting fees              29         27           48              65         58             126           353
   Other                                                   5          3            2               2         48             293           353




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                              Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                             90                                                      November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                     VI. Appendices




                                                             Table C.1.8
        Please rate the need for services that might better promote Owner-Occupied housing
                                                         Total St. Cloud Survey
                                               2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                           No       Low      Medium    High       Don’t
 Question                                                                                                  Missing       Total
                                                          Need      Need      Need     Need       Know
 Energy efficient retrofitting                             10        18        72        95        32         126         353
 Lead-based paint abatement                                17        52        64        46        45         129         353
 Demolition of dilapidated single-family units             11        36        68        80        31         127         353
 More enforcement of building codes                        22        54        58        56        34         129         353
 Retrofitting of homes for senior needs                    10        35        73        62        42         131         353
 Pedestrian-friendly community design elements             18        29        50        91        33         132         353
 Other                                                      5         2         1         7        43         295         353



                                                             Table C.1.9
                                      Do any of the following acts as barriers to the
                                        development or preservation of housing
                                                         Total St. Cloud Survey
                                               2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                                                      Number of
                                 Barrier
                                                                                      Citations
                                 Lack of qualified contractors or builders                10
                                 Lack of available land                                   34
                                 Lack of access to home loans                             58
                                 Lack of access to capital for construction               57
                                 Cost of land or lot                                      60
                                 Cost of materials                                        72
                                 Cost of labor                                            72
                                 Permitting fees                                          47
                                 Permitting process                                       50
                                 Construction fees                                        41
                                 Lot size                                                 18
                                 Density of other zoning requirements                     40
                                 Community resistance                                     66
                                 Building codes                                           36
                                 Accessible construction standards                        10
                                 Lack of housing development policies                     22
                                 Current state of the housing market                      83
                                 Lack of adequate public transportation services          38
                                 Lack of adequate public safety services                  14
                                 Lack of quality public schools                           35
                                 Other Barrier                                            18




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                 Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                             91                                         November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                               VI. Appendices




                                                                Table C.1.10
               Please rate how the following infrastructure components affect housing production
                                                              Total St. Cloud Survey
                                                    2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                 Strong     Moderate                     Moderate      Strong
                                                                                                                       Don’t
Question                                        Negative    Negative        No Affect    Positive      Positive                 Missing          Total
                                                                                                                       Know
                                                 Affect      Affect                       Affect        Affect
Water system quality                                2           6              58            37          50             49           151           353
Water system capacity                               1            6             55            38          48             55           150           353
Sewer system quality                                2            6             56            35          50             52           152           353
Sewer system capacity                               3            7             53            38          46             54           152           353
Storm water run-off capacity                                    18             53            35          38             54           155           353
City and county road conditions                   13            33             32            45          41             36           153           353
Sidewalk conditions                                8            31             41            50          37             33           153           353
Pedestrian-friendly places/walkability            10            25             37            49          51             30           151           353
Bridge capacity                                    4             7             60            51          30             45           156           353
Public transportation quality                      9            19             32            59          52             31           151           353
Public transportation capacity                    11            17             38            56          45             33           153           353
Other                                              4                            4             1           4             39           301           353




                                                                Table C.1.11
                   Please rate the importance of being close proximity to the following amenities
                                                              Total St. Cloud Survey
                                                    2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                          Strong        Moderate                    Moderate      Strong
                                                                                                               Don’t
     Question                            Negative       Negative     No Affect      Positive      Positive                   Missing       Total
                                                                                                               Know
                                          Affect         Affect                      Affect        Affect
     Medical facilities                     8              21           69              70          37            4            144         353
     Restaurants                           13              46           89              38          15             7           145         353
     Public transportation                 13              17           52              68          53             5           145         353
     Quality K-12 public schools            4               4           36              69          87             7           146         353
     Day care                              10              17           63              65          41            12           145         353
     Retail shopping                       12              36           87              46          20             7           145         353
     Grocery stores                         2              15           58              79          49             5           145         353
     Park and recreational
                                            6              22           61              65          50            4            145         353
     facilities
     Entertainment facilities              11              47           87              38          18             7           145         353
     Highway access                         6              43           72              60          19             7           146         353
     Pharmacies                            12              35           70              57          26             7           146         353
     Other                                  2                            1               3           3            34           310         353




     St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                    Draft Report for Public Review
     Community Housing Study                                           92                                              November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                             VI. Appendices




                                                               Table C.1.12
               Please rate the need for the following housing-related services in the City of St. Cloud
                                                              Total St. Cloud Survey
                                                    2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                                                  Medium                        Don’t                        Don’t
Question                                             No Need      Low Need                    High Need                      Missing
                                                                                   Need                         know                         Know
Fair housing activities                                 17            55            64            48             26             143           353
Fair housing education                                  15            53            65             54            23             143           353
Landlord/tenant counseling                              15            43            70             64            16             145           353
First-time homebuyer education                          10            35            65             78            21             144           353
Crime awareness, prevention, and education               4            26            74             92            14             143           353
Public safety, such as police and fire protection        5            18            72            101            14             143           353
Public transportation                                    9            29            85             79             7             144           353
Other services                                           3             1                            1            37             311           353




                                                                Table C.2.1
                                                             Role of Respondent
                                                           The entire City of St. Cloud
                                                   2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                          Primary Role                                   Total
                                          Advocate                                        16
                                          Banking/Finance                                  1
                                          Construction/Development                         6
                                          Homeowner                                       24
                                          Homeless service provider                        9
                                          Insurance
                                          Law/Legal Services                               7
                                          Local Government                                20
                                          Property Management                             25
                                          Real Estate                                      7
                                          Renter/Tenant                                    3
                                          Other Role                                      20
                                          Missing                                         26
                                          Total                                            168




                                                                Table C.2.2
                          Please rate the need for the following types of Owner-Occupied housing
                                                            The entire City of St. Cloud
                                                    2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                                No         Low    Medium      High      Don’t
    Question                                                                                                          Missing         Total
                                                               Need        Need    Need       Need      Know
    New low-income homes                                        13          25      19           51       13            47             168
    New affordable homes                                         8          22      26           51       12            49             168
    New moderate-income and workforce homes                      6          18      46           33       15            50             168
    New market-rate homes                                        8          37      40           13       20            50             168
    New higher-end homes                                        28          51      11            6       20            52             168
    Rehabilitated low-income homes                               4           7      23           73       12            49             168
    Rehabilitated affordable homes                               1           7      26           74       12            48             168
    Rehabilitated moderate-income and workforce homes            2           9      38           52       17            50             168
    Rehabilitated market-rate homes                              5          25      40           24       24            50             168
    Rehabilitated higher-end homes                              26          50      10            9       22            51             168



     St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                 Draft Report for Public Review
     Community Housing Study                                          93                                            November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                                 VI. Appendices




                                                           Table C.2.3
                         Please rate the need for the following types of Rental housing
                                                    The entire City of St. Cloud
                                            2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                              No         Low      Medium            High         Don’t
Question                                                                                                                    Missing       Total
                                                             Need        Need      Need             Need         Know
New low-income rental units                                   11          18           14            71            7             47        168
New affordable rental units                                    9          14           25            65            6             49        168
New moderate-income and workforce rental units                 9          21           42            34           11             51        168
New market-rate rental units                                  11          49           34             9           15             50        168
New higher-end rental units                                   21          53           12             9           22             51        168
Rehabilitated low-income rental units                          9           9           19            73            6             52        168
Rehabilitated affordable rental units                          7           8           30            68            7             48        168
Rehabilitated moderate-income and workforce rental units       7          13           47            41           11             49        168
Rehabilitated market-rate rental units                        10          29           45            16           18             50        168
Rehabilitated higher-end rental units                         26          50           15             6           21             50        168




                                                           Table C.2.4
                           Please rate the need for the following types of Other housing
                                                    The entire City of St. Cloud
                                            2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                             No       Low      Medium           High        Don’t
                Question                                                                              Missing            Total
                                            Need      Need      Need            Need        Know
                Mixed use housing             9        24           36           22          27            50            168
                Mixed-income housing           8       22           38           26          20             54           168
                Downtown housing              11       25           37           21          23             51           168
                Housing for seniors            3        9           39           48          16             53           168
                Student housing               17       29           32           12          26             52           168
                Housing for the disabled       4        9           43           45          17             50           168
                Supportive housing             5       11           28           55          18             51           168
                Transitional housing           6       12           30           61          11             48           168
                Emergency housing              6       10           24           68          12             48           168
                Homeless shelters              6       10           24           68          12             48           168
                Other                          4        1                        12          23            128           168




 St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                      Draft Report for Public Review
 Community Housing Study                                       94                                                    November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                                    VI. Appendices




                                                           Table C.2.5
                              In terms of senior housing, what types are in need
                                                    The entire City of St. Cloud
                                            2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                        No        Low           Medium          High     Don’t
                Question                                                                                Missing           Total
                                       Need       Need           Need           Need     Know
                Independent living          3        8              38           47          25             47            168
                Assisted living             2        13             34           46          26              47           168
                Nursing home                2        30             35           14          34              53           168
                Other                       4         1              1            4          24             134           168



                                                           Table C.2.6
              Please rate the need for the following activities for Owner-Occupied housing
                                                 financing
                                                    The entire City of St. Cloud
                                            2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                 No        Low           Medium        High        Don’t
        Question                                                                                                  Missing         Total
                                                Need       Need           Need         Need        Know
        First-time homebuyer assistance          4             12          39           49             13            51           168
        Access to low interest rate loans        3             12          31           60             11            51           168
        Down payment assistance                  6             12          35           51             13            51           168
        Housing rehabilitation assistance        5              5          33           61             13            51           168
        Other                                    4              1                        2             24           137           168




                                                           Table C.2.7
               Please rate the need for the following Rental housing financing activities
                                                    The entire City of St. Cloud
                                            2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                          No        Low         Medium        High          Don’t
   Question                                                                                                               Missing         Total
                                                         Need       Need         Need         Need          Know
   Low Income Housing Tax Credit Projects                 7          15           26              53         12              55           168
   Community Development Block Grant funding               8          7           34              51         15              53           168
   HOME Investment Partnership Act funding                 8          7           32              32         36              53           168
   Access to low interest commercial loans                 5         10           37              42         21              53           168
   Waiving or discounting of development fees             15         16           24              33         26              54           168
   Waiving or discounting of permitting fees              13         15           24              35         26              55           168
   Other                                                   2          1            1               1         24             139           168




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                              Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                             95                                                      November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                     VI. Appendices




                                                             Table C.2.8
        Please rate the need for services that might better promote Owner-Occupied housing
                                                       The entire City of St. Cloud
                                               2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                           No       Low      Medium    High       Don’t
 Question                                                                                                  Missing       Total
                                                          Need      Need      Need     Need       Know
 Energy efficient retrofitting                              3         5        39        49        16         56          168
 Lead-based paint abatement                                 6        23        33        25        23          58         168
 Demolition of dilapidated single-family units              4        21        31        40        16          56         168
 More enforcement of building codes                         3        30        30        29        18          58         168
 Retrofitting of homes for senior needs                     2        13        36        39        19          59         168
 Pedestrian-friendly community design elements              6        13        26        49        16          58         168
 Other                                                      1         1                   3        22         141         168



                                                             Table C.2.9
                                      Do any of the following acts as barriers to the
                                        development or preservation of housing
                                                       The entire City of St. Cloud
                                               2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                                                      Number of
                                 Barrier
                                                                                      Citations
                                 Lack of qualified contractors or builders                6
                                 Lack of available land                                   17
                                 Lack of access to home loans                             30
                                 Lack of access to capital for construction               30
                                 Cost of land or lot                                      37
                                 Cost of materials                                        38
                                 Cost of labor                                            38
                                 Permitting fees                                          24
                                 Permitting process                                       21
                                 Construction fees                                        20
                                 Lot size                                                  5
                                 Density of other zoning requirements                     14
                                 Community resistance                                     38
                                 Building codes                                           13
                                 Accessible construction standards                         3
                                 Lack of housing development policies                     12
                                 Current state of the housing market                      41
                                 Lack of adequate public transportation services          33
                                 Lack of adequate public safety services                   9
                                 Lack of quality public schools                           20
                                 Other Barrier                                             9




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                 Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                             96                                         November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                               VI. Appendices




                                                                Table C.2.10
               Please rate how the following infrastructure components affect housing production
                                                            The entire City of St. Cloud
                                                    2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                 Strong     Moderate                     Moderate      Strong
                                                                                                                       Don’t
Question                                        Negative    Negative        No Affect    Positive      Positive                 Missing          Total
                                                                                                                       Know
                                                 Affect      Affect                       Affect        Affect
Water system quality                                1           4              28            19          24             27           65            168
Water system capacity                               1            3             25            20          25             30            64           168
Sewer system quality                                             4             30            18          22             28            66           168
Sewer system capacity                               1            5             27            21          22             27            65           168
Storm water run-off capacity                                    11             27            17          18             27            68           168
City and county road conditions                     5           19             18            25          16             19            66           168
Sidewalk conditions                                 6           17             19            29          14             17            66           168
Pedestrian-friendly places/walkability              7           18             15            29          22             14            63           168
Bridge capacity                                     1            5             33            26          11             23            69           168
Public transportation quality                       7           14             12            31          24             15            65           168
Public transportation capacity                      9           12             17            28          20             16            66           168
Other                                               2                           3             1           2             18           142           168




                                                                Table C.2.11
                   Please rate the importance of being close proximity to the following amenities
                                                            The entire City of St. Cloud
                                                    2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                          Strong        Moderate                    Moderate      Strong
                                                                                                               Don’t
     Question                            Negative       Negative     No Affect      Positive      Positive                   Missing       Total
                                                                                                               Know
                                          Affect         Affect                      Affect        Affect
     Medical facilities                     1              12           34              39          18            2            62          168
     Restaurants                            4              27           43              19           8            5            62          168
     Public transportation                  6               8           25              33          30            3            63          168
     Quality K-12 public schools                            2           18              36          46            3            63          168
     Day care                               6               7           29              33          24            6            63          168
     Retail shopping                        5              23           41              20          13            4            62          168
     Grocery stores                                         9           29              32          33            2            63          168
     Park and recreational
                                            2              12           28              29          32            2            63          168
     facilities
     Entertainment facilities               3              28           44              19           7             4            63         168
     Highway access                         2              27           35              30           8             3            63         168
     Pharmacies                             5              17           37              28          15             3            63         168
     Other                                  1                            1               1           2            13           150         168




     St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                    Draft Report for Public Review
     Community Housing Study                                           97                                              November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                            VI. Appendices




                                                               Table C.2.12
               Please rate the need for the following housing-related services in the City of St. Cloud
                                                            The entire City of St. Cloud
                                                    2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                                                  Medium                       Don’t                       Don’t
Question                                             No Need      Low Need                    High Need                     Missing
                                                                                   Need                        know                        Know
Fair housing activities                                  5            21            35            35             9             63            168
Fair housing education                                   3            23            33            39             8              62           168
Landlord/tenant counseling                               4            16            35            44             6              63           168
First-time homebuyer education                           3            14            31            47            10              63           168
Crime awareness, prevention, and education               1            12            36            50             6              63           168
Public safety, such as police and fire protection        2             6            36            55             7              62           168
Public transportation                                    3            11            38            50             2              64           168
Other services                                           1             1                           1            18             147           168



                                                                Table C.3.1
                                                             Role of Respondent
                                                              North side of the City
                                                   2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                          Primary Role                                   Total
                                          Advocate                                         2
                                          Banking/Finance                                  1
                                          Construction/Development
                                          Homeowner                                       40
                                          Homeless service provider                        4
                                          Insurance
                                          Law/Legal Services
                                          Local Government                                 1
                                          Property Management                             18
                                          Real Estate                                      1
                                          Renter/Tenant                                    3
                                          Other Role
                                          Missing                                          7
                                          Total                                            78




                                                                Table C.3.2
                          Please rate the need for the following types of Owner-Occupied housing
                                                               North side of the City
                                                    2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                                No         Low    Medium        High   Don’t
    Question                                                                                                         Missing         Total
                                                               Need        Need    Need         Need   Know
    New low-income homes                                        10          9        8           14       13           24             78
    New affordable homes                                         9           6      13           13       14           23             78
    New moderate-income and workforce homes                      8           2      23            8       13           24             78
    New market-rate homes                                       10          13      13            2       16           24             78
    New higher-end homes                                        12          21       4            2       15           24             78
    Rehabilitated low-income homes                               5           5      16           15       11           26             78
    Rehabilitated affordable homes                               4                  22           18       11           23             78
    Rehabilitated moderate-income and workforce homes            3           2      25           13       12           23             78
    Rehabilitated market-rate homes                              6           7      21            6       14           24             78
    Rehabilitated higher-end homes                              11          20       4            2       17           24             78



     St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                 Draft Report for Public Review
     Community Housing Study                                          98                                            November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                                VI. Appendices




                                                           Table C.3.3
                         Please rate the need for the following types of Rental housing
                                                       North side of the City
                                            2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                              No         Low         Medium         High        Don’t
Question                                                                                                                      Missing    Total
                                                             Need        Need         Need          Need        Know
New low-income rental units                                   10          4            8             18          14             24         78
New affordable rental units                                    8           5           13            15          11             26         78
New moderate-income and workforce rental units                 6           7           13            12          12             28         78
New market-rate rental units                                   7          12           13             4          16             26         78
New higher-end rental units                                   11          17            7             1          15             27         78
Rehabilitated low-income rental units                          7           2           12            19          13             25         78
Rehabilitated affordable rental units                          4           2           17            18          12             25         78
Rehabilitated moderate-income and workforce rental units       4           6           17            12          13             26         78
Rehabilitated market-rate rental units                         6           8           14             6          18             26         78
Rehabilitated higher-end rental units                         12          14            6             1          18             27         78




                                                           Table C.3.4
                           Please rate the need for the following types of Other housing
                                                       North side of the City
                                            2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                             No       Low      Medium           High        Don’t
                Question                                                                              Missing           Total
                                            Need      Need      Need            Need        Know
                Mixed use housing             7        10           15           3           18            25            78
                Mixed-income housing          8         7           16            3          18            26            78
                Downtown housing              7        14            6            6          18            27            78
                Housing for seniors           4         9           10           14          14            27            78
                Student housing               6        12           17            4          14            25            78
                Housing for the disabled      4         6           15            9          19            25            78
                Supportive housing            5         6           14           10          17            26            78
                Transitional housing          6         3           17           13          15            24            78
                Emergency housing             3         6           14           15          15            25            78
                Homeless shelters             3         6           14           15          15            25            78
                Other                         3                                   3          18            54            78




 St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                      Draft Report for Public Review
 Community Housing Study                                       99                                                    November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                                    VI. Appendices




                                                           Table C.3.5
                              In terms of senior housing, what types are in need
                                                       North side of the City
                                            2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                        No        Low             Medium        High     Don’t
                Question                                                                                   Missing        Total
                                       Need       Need             Need         Need     Know
                Independent living          6        3              15           12          18              24            78
                Assisted living             2         8             15           10          18              25            78
                Nursing home                5        11             11            6          20              25            78
                Other                       2                                     1          15              60            78



                                                           Table C.3.6
              Please rate the need for the following activities for Owner-Occupied housing
                                                 financing
                                                       North side of the City
                                            2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                 No        Low           Medium        High        Don’t
        Question                                                                                                  Missing         Total
                                                Need       Need           Need         Need        Know
        First-time homebuyer assistance          7            3            18           17             6             27            78
        Access to low interest rate loans        4            4            17           19              6            28            78
        Down payment assistance                  7            4            20           13              6            28            78
        Housing rehabilitation assistance        3            6            19           15              8            27            78
        Other                                    2                                       1             12            63            78




                                                           Table C.3.7
               Please rate the need for the following Rental housing financing activities
                                                       North side of the City
                                            2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                          No        Low         Medium        High           Don’t
   Question                                                                                                               Missing         Total
                                                         Need       Need         Need         Need           Know
   Low Income Housing Tax Credit Projects                 5          10           12              14          11             26            78
   Community Development Block Grant funding              4          11           13              11          12             27            78
   HOME Investment Partnership Act funding                3           8           12               8          19             28            78
   Access to low interest commercial loans                4           6           18              10          11             29            78
   Waiving or discounting of development fees             6           7           16               7          15             27            78
   Waiving or discounting of permitting fees              6           5           14              12          14             27            78
   Other                                                  2           1                            1          12             62            78




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                              Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                            100                                                      November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                        VI. Appendices




                                                             Table C.3.8
        Please rate the need for services that might better promote Owner-Occupied housing
                                                          North side of the City
                                               2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                           No       Low      Medium    High       Don’t
 Question                                                                                                     Missing       Total
                                                          Need      Need      Need     Need       Know
 Energy efficient retrofitting                              4         4        15        21         8            26           78
 Lead-based paint abatement                                 5        11        18         6        11            27           78
 Demolition of dilapidated single-family units              3         7        21        16         5            26           78
 More enforcement of building codes                         6        13        14        10         8            27           78
 Retrofitting of homes for senior needs                     3         9        20         8        10            28           78
 Pedestrian-friendly community design elements              3         9        14        17         7            28           78
 Other                                                      2                             2        12            62           78



                                                             Table C.3.9
                                      Do any of the following acts as barriers to the
                                        development or preservation of housing
                                                          North side of the City
                                               2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                                                      Number of
                                 Barrier
                                                                                      Citations
                                 Lack of qualified contractors or builders                2
                                 Lack of available land                                    8
                                 Lack of access to home loans                             14
                                 Lack of access to capital for construction               13
                                 Cost of land or lot                                      17
                                 Cost of materials                                        17
                                 Cost of labor                                            17
                                 Permitting fees                                          11
                                 Permitting process                                       11
                                 Construction fees                                        14
                                 Lot size                                                  5
                                 Density of other zoning requirements                     13
                                 Community resistance                                     17
                                 Building codes                                           13
                                 Accessible construction standards                         4
                                 Lack of housing development policies                      6
                                 Current state of the housing market                      20
                                 Lack of adequate public transportation services           4
                                 Lack of adequate public safety services                   2
                                 Lack of quality public schools                            9
                                 Other Barrier                                             4




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                    Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                             101                                           November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                              VI. Appendices




                                                                Table C.3.10
               Please rate how the following infrastructure components affect housing production
                                                               North side of the City
                                                    2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                 Strong     Moderate                  Moderate        Strong
                                                                                                                      Don’t
Question                                        Negative    Negative     No Affect    Positive        Positive                 Missing        Total
                                                                                                                      Know
                                                 Affect      Affect                    Affect          Affect
Water system quality                                                         14           8             12             12          32           78
Water system capacity                                                        14            8            11             13          32           78
Sewer system quality                                            1            13            6            12             14          32           78
Sewer system capacity                                           2            13            5            11             15          32           78
Storm water run-off capacity                                    3            11            7            10             15          32           78
City and county road conditions                     8           6             5            8            10              9          32           78
Sidewalk conditions                                 1           8            10           11             8              7          33           78
Pedestrian-friendly places/walkability              1           5            11            9            12              8          32           78
Bridge capacity                                     2                        15           10             8             11          32           78
Public transportation quality                                   3             8           15            12              8          32           78
Public transportation capacity                                  3             7           14            12              9          33           78
Other                                               2                         1                          2              9          64           78




                                                                Table C.3.11
                   Please rate the importance of being close proximity to the following amenities
                                                               North side of the City
                                                    2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                          Strong        Moderate                  Moderate     Strong
                                                                                                             Don’t
     Question                            Negative       Negative    No Affect     Positive     Positive                     Missing     Total
                                                                                                             Know
                                          Affect         Affect                    Affect       Affect
     Medical facilities                     2              5            15           16           8              2            30         78
     Restaurants                            1              14           16           11           3              2            31         78
     Public transportation                  2               4           14           16          10              2            30         78
     Quality K-12 public schools                                         7           22          15              3            31         78
     Day care                                              4            15           19           7              3            30         78
     Retail shopping                        2              9            22           10           3              2            30         78
     Grocery stores                                        3            13           23           7              2            30         78
     Park and recreational
                                                           5            15           19           7              2            30         78
     facilities
     Entertainment facilities               1              12           20           10           3               2           30         78
     Highway access                                         5           19           16           6               2           30         78
     Pharmacies                             1              11           14           12           7               3           30         78
     Other                                  1                                         2           1              12           62         78




     St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                  Draft Report for Public Review
     Community Housing Study                                           102                                           November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                              VI. Appendices




                                                               Table C.3.12
               Please rate the need for the following housing-related services in the City of St. Cloud
                                                               North side of the City
                                                    2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                                                  Medium                          Don’t                      Don’t
Question                                             No Need      Low Need                    High Need                       Missing
                                                                                   Need                           know                       Know
Fair housing activities                                  6            16            10               7             10             29           78
Fair housing education                                   5            16            10                9             9             29           78
Landlord/tenant counseling                               4             9            20               10             6             29           78
First-time homebuyer education                           3             6            20               14             5             30           78
Crime awareness, prevention, and education                             7            22               15             5             29           78
Public safety, such as police and fire protection                      9            16               20             4             29           78
Public transportation                                    2             8            22               14             3             29           78
Other services                                           2                                                         11             65           78



                                                                Table C.4.1
                                                             Role of Respondent
                                                          East side, in Benton County
                                                   2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                          Primary Role                                   Total
                                          Advocate
                                          Banking/Finance
                                          Construction/Development
                                          Homeowner                                        8
                                          Homeless service provider                        1
                                          Insurance
                                          Law/Legal Services
                                          Local Government
                                          Property Management                              7
                                          Real Estate
                                          Renter/Tenant
                                          Other Role
                                          Missing                                          2
                                          Total                                            19




                                                                Table C.4.2
                          Please rate the need for the following types of Owner-Occupied housing
                                                           East side, in Benton County
                                                    2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                                No         Low    Medium        High      Don’t
    Question                                                                                                            Missing        Total
                                                               Need        Need    Need         Need      Know
    New low-income homes                                         2                   5           5          3             4             19
    New affordable homes                                         1          1        7           3          3             4             19
    New moderate-income and workforce homes                                 3        6           3          3             4             19
    New market-rate homes                                        1          4        3           3          3             5             19
    New higher-end homes                                         3          4        2           3          3             4             19
    Rehabilitated low-income homes                               2                   1           9          3             4             19
    Rehabilitated affordable homes                               2                   4           6          3             4             19
    Rehabilitated moderate-income and workforce homes            1          1        5           5          3             4             19
    Rehabilitated market-rate homes                              3          1        6           2          3             4             19
    Rehabilitated higher-end homes                               4          5        1           2          3             4             19



     St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                  Draft Report for Public Review
     Community Housing Study                                          103                                            November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                                   VI. Appendices




                                                               Table C.4.3
                         Please rate the need for the following types of Rental housing
                                                   East side, in Benton County
                                            2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                                  No         Low         Medium        High        Don’t
Question                                                                                                                         Missing    Total
                                                                 Need        Need         Need         Need        Know
New low-income rental units                                       2                        4            6             2             5         19
New affordable rental units                                       3           1            5            5             1             4         19
New moderate-income and workforce rental units                    2           4            5            3             1             4         19
New market-rate rental units                                      5           2            4            3             1             4         19
New higher-end rental units                                       3           2            4            3             3             4         19
Rehabilitated low-income rental units                             4           1            2            7             1             4         19
Rehabilitated affordable rental units                             4           1            4            5             1             4         19
Rehabilitated moderate-income and workforce rental units          3           4            3            4             1             4         19
Rehabilitated market-rate rental units                            5           4            3            2             1             4         19
Rehabilitated higher-end rental units                             3           5            2            2             3             4         19




                                                               Table C.4.4
                           Please rate the need for the following types of Other housing
                                                   East side, in Benton County
                                            2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                             No       Low          Medium           High       Don’t
                Question                                                                                    Missing        Total
                                            Need      Need          Need            Need       Know
                Mixed use housing             3            2             4           4            2           4             19
                Mixed-income housing          4            3             3           4            1            4            19
                Downtown housing                                         4           6            5            4            19
                Housing for seniors           1                          4           4            6            4            19
                Student housing               1            5             1           2            6            4            19
                Housing for the disabled      1                          5           5            4            4            19
                Supportive housing            2                          3           7            3            4            19
                Transitional housing          1            1             3           7            3            4            19
                Emergency housing             2            1             1           8            3            4            19
                Homeless shelters             2            1             1           8            3            4            19
                Other                                                                             3           16            19




 St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                         Draft Report for Public Review
 Community Housing Study                                           104                                                  November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                                              VI. Appendices




                                                         Table C.4.5
                              In terms of senior housing, what types are in need
                                                   East side, in Benton County
                                            2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                        No        Low            Medium          High         Don’t
                Question                                                                                         Missing           Total
                                       Need       Need            Need           Need         Know
                Independent living                                 7                3              5               4                19
                Assisted living             1                      6                3              5                4               19
                Nursing home                1                      4                4              6                4               19
                Other                                                                              2               17               19



                                                         Table C.4.6
              Please rate the need for the following activities for Owner-Occupied housing
                                                 financing
                                                   East side, in Benton County
                                            2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                 No      Low               Medium           High           Don’t
        Question                                                                                                           Missing           Total
                                                Need     Need               Need            Need           Know
        First-time homebuyer assistance          1           1               1               7               3                6               19
        Access to low interest rate loans        1           1                               9               2                 6              19
        Down payment assistance                  2                                           8               3                 6              19
        Housing rehabilitation assistance        2                           1               8               2                 6              19
        Other                                                                                                1                18              19




                                                         Table C.4.7
               Please rate the need for the following Rental housing financing activities
                                                   East side, in Benton County
                                            2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                        No         Low           Medium            High            Don’t
   Question                                                                                                                        Missing           Total
                                                       Need        Need           Need             Need            Know
   Low Income Housing Tax Credit Projects                4                              1              7               2                 5            19
   Community Development Block Grant funding             2             1                1              8               2               5              19
   HOME Investment Partnership Act funding               3             1                               8               2               5              19
   Access to low interest commercial loans               2             2                               7               3               5              19
   Waiving or discounting of development fees            4                                             7               3               5              19
   Waiving or discounting of permitting fees             3                                             7               3               6              19
   Other                                                                                                               1              18              19




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                                       Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                           105                                                                November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                         VI. Appendices




                                                             Table C. 4.8
        Please rate the need for services that might better promote Owner-Occupied housing
                                                      East side, in Benton County
                                               2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                           No       Low      Medium     High       Don’t
 Question                                                                                                      Missing       Total
                                                          Need      Need      Need      Need       Know
 Energy efficient retrofitting                              1                      5     6           1             6           19
 Lead-based paint abatement                                 1         2            3     6           1             6           19
 Demolition of dilapidated single-family units                                     5     8                         6           19
 More enforcement of building codes                         2         1            4     6                         6           19
 Retrofitting of homes for senior needs                               2            4     4           3             6           19
 Pedestrian-friendly community design elements                        1            1     8           2             7           19
 Other                                                                                               1            18           19



                                                             Table C.4.9
                                      Do any of the following acts as barriers to the
                                        development or preservation of housing
                                                      East side, in Benton County
                                               2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                                                       Number of
                                 Barrier
                                                                                       Citations
                                 Lack of qualified contractors or builders                   1
                                 Lack of available land                                      2
                                 Lack of access to home loans                                2
                                 Lack of access to capital for construction                  1
                                 Cost of land or lot                                         1
                                 Cost of materials                                           4
                                 Cost of labor                                               4
                                 Permitting fees                                             4
                                 Permitting process                                          4
                                 Construction fees                                           2
                                 Lot size
                                 Density of other zoning requirements
                                 Community resistance                                        1
                                 Building codes                                              3
                                 Accessible construction standards
                                 Lack of housing development policies
                                 Current state of the housing market                         2
                                 Lack of adequate public transportation services             1
                                 Lack of adequate public safety services
                                 Lack of quality public schools                              1
                                 Other Barrier                                               2




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                     Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                             106                                            November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                             VI. Appendices




                                                               Table C.4.10
               Please rate how the following infrastructure components affect housing production
                                                           East side, in Benton County
                                                    2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                 Strong     Moderate                 Moderate        Strong
                                                                                                                     Don’t
Question                                        Negative    Negative     No Affect   Positive        Positive                 Missing        Total
                                                                                                                     Know
                                                 Affect      Affect                   Affect          Affect
Water system quality                                           1             2           2               2             2          10           19
Water system capacity                                          1             2           2               1             3          10           19
Sewer system quality                                                         2           2               3             2          10           19
Sewer system capacity                                                        2           2               2             3          10           19
Storm water run-off capacity                                                 2           3               2             2          10           19
City and county road conditions                                1             2           2               2             2          10           19
Sidewalk conditions                                            1             2           2               3             2           9           19
Pedestrian-friendly places/walkability                                       1           3               2             2          11           19
Bridge capacity                                                1             1           2               2             3          10           19
Public transportation quality                       1          1                         2               3             3           9           19
Public transportation capacity                      1          1                         3               2             2          10           19
Other                                                                                                                  1          18           19




                                                               Table C.4.11
                   Please rate the importance of being close proximity to the following amenities
                                                           East side, in Benton County
                                                    2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                          Strong        Moderate                 Moderate     Strong
                                                                                                               Don’t
     Question                            Negative       Negative   No Affect     Positive     Positive                     Missing     Total
                                                                                                               Know
                                          Affect         Affect                   Affect       Affect
     Medical facilities                                    1            6                        4                           8          19
     Restaurants                                                        9            1           1                           8          19
     Public transportation                  1              1            3            2           4                           8          19
     Quality K-12 public schools                                        2            3           6                           8          19
     Day care                                              1            3            5           2                           8          19
     Retail shopping                                                    5            5           1                           8          19
     Grocery stores                                                     3            4           4                           8          19
     Park and recreational
                                                           1            2            6           2                           8          19
     facilities
     Entertainment facilities                                           6            2           3                            8         19
     Highway access                                        2            2            3           4                            8         19
     Pharmacies                                                         5            5           1                            8         19
     Other                                                                                                       1           18         19




     St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                    Draft Report for Public Review
     Community Housing Study                                           107                                             November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                             VI. Appendices




                                                               Table C.4.12
               Please rate the need for the following housing-related services in the City of St. Cloud
                                                           East side, in Benton County
                                                    2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                                                 Medium                          Don’t                      Don’t
Question                                             No Need      Low Need                    High Need                      Missing
                                                                                  Need                           know                       Know
Fair housing activities                                               5            3                 2            2             7             19
Fair housing education                                                4            3                 3            2              7            19
Landlord/tenant counseling                                            6            1                 3            2              7            19
First-time homebuyer education                                        2            4                 3            3              7            19
Crime awareness, prevention, and education                            1            4                 6            1              7            19
Public safety, such as police and fire protection        1                         4                 6            1              7            19
Public transportation                                    1            2            5                 3            1              7            19
Other services                                                                                                    1             18            19



                                                                Table C.5.1
                                                             Role of Respondent
                                                         East side, in Sherburne County
                                                   2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                          Primary Role                                   Total
                                          Advocate                                         1
                                          Banking/Finance
                                          Construction/Development
                                          Homeowner                                       10
                                          Homeless service provider                        1
                                          Insurance
                                          Law/Legal Services
                                          Local Government
                                          Property Management                              4
                                          Real Estate
                                          Renter/Tenant
                                          Other Role
                                          Missing                                          0
                                          Total                                           16




                                                                Table C.5.2
                          Please rate the need for the following types of Owner-Occupied housing
                                                         East side, in Sherburne County
                                                    2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                                No        Low    Medium        High      Don’t
    Question                                                                                                          Missing        Total
                                                               Need       Need    Need         Need      Know
    New low-income homes                                         3          2       1            2         1             7             16
    New affordable homes                                         1          3       4                      1             7             16
    New moderate-income and workforce homes                      2          1       4            1         1             7             16
    New market-rate homes                                        1          4       2            1         1             7             16
    New higher-end homes                                         1          3                    1         2             9             16
    Rehabilitated low-income homes                               2          2       1            2         2             7             16
    Rehabilitated affordable homes                               1          4       4                      1             6             16
    Rehabilitated moderate-income and workforce homes            1          3       3                      2             7             16
    Rehabilitated market-rate homes                              1          5       2                      2             6             16
    Rehabilitated higher-end homes                               2          4                              2             8             16



     St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                 Draft Report for Public Review
     Community Housing Study                                          108                                           November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                                   VI. Appendices




                                                               Table C.5.3
                         Please rate the need for the following types of Rental housing
                                                 East side, in Sherburne County
                                            2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                                  No         Low         Medium        High        Don’t
Question                                                                                                                         Missing    Total
                                                                 Need        Need         Need         Need        Know
New low-income rental units                                       2           3            1            2             1             7         16
New affordable rental units                                       1           3            4                          1             7         16
New moderate-income and workforce rental units                    1           4            3                          1             7         16
New market-rate rental units                                      1           5            1                          2             7         16
New higher-end rental units                                       1           4            1            1             3             6         16
Rehabilitated low-income rental units                             1           2            1            1             4             7         16
Rehabilitated affordable rental units                             1           2            2                          4             7         16
Rehabilitated moderate-income and workforce rental units          1           3            1                          4             7         16
Rehabilitated market-rate rental units                            1           3            1                          3             8         16
Rehabilitated higher-end rental units                             1           4                         1             4             6         16




                                                               Table C.5.4
                           Please rate the need for the following types of Other housing
                                                 East side, in Sherburne County
                                            2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                             No       Low          Medium           High       Don’t
                Question                                                                                    Missing        Total
                                            Need      Need          Need            Need       Know
                Mixed use housing             1            3             1                        4           7             16
                Mixed-income housing          1            3                         1            4            7            16
                Downtown housing              1            4                                      4            7            16
                Housing for seniors           1            2             3           2            2            6            16
                Student housing               2            2             2                        3            7            16
                Housing for the disabled      1            1             3                        4            7            16
                Supportive housing            2            1             1           2            3            7            16
                Transitional housing          2            1                         3            3            7            16
                Emergency housing             1            2                         3            3            7            16
                Homeless shelters             1            2                         3            3            7            16
                Other                         1            1                         1            3           10            16




 St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                         Draft Report for Public Review
 Community Housing Study                                           109                                                  November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                                               VI. Appendices




                                                           Table C.5.5
                              In terms of senior housing, what types are in need
                                                 East side, in Sherburne County
                                            2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                        No        Low             Medium          High         Don’t
                Question                                                                                          Missing           Total
                                       Need       Need             Need           Need         Know
                Independent living          1        2              1                3              3               6                16
                Assisted living             1        1              1                2              3                8               16
                Nursing home                1        1              1                               5                8               16
                Other                       1        1                               1              3               10               16



                                                           Table C.5.6
              Please rate the need for the following activities for Owner-Occupied housing
                                                 financing
                                                 East side, in Sherburne County
                                            2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                 No        Low              Medium           High           Don’t
        Question                                                                                                            Missing           Total
                                                Need       Need              Need            Need           Know
        First-time homebuyer assistance          1            2               4               2                                7               16
        Access to low interest rate loans        1            1               3               4                                 7              16
        Down payment assistance                  1            4               2               2                                 7              16
        Housing rehabilitation assistance        2            1                               4               2                 7              16
        Other                                    1            1                                               2                12              16




                                                           Table C.5.7
               Please rate the need for the following Rental housing financing activities
                                                 East side, in Sherburne County
                                            2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                          No        Low           Medium            High            Don’t
   Question                                                                                                                         Missing           Total
                                                         Need       Need           Need             Need            Know
   Low Income Housing Tax Credit Projects                 2             1                2              1               2                 8            16
   Community Development Block Grant funding              1             2                2              1               3               7              16
   HOME Investment Partnership Act funding                2             1                2                              4               7              16
   Access to low interest commercial loans                2             2                2              1               2               7              16
   Waiving or discounting of development fees             2             2                1              1               3               7              16
   Waiving or discounting of permitting fees              2             1                2              1               3               7              16
   Other                                                  1             1                1                              2              11              16




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                                        Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                            110                                                                November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                         VI. Appendices




                                                             Table C.5.8
        Please rate the need for services that might better promote Owner-Occupied housing
                                                    East side, in Sherburne County
                                               2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                           No       Low      Medium     High       Don’t
 Question                                                                                                      Missing       Total
                                                          Need      Need      Need      Need       Know
 Energy efficient retrofitting                              1         3            2     2                         8           16
 Lead-based paint abatement                                 1         3            1     3                         8           16
 Demolition of dilapidated single-family units              1         1            4     2                         8           16
 More enforcement of building codes                         1         2            1     4                         8           16
 Retrofitting of homes for senior needs                     1         2            1     3           1             8           16
 Pedestrian-friendly community design elements              2         1            2     2           1             8           16
 Other                                                      1         1                              1            13           16



                                                             Table C.5.9
                                      Do any of the following acts as barriers to the
                                        development or preservation of housing
                                                    East side, in Sherburne County
                                               2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                                                       Number of
                                 Barrier
                                                                                       Citations
                                 Lack of qualified contractors or builders
                                 Lack of available land                                      1
                                 Lack of access to home loans                                3
                                 Lack of access to capital for construction                  2
                                 Cost of land or lot                                         2
                                 Cost of materials                                           5
                                 Cost of labor                                               5
                                 Permitting fees                                             1
                                 Permitting process
                                 Construction fees                                           1
                                 Lot size
                                 Density of other zoning requirements
                                 Community resistance                                        1
                                 Building codes
                                 Accessible construction standards
                                 Lack of housing development policies
                                 Current state of the housing market                         5
                                 Lack of adequate public transportation services
                                 Lack of adequate public safety services                     1
                                 Lack of quality public schools                              1
                                 Other Barrier                                               1




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                     Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                             111                                            November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                             VI. Appendices




                                                               Table C.5.10
               Please rate how the following infrastructure components affect housing production
                                                         East side, in Sherburne County
                                                    2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                 Strong     Moderate                 Moderate        Strong
                                                                                                                     Don’t
Question                                        Negative    Negative     No Affect   Positive        Positive                 Missing        Total
                                                                                                                     Know
                                                 Affect      Affect                   Affect          Affect
Water system quality                                                         2           1               3             1          9            16
Water system capacity                                                        2           2               2             1           9           16
Sewer system quality                                                         1           2               3             1           9           16
Sewer system capacity                                                        1           3               2             1           9           16
Storm water run-off capacity                                                 1           3               2             1           9           16
City and county road conditions                                1             1           1               3             1           9           16
Sidewalk conditions                                 1                        3                           2             1           9           16
Pedestrian-friendly places/walkability              1                        3           1               1             1           9           16
Bridge capacity                                     1                        1           1               3             1           9           16
Public transportation quality                       1                        2           1               2             1           9           16
Public transportation capacity                      1                        2           1               2             1           9           16
Other                                                                                                                  2          14           16




                                                               Table C.5.11
                   Please rate the importance of being close proximity to the following amenities
                                                         East side, in Sherburne County
                                                    2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                          Strong        Moderate                 Moderate     Strong
                                                                                                               Don’t
     Question                            Negative       Negative   No Affect     Positive     Positive                     Missing     Total
                                                                                                               Know
                                          Affect         Affect                   Affect       Affect
     Medical facilities                                                 1            6                                       9          16
     Restaurants                            1              1            4            1                                        9         16
     Public transportation                  1                                        3           3                            9         16
     Quality K-12 public schools            1                           1            1           4                            9         16
     Day care                               1              1            2            1           2                            9         16
     Retail shopping                                                    3            3                                       10         16
     Grocery stores                                        1                         6                                        9         16
     Park and recreational
                                            1              1            2            1           2                           9          16
     facilities
     Entertainment facilities               2                           4                        1                            9         16
     Highway access                         1                           5            1                                        9         16
     Pharmacies                                                         2            4           1                            9         16
     Other                                                                                                       2           14         16




     St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                    Draft Report for Public Review
     Community Housing Study                                           112                                             November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                               VI. Appendices




                                                               Table C.5.12
               Please rate the need for the following housing-related services in the City of St. Cloud
                                                         East side, in Sherburne County
                                                    2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                                                 Medium                           Don’t                       Don’t
Question                                             No Need      Low Need                    High Need                        Missing
                                                                                  Need                            know                        Know
Fair housing activities                                               3            4                                              9             16
Fair housing education                                                2            4                  1                            9            16
Landlord/tenant counseling                                            2            2                  2                           10            16
First-time homebuyer education                                        3            2                  2                            9            16
Crime awareness, prevention, and education                            2            2                  3                            9            16
Public safety, such as police and fire protection                     1            3                  3                            9            16
Public transportation                                                 2            1                  4                            9            16
Other services                                                                                                     2              14            16


                                                                Table C.6.1
                                                           Role of Respondent
                                                              South side of the City
                                                   2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                          Primary Role                                   Total
                                          Advocate                                         1
                                          Banking/Finance
                                          Construction/Development                         1
                                          Homeowner                                       38
                                          Homeless service provider
                                          Insurance
                                          Law/Legal Services
                                          Local Government
                                          Property Management                             16
                                          Real Estate                                      5
                                          Renter/Tenant                                    4
                                          Other Role
                                          Missing                                          7
                                          Total                                           72




                                                                Table C.6.2
                          Please rate the need for the following types of Owner-Occupied housing
                                                               South side of the City
                                                    2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                                No        Low    Medium        High       Don’t
    Question                                                                                                           Missing         Total
                                                               Need       Need    Need         Need       Know
    New low-income homes                                         8          5       10           10        12             27             72
    New affordable homes                                         5          11      12            9         8             27             72
    New moderate-income and workforce homes                      2           8      16            8        10             28             72
    New market-rate homes                                        4          13       9            7        11             28             72
    New higher-end homes                                         9          19       3            5         9             27             72
    Rehabilitated low-income homes                               5           8      13           11         8             27             72
    Rehabilitated affordable homes                               4           8      13           13         6             28             72
    Rehabilitated moderate-income and workforce homes            1          10      16           10         8             27             72
    Rehabilitated market-rate homes                              2          11      12           11         8             28             72
    Rehabilitated higher-end homes                               9          11      12            4         8             28             72




     St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                  Draft Report for Public Review
     Community Housing Study                                          113                                            November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                                VI. Appendices




                                                           Table C.6.3
                         Please rate the need for the following types of Rental housing
                                                       South side of the City
                                            2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                              No         Low         Medium         High        Don’t
Question                                                                                                                      Missing    Total
                                                             Need        Need         Need          Need        Know
New low-income rental units                                   6           11           12            6             9            28         72
New affordable rental units                                    8          10           11             6            8            29         72
New moderate-income and workforce rental units                 6           8           14             6            9            29         72
New market-rate rental units                                  10          12            9             3            9            29         72
New higher-end rental units                                   14          15            5             2            8            28         72
Rehabilitated low-income rental units                          8           8           11             9            7            29         72
Rehabilitated affordable rental units                          5           6           14            10            7            30         72
Rehabilitated moderate-income and workforce rental units       5           8           15             9            7            28         72
Rehabilitated market-rate rental units                         3          11           15             7            8            28         72
Rehabilitated higher-end rental units                         12          14            9             2            8            27         72




                                                           Table C.6.4
                           Please rate the need for the following types of Other housing
                                                       South side of the City
                                            2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                             No       Low      Medium           High        Don’t
                Question                                                                                 Missing        Total
                                            Need      Need      Need            Need        Know
                Mixed use housing             6        12            9           2           15            28            72
                Mixed-income housing           6       12           11           3           12            28            72
                Downtown housing               6        8           12           8            9            29            72
                Housing for seniors            3        6           18           8            9            28            72
                Student housing               10       13            8           5            9            27            72
                Housing for the disabled       4        5           16           8           11            28            72
                Supportive housing             5        8           10           7           14            28            72
                Transitional housing           5        8           10           6           15            28            72
                Emergency housing              5        6           10           8           15            28            72
                Homeless shelters              5        6           10           8           15            28            72
                Other                          1        1                        2           13            55            72




 St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                      Draft Report for Public Review
 Community Housing Study                                       114                                                   November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                                     VI. Appendices




                                                           Table C.6.5
                              In terms of senior housing, what types are in need
                                                       South side of the City
                                            2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                        No        Low             Medium        High     Don’t
                Question                                                                                    Missing        Total
                                       Need       Need             Need         Need     Know
                Independent living          1        4              16           11          12               28            72
                Assisted living             1        4              16           11          12               28            72
                Nursing home                1        9              10            5          16               31            72
                Other                                                2            1          12               57            72



                                                           Table C.6.6
              Please rate the need for the following activities for Owner-Occupied housing
                                                 financing
                                                       South side of the City
                                            2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                 No        Low           Medium        High           Don’t
        Question                                                                                                   Missing         Total
                                                Need       Need           Need         Need           Know
        First-time homebuyer assistance          3            5            13           15              6             30            72
        Access to low interest rate loans        6            3            11           17              4             31            72
        Down payment assistance                  4            8             8           16              6             30            72
        Housing rehabilitation assistance        3            2            11           22              4             30            72
        Other                                                                            2              7             63            72




                                                           Table C.6.7
               Please rate the need for the following Rental housing financing activities
                                                       South side of the City
                                            2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                          No        Low         Medium        High            Don’t
   Question                                                                                                                Missing         Total
                                                         Need       Need         Need         Need            Know
   Low Income Housing Tax Credit Projects                 5          8            7               8            13             31            72
   Community Development Block Grant funding              4          5            12               9           11             31            72
   HOME Investment Partnership Act funding                4          6             8               9           14             31            72
   Access to low interest commercial loans                3          8             5              12           13             31            72
   Waiving or discounting of development fees             4          9             7               9           12             31            72
   Waiving or discounting of permitting fees              5          6             8              10           12             31            72
   Other                                                                                                        9             63            72




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                               Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                            115                                                       November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                        VI. Appendices




                                                             Table C.6.8
        Please rate the need for services that might better promote Owner-Occupied housing
                                                          South side of the City
                                               2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                           No       Low      Medium    High       Don’t
 Question                                                                                                     Missing       Total
                                                          Need      Need      Need     Need       Know
 Energy efficient retrofitting                              1         6        11        17         7            30           72
 Lead-based paint abatement                                 4        13         9         6        10            30           72
 Demolition of dilapidated single-family units              3         7         7        14        10            31           72
 More enforcement of building codes                        10         8         9         7         8            30           72
 Retrofitting of homes for senior needs                     4         9        12         8         9            30           72
 Pedestrian-friendly community design elements              7         5         7        15         7            31           72
 Other                                                      1                   1         2         7            61           72



                                                             Table C.6.9
                                      Do any of the following acts as barriers to the
                                        development or preservation of housing
                                                          South side of the City
                                               2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                                                      Number of
                                 Barrier
                                                                                      Citations
                                 Lack of qualified contractors or builders                1
                                 Lack of available land                                    6
                                 Lack of access to home loans                              9
                                 Lack of access to capital for construction               11
                                 Cost of land or lot                                       3
                                 Cost of materials                                         8
                                 Cost of labor                                             8
                                 Permitting fees                                           7
                                 Permitting process                                       14
                                 Construction fees                                         4
                                 Lot size                                                  8
                                 Density of other zoning requirements                     13
                                 Community resistance                                      9
                                 Building codes                                            7
                                 Accessible construction standards                         3
                                 Lack of housing development policies                      4
                                 Current state of the housing market                      15
                                 Lack of adequate public transportation services
                                 Lack of adequate public safety services                  2
                                 Lack of quality public schools                           4
                                 Other Barrier                                            2




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                    Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                             116                                           November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                              VI. Appendices




                                                               Table C.6.10
               Please rate how the following infrastructure components affect housing production
                                                               South side of the City
                                                    2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                 Strong     Moderate                  Moderate        Strong
                                                                                                                      Don’t
Question                                        Negative    Negative     No Affect    Positive        Positive                 Missing        Total
                                                                                                                      Know
                                                 Affect      Affect                    Affect          Affect
Water system quality                                1          1             12           7               9             7          35           72
Water system capacity                                          2             12            6             9              8          35           72
Sewer system quality                                2          1             10            7            10              7          35           72
Sewer system capacity                               2                        10            7             9              8          36           72
Storm water run-off capacity                                   4             12            5             6              9          36           72
City and county road conditions                                6              6            9            10              5          36           72
Sidewalk conditions                                            5              7            8            10              6          36           72
Pedestrian-friendly places/walkability              1          2              7            7            14              5          36           72
Bridge capacity                                                1             10           12             6              7          36           72
Public transportation quality                                  1             10           10            11              4          36           72
Public transportation capacity                                 1             12           10             9              5          35           72
Other                                                                                                                   9          63           72




                                                               Table C.6.11
                   Please rate the importance of being close proximity to the following amenities
                                                               South side of the City
                                                    2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                          Strong        Moderate                  Moderate     Strong
                                                                                                                Don’t
     Question                            Negative       Negative   No Affect      Positive     Positive                     Missing     Total
                                                                                                                Know
                                          Affect         Affect                    Affect       Affect
     Medical facilities                     5              3            13           9            7                           35         72
     Restaurants                            7              4            17            6           3                           35         72
     Public transportation                  3              4            10           14           6                           35         72
     Quality K-12 public schools            3              2             8            7          16               1           35         72
     Day care                               3              4            14            7           6               3           35         72
     Retail shopping                        5              4            16            8           3               1           35         72
     Grocery stores                         2              2            13           14           5               1           35         72
     Park and recreational
                                            3              3            14           10           7                           35         72
     facilities
     Entertainment facilities               5              7            13            7           4               1           35         72
     Highway access                         3              9            11           10           1               2           36         72
     Pharmacies                             6              7            12            8           2               1           36         72
     Other                                                                                                        6           66         72




     St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                     Draft Report for Public Review
     Community Housing Study                                           117                                              November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                         VI. Appendices




                                                               Table C.6.12
              Please rate the need for the following housing-related services in the City of St. Cloud
                                                               South side of the City
                                                    2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                                                Medium                        Don’t                   Don’t
Question                                             No Need      Low Need                    High Need                   Missing
                                                                                 Need                         know                    Know
Fair housing activities                                  6           10            12             4              5           35            72
Fair housing education                                   7            8            15             2              4           36            72
Landlord/tenant counseling                               7           10            12             5              2           36            72
First-time homebuyer education                           4           10             8            12              3           35            72
Crime awareness, prevention, and education               3            4            10            18              2           35            72
Public safety, such as police and fire protection        2            2            13            17              2           36            72
Public transportation                                    3            6            19             8              1           35            72
Other services                                                                                                   5           67            72




     Comments


                                                                Table C.7.1
                                      What “Other” type of housing are you considering?
                                                              Total St. Cloud Survey
                                                    2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                                   Comments:
       Additional detox/recovery housing
       Additional Section 8 vouchers
       affordable shared housing
       Corrections
       High end downtown urban lofts!!!!
       Housing for immigrant populations with increased family sizes.
       housing for large families 4+ bedrooms
       housing for larger families
       Housing programs for people with felonies on their criminal records that also have disabilities
       intergenerational housing units are a national trend. great for near SCSU, a living and teaching and connecting
       opportunity
       just don't know of any other, sorry
       Larger size 4+ bedroom housing (renting and owning)
       Mental Health
       mental health housing
       Not another publicly funded joke like Corborn Plaza. The people involved with that project should do jail time for
       corruption.
       Permanent Supportive Housing for low income
       Permanent Supportive Rental Housing
       sober housing
       Temp Housing for Business Professionals or long term guests for those visiting our city on an extended stay
       upper grade housing around Lake George and the River and downtown
       Youth homeless shelters or transitional housing
       Youth Shelters




     St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                 Draft Report for Public Review
     Community Housing Study                                         118                                            November 13, 2013
                                                                                                            VI. Appendices



                                                    Table C.7.2
                          What other type of senior housing are you considering?
                                                  Total St. Cloud Survey
                                        2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                       Comments:
affordable single housing
Affordable/subsidized senior housing where services can come to them No more assisted living.
Age in own home and Senior Foster Care
licensed adult foster care homes/private and corporate
low income assisted senior
low income independent or assisted living
memory care specific
Rehab housing for those whom have had issues that will heal in time - can be for all ages and not just seniors, but
seniors would be most of what is needed - thus avoiding the nursing homes, as it is not the same fit.



                                                    Table C.7.3
                  What other types of owner-occupied financing are you considering?
                                                  Total St. Cloud Survey
                                        2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                       Comments:
Education on working with other agencies to obtain funding to rehab homes with little to no cost to the low income
home owner. They don't know where or how to start and PSA's or something to get them to the right sources,
whether it is for a roof, paint, mechincals, etc. It would be the help they need to stay in there home and not walk
away from it or neglect it and then the property values go down.
Explanation: several of these areas, while high need, already exist.
Housing rehabilitation assistance for non-owner occupied
Islamic approved mortgage products
Tax credits or deferments for rehabilitating historic homes



                                                    Table C.7.4
                          What other types of rental financing are you considering?
                                                  Total St. Cloud Survey
                                        2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                       Comments:
First of all, I am low-income and a landlord. Rental housing is a business for the purpose of making $. It is a choice.
Personally, I would really benefit from these programs as I was not low-income when I started this business. But, I
believe it is wrong to subsidize investors, when housing $, imo should go to consumers.
Less need in this catagory and more for owner occuppied homes.
Tax Increment Financing - Bonds - Low cost land
waiving of fees only for mixed income or low income developments




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                         Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                   119                                          November 13, 2013
                                                                                                          VI. Appendices



                                                   Table C.7.5
     What other types of services that might better promote owner-occupied housing are you
                                          considering?
                                                 Total St. Cloud Survey
                                       2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                      Comments:
Blending of commercial into neighborhoods - transportation
core neighborhood perception in real estate community needs to be improved - marketing problem!
I believe the demo of rundown housing is very important.
loans for rehabilitation of existing homes
Low interest loans for updating homes for current homeowners or to bring rental homes to ownership
Programs, agencies, volunteers to help home owners with repairs/maintenance. You have elderly women who out
live men and they need help. You also have home owners who are on assistance for whatever reason and they
need assistance too.
Retrofitting of dilapidated homes for families
We need to enforce a safe building code without making it so expensive to build that it puts the goal of home
ownership out of reach



                                                   Table C.7.6
   What other types of services that might better promote rental housing are you considering?
                                                 Total St. Cloud Survey
                                       2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                      Comments:
Better supervision of persons receiving rental assistance by the agency providing it - at times they create problems
in neighborhoods due to not understanding how to function in a community setting (noise, objectionable behavior,
etc.)
low interest loans to bring current rental units up to date
not as many obsticles for renters!!!
Programs, agencies, volunteers to help owners with repairs/maintenance. You have elderly women who out live
men and they need help. You also have owners who are on assistance for whatever reason and they need
assistance too.
rehabbing units to create space for larger families
Retrofitting of dilapidated rental units for everyone to rent




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                       Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                  120                                         November 13, 2013
                                                                                                          VI. Appendices



                                                    Table C.7.7
         What other types of barriers exist to the development or preservation of housing?
                                                  Total St. Cloud Survey
                                        2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                       Comments:
Assistance to first-time homeowners in learning how to maintain their home - basic preventive maintenance, minor
repairs, appliance life-span, savings for eventual replacement costs, ect. One possible option would be ongoing
sessions as a part of city involvement/investment.
City Council attitudes that St. Cloud has enough housing
Community attitude toward those less fortunate
continuing moratorium on corporate adult foster care homes
Design standards
high vacancy rates in rental housing
Lack of non-construction based jobs that are median income
lack of vision to rehab older homes, ignorance of how to do it appropriately, fear of high costs
Limited funding for projects from Minnesota Housing and other housing funding/financing agencies.
low local wages
Low-income assistance driving values down
No barriers-simply life choices
none
Poor economic conditions in general. High unemployment.
Presence of existing homes in poor condition discourages new construction nearby.
reconition of local contribution to fill the gaps in financing
Rental owners find they do some work and then the city has them now upgrade plumbing, etc. to meet code, where if
they just made the repair they are O.K. with it, but then spending several hundred dollars later to meet todays codes,
it causes them to not make repairs because of the codes of the city makes them upgrade beyond the repair itself.
The presence of quality public schools!! We have 'em!



                                                    Table C.7.8
                   What other infrastructure components affect housing production?
                                                  Total St. Cloud Survey
                                        2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                       Comments:
all of these impact housing, most of these are good in St. Cloud. St. Cloud needs more bike trails and more hours of
public transportation
Many citizens complaining about the streets (potholes)
Median income jobs - We wouldn't this mess if there were decent jobs available in the local market
Northstar
Not enough police officers to keep areas safe.
public transportation availability and cost!!!
We need to become a ped and bike friendly city! Better transportation system that works for split shifs, night shifts



                                                    Table C.7.9
                            What other amenities need to be in close proximity?
                                                  Total St. Cloud Survey
                                        2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                       Comments:
College Campus
County service buildings
Grocery Delivery
Location of governmental offices and the ability to find them.
Median Income Jobs
Place of employment




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                       Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                   121                                        November 13, 2013
                                                                                                              VI. Appendices



                                                     Table C.7.10
                      What other housing related service needs are you considering?
                                                   Total St. Cloud Survey
                                         2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                        Comments:
More PSA's to educate the public on different programs available to the public. Even the city pound people do not
know where it is, let alone city hall or county offices.




                                                     Table C.7.11
    Please share any comments you have about housing needs or barriers to the development of
                                    housing in St. Cloud?
                                                   Total St. Cloud Survey
                                         2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                        Comments:
 - School District: I believe I heard Bruce Watkins just this morning say there is now over 50% low income, vs 25% 10
 years ago. Big issue for families choosing where to send their children to school and deciding where to live. - St.
 Cloud has a lot of older neighborhoods vs surrounding communities. Many homes need major repair and it is getting
 worse. People do not want to invest in their property knowing they will not see a return due to the degrading
 neighborhood. - My Realtor friend says that homes in Sauk Rapids and Sartell are starting to sell while St. Cloud
 remains slow. As higher income people move to those communities the above issues become worse.
 --
 a large amount of my parents cannot afford the bus or public transportation is not in their area. This is a huge
 obsticle to getting to work and daycare.
 As a Broker & Investor, the most common hurdles I'm overcoming is the lack of financing options for Buyer's.
 Increased distressed properties are driving the values down creating a strong market for investors to purchase and
 rehabilitate properties for resale to 1st Time Homebuyers. Often times homes that are renovated for resale are
 available to own for the same or less than it would cost to rent, but the pool of "qualified" Buyers is so small that
 investors have to sell the homes cheaply, which creates tougher competition for current homeowners to sell and
 move up. The entire pyramid of the real estate market is built on the foundation of renters becoming first time
 homebuyers. This enables traditional sellers to sell their homes quicker, and at market value, causing them to build
 a new home or buy a nicer existing one.
 As legislation moves to begin to transition nursing home residents back to the community starting in 2014 there is
 going to be a great need for low income/subsidized housing (mostly Senior rentals). There is also going to be an
 increased need for adult foster care housing for the geriatric consumer and with the moratorium on corporate adult
 foster care this need is impossible to meet. There are many in the community who would like to meet this need by
 purchasing homes and remodeling and licensing for adult foster care but the moratorium continues to prevent them
 from doing this. Someone needs to speak to lawmakers to lift this moratorium.
 Barrier- The Saint Cloud City Building and Inspections Dept would be better served being a more helpful location to
 visit rather than the place where you only get told no and your wrong and you cant do that. I have seen more people
 sit at the window and be told no or that drawing is not good enough many many times- I'm a contractor and a
 student rental property owner and its truthfully the last building in town I look forward to going to for anything. Debbie
 does a great job with rental inspections, but other than that its not a place many look forward to visiting and I think it
 really affects the decisions of builders when looking for a location for their next project.
 Better enforcement of building, healthy and safety codes with existing properties in the South Side would encourage
 more landlords to keep up properties.
 building permits take too long to process
 City and the regulators are harsh as far as landlord licensing and registrations
 Clean up all the sloppy, run down homes and rental units. Charge less for rent and refund renters deposit, most of
 the time, the apartments are in worst shape when a person moves in and much cleaner when they leave, yet refunds
 are a thing of the past.
 Commercial lending is still tight. We need the banks to get back into lending for new businesses. Economic growth!
 consideration for large families of such as 7-10 people in the samr household
 Core neighborhood perception and perception of older housing stock needs improvement. Rehabbing an older
 home is not necessarily more costly than adding many features such as landscaping, finishing a basement, adding a
 deck and etc. for a new house but perception daunts people. Need much less rental use of houses and more
 families that homestead in order to improve neighborhoods.
 Currently I see a need for larger housing (more bedrooms) for our Somali families. I also see a need for more
 subsidized rents or more vouchers. More shelter space, transitional housing and housing for hard to serve clients ie


 St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                          Draft Report for Public Review
 Community Housing Study                                    122                                          November 13, 2013
                                                                                                             VI. Appendices



people dealing with drug/alchohol addiction or mental health issues.
Currently we have 4 family rooms at the Salvation Army. They are all full with a waiting list of 18 families. This is our
only emergency shelter. The St Cloud School District has identified 35 unaccompanied youth throughout this school
year but we have no youth shelters. These students are sleeping at Lake George, couch surfing and/or putting
themselves at risk for the sake of a warm bed.
Don't create policies that create barriers to housing. Work with District 742.
Don't make it all about new construction and also take care in retorfitting/remodeling for quality and character
retention in our neighborhoods. Also, don't try to make anything wanted to be torn down suddenly be called
dilapidated. This was a huge disaster in the 1970-80's with demolition credits, and it is a disater not yet forgotten.
Existing homes in an extended state of disrepair are a major barrier to renovation and new construction.
Funds are needed to help low income renters when they fall behind in rent and are facing eviction. If there are funds
the become available they are used up so quickly they only help for a short time and then the money is gone for
months.
How about business growth which provides median income jobs. When people feel confident about their jobs and
the stability of the Federal and local governments with both following fiscal responsbility. Not using the US tax payer
as an ATM machine for growing government to resemble European socialism which has recently proven itself to be
impossible to support.
I am a homeowner under water. I love to sell this house because I married and live elsewhere but I can't afford to.
I am disabled and find it very difficult to find quality rental units, and because I am disabled that also means that I am
low-income...and there are very few low-income housing units available in areas where there access to grocery
shopping areas. if you are disabled you need to have access to shopping areas within walking distance because
most of us don't drive, and don't or can't use public transportation. I signed up for HRA/Section 8 housing over 3 yrs.
ago...and I haven't heard anything back from them...that's sad. There really needs to be something done about this.
I own a 30 unit apt. bldg. that has been completely rehab. with new carpet, all repairs made, many new appliances,
low rents. On 2 bus lines. I have empty apts. Where are the renters? 1br $550, 2 br $625, 3br $725.
If the city wants to retain or attract younger, first-time home buyers (i.e. recent college graduates) it should consider
how this demographics' attitude towards home ownership is different than older generations. For example,
ownership of personal vehicles among this generation--the "Millennials"--is at an all-time low. Not because they can't
afford to buy a vehicle, but because the idea is becoming less and less attractive. The reason being that young
adults value living in close proximity to arts and cultural venues, restaurants, and places of employment. Knowing
this, it is not surprising that we are seeing a swell in the number of Mellennials moving to metropolitan areas with
vibrant pedestrian-friendly downtowns and mixed-use housing options. The appeal of cookie-cutter, suburban
neighborhoods is a relic of the 1950s.
In the Southside Historic Neighborhood we are hampered by zoning restrictions. while we try to clean up properties,
we are hampered by not being able update our single car garages and make them double or knock down and rebuild
will only enhance the property value.
Increased diversity and quality of low income rental units and homes.
It's a big job to determine how to solve the housing problems. Because I work with those who are at about 50 % of
the area median income and below, I see barriers like undiagnosed or untreated mental health issues, income/job
issues (obtaining).
Keep Govt involvement to a minimum
Lack of all low income housing opportunities from shelter to transitional, to supportive to public housing/section 8.
We are seriously lacking these resources and lacking financial assistance for families facing eviction, foreclosure
and homelessness.
lack of housing assistance for low income persons, especially seniors on a limited income.
Lack of section 8 vouchers for disabled and seniors (list has been closed for too long). Disabled and senior citizens
should be given section 8 housing priority over non citizens with green cards. (I have verified the facts with ARC Mn
and HRA, that immigrants have equal access to housing assistance as citizens.) Due to our high immigrant
population in St. Cloud, seniors and disabled are often not able to afford apartments due to lack of availability of
section 8 housing assistance. We have seen this first hand with our disabled adult son who has been trying for years
to get a section 8 housing voucher through HRA.
Large immigrant families have a hard time finding apartment complexes with 3 and 4 bedrooms
Low/ no Income barriers, criminal past barriers, Evicition on record
Many slum lords around the SCSU campus. Zoning laws and inspection rules should be strengthened. It looks like
an under developed country -- horrible appearance to many rentals throughout the city.
Many times I selected extremely or high needs choices. However, many of these programs already exist and work
really well.
Market rate multifamily housing (mixed use and otherwise) in the downtown area would do wonders for the livability
of our community and vibrancy of the downtown area.
Much of this depends on what part of the city of St. Cloud you would be developing a project in. If land is only


St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                          Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                    123                                          November 13, 2013
                                                                                                         VI. Appendices



available on the outer limits of St. Cloud, transporation and access to amenities because a larger issue.
need more sidewalks and bike facilities. Increase densities to better support existing bus service (infill development
downtown and southside)
Not sure
People's attitudes toward new immigrants remain to be a barrier for access to housing. Some City Council
members make up information about housing needs and express the attitudes that St. Cloud has done "enough"
regarding affordable housing and other communities should do more. These attitudes are not helpful. This housing
study is long overdue to address the issues faced by people living and working in this area.
Perception of a weak school district, land use policies
Rates are low, significant amounts of money are available for projects. The perception of school district 742 will
contribute to the further lack of homeownership (currently at 53 %) in Saint Cloud. Also the futher enhancements
made by surrounding cities (Sartell, Sauk Rapids, St. Joseph) will continue the outmigration that is occuring.
Rental unit inspectors do not apply standards equally to all owners
Residents need to save money for down payment. Do not buy a house unless you can afford to maintain it to city
ordinances.
She school district greatly impacts the growth for the city of St. Cloud - the solution does not appear to be a simple
solution
So much is based on the economic conditions that did not allow the development of these residential communities
as they were designed and approved. Currently our residential developments are in a state of flux as the landowners
are not building due to lack of demand and financing for speculative homes and the inventory of homes is still high.
Foreclosures has taken the market as homeowners are looking to purchase at discounted values homes rather than
build new.
St. Cloud is growing too fast of the housing industry to keep up. We have many homes that are available for families
to occupy,however these homes need in some cases extensive work to reach a standard for living within the home.
Instead of having these homes sit empty and without up keep, we need to establish a system that would allow for
families to purchase the homes and apply for or receive a considerable discount on the home if the repairs are made
to bring the home up to standards. We also need housing for felons.These are people that have served their time
and are trying to get back into society and need a place to live that allows them to stay within the community. The
State of MN has stated that they will be reducing the number of beds in foster and group homes over the next few
years. Where will these people go? something that St. Cloud needs to be ready to handle is accessible independent
living, or assisted living sites to accommodate these individuals or we will lose them as members of our community.
The is a need for housing for large families and for unaccompanied youth. Neither of these issues were addressed
in this survey.
The main barrier I observe is the funding.
The question were very good and it was interest that you ask us those question
There is a great need for low-income, larger size units with our changing populater
There is a need for low income assisted (subsidized) senior housing. We want to see rehabilitation of center city
housing for low-med. income. We have made strides in homeless housing but it is not adequate. Church of the
week was meant to be a transition and it is still needed...so I think we need drop in over-nite for homeless or
transients passing thru.
There is always going to be a need for housing in our area. We do need to be careful with the types of housing we
are putting in the area.
This is a first in that the Housing Inspectors in the City of St. Cloud are being asked questions about housing in our
community. This is great!! We know first hand what is going on in our areas of town. There should be more of this,
as we are the only ones who know first hand the needs and concerns when it comes to housing in St. Cloud.
Thanks for the opportunity to address a fractioin of our housing needs in this city.
This survey leaned heavily on housing programs and incentives that would need to be staffed at great cost to our
city. I would like to have seen more emphasis on addressing specific Senior housing needs especially relating to low
and very low income Seniors and their ability to find satisfactory housing without having to wait 4 years or more on
waiting lists that include people that in many cases have other options. Our seniors especially low and very low
income have no options available to them other than the generosity of our community that in many cases they
helped build and support. I would like to see an emphasis on studying the past directives of previous boards and
community members that addressed the needs of our needy Seniors and respond to current needs by adapting
some of our buildings to return to their previous classifications as Senior only buildings (202 Government program)
as other communities have done successfully. To paint housing needs with such a wide brush may prevent us from
addressing the specific needs of our Seniors.
to many rental units and too few qualified renters
Too many codes and ordinaces to follow. The city has made it extremely difficult to rent, build or develop land in the
city. There are may developers that shy away from St.Cloud because of this. The school district is also rapidly
driving people out of st.cloud due to the poorly perceived quality of it.



St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                      Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                  124                                        November 13, 2013
                                                                                                            VI. Appendices



Too many collage area vacancies.
Too many trafic lights. Not enough right turn lanes that you can take a right on red! Need to add flashing yellow left
turn arrows to EVERY intersection.
We have a number of examples of successful, well managed supportive and affordable housing in the St Cloud
area....Just not enough of it.
We have too many rentals with-in certain areas (Blocks) in the city. The south side around and off of Washington
Memorial Drive for example is saturated with rental property.
we need a youth shelter and a place for the chronic homeless with mental health issues to live and receive the help
that they need
WE need more housing for families with multiple children.
We need to do everything possible to maintain, preserve, and restore existing housing stock in St. Cloud. This is
affordable housing.
When economic conditions improve there are ample buldng lots and builders in the area that are available to build
new houses and/or remodel existing homes. Attracting and retaining businesses/employers is very important to local
housing issues.
With the current low mortgage interest rates I don't know how much farther you could go down to get lower income
people into homes as owners. Assistance with down payments or HAF would be a good point.



                                                    Table C.7.12
                            What other amenities need to be in close proximity?
                                                  Total St. Cloud Survey
                                        2013 St. Cloud Community Housing Survey
                                                       Comments:
- We need to address the declining quality of the neighborhoods. This has been a big push over the last several
years, but it is really only getting worse. The problem is just too big to deal with and not due to lack of awareness, or
concern of the City and concerned residents. - Retain and grow higher income properties. The traditional focus on
providing lower income housing is noble, but you can't finance that without the higher incomes. For example, we
need more inspections and enforcement of property issues. The current budget does not allow for current needs
much less expanding them. You can't tax more to cover, you need economic growth. Frankly good paying jobs and
keeping those people in St. Cloud homes is the answer, easier said than done I understand. - Focus on employers
like CentraCare that provide a lot of good paying stable jobs. Find out what those employees are looking for and
make St. Cloud to place to live. - Again, the emergency, transitional, supportive, affordable..... housing is noble and
necessary, but you can't have a community where those with good paying jobs move to Sauk Rapids and Sartell and
those that need assistance live in St. Cloud. Sorry if that was harsh, but it really appears to me that it is becoming
the reality. - The above housing needs should be met by rehabilitating the dilapidated housing stock that we already
have. I would not encourage new development to address these needs. We need low income housing and we
already have an abundance of low cost houses. What is needed is to get them repaired and the neighborhoods
safe to raise a family.
--
Affordable and supportive housing can better stabilize a community and its resources.
Affordable housing would not be such a huge problem is wages in the area were higher.
Area officials need to understand that St. Cloud can no longer be considered a small community. It is a metro area.
Issues like poverty, homelessness, domestic violence, etc. need to be addressed in a proactive way. Officials
should not say St. Cloud is "at capacity" and people with barriers need to go somewhere else.
Be educated and address the challenges.
be more informed on the high numbers of homeless in our community
Build for our community members' needs.
Center city safe senior housing options
Change priority of section 8 housing vouchers for seniors and disabled citizens (first) followed by non citizens.
Continue to look at businesses that provide livable wages and offer incentives to locate in the greate St Cloud area.
Create more jobs, so that HRA recepients can pay the remainder of their rent beyond HRA subsidy.
Develop a plan of what the city wants for housing and develop policies to promote that plan.
Develop some education and awareness infrastructure that will help people see the connection between affordable
housing and economic development and public safety and that it is everyone's best interest to increase the
availability of well managed affordable housing. Hoped for partners range from Health care industry, educational
institutions, Chamber of Commerce, Economic Development groups , Local human service providers, business
owners and voters. Community focus has much room for improvement
education


St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                         Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                   125                                          November 13, 2013
                                                                                                            VI. Appendices



education about the different housing opportunities in the city
Education, connecting potential buyers with neighborhood groups, help for how to renovate, encourage renovation
and rental to single family conversion, address perception problems with older neighborhoods in minds of public and
especially realty community. Have heard from many families that they wanted to investigate older housing but were
not encouraged to do so or could not easily find an older house to purchase so ended up in newer subdivision. Also
have heard from many that they do not have time or inclination to renovate. Perhaps if much was already done,
older housing stock could be competitive.
encourage private sector development to address any needs
Encourage rehabilitation instead of new construction
Enforce the existing codes for compliance, debris accumulation, and safety.
Focus on the relationship between affordable (and attractive) housing and urban planning more generally.
Good Leadership
Have more mixed income housing downtown for elderly and 20-30 somethings. Rehab and infill aging housing in
core neighborhoods
Help for senior citizens to remain in their homes if they so choose. This could include energy efficiency, addition of
shower/bath safety bars, and general home/yard maintenance.
Help small owner/landlords rehab buildings through low interest capital loans to help maintain quality options
throughout city for affordable housing
I advise trying to work with a or several banks and try to come up with low interest loan program, so people can
afford to upgrade, improve, renovate for efficiency etc... older homes in the area which would then help, so we don't
end up with "Run Down/Bad Areas" around the city.
I don't believe that it is possible for the community to do anything ethical in this regard. It only takes a small number
of poorly managed properties to ruin a neighborhood, and the City does not have the will nor resources to
permanently eliminate recurring trouble spots.
I feel that Education is the most important factor for any challenge we face. We need to be aware of the problems
that we face and Educate ourselves and others on how we can make them better.
I think as a community we need to expect people, mostly landlords from both local companies and out of town to
take better care of their properties and be more evolved with their renters. I also think that many of the very strict
rules about what is and is not allowed on a persons private property keep people from wanting to be in Saint Cloud
which is only going to open the area up for more and more rental properties and less home ownership. Side note,
the historic district around the University needs to go, there are many historic homes I agree, that being said, many
structures are hot historic other than that they are old. The houses have mostly been remodeled inside and the
historic character is no longer there. It is a college housing area that was there many many years before it was
considered historic and the rules in the area are not promoting any growth in the area.
I think the steps of coming together and discussing solutions is the best way. I would love to see people just plain not
be so mean to those who are not able to "rise" to the socio-economic level of others. I think we can accomplish this
by educating as many people as possible about solutions and not continually talking about problems. I think the
United Way is doing a great job within the community on educating and helping different groups know more about
needs in our community, with housing and basic needs especially.
I would like to see improved public transportation and ability to access retail on a bicycle.
Improve the quality of the schools, loosen development restrictions and/or rules.
Incentives to purchase existing homes and update current homes with possible low interest loans as a bridge loan or
to help update a home that may have previously not been maintained due to financial difficulties or to bring a rental
home in a single family development back to an homeowner status.
It may present a different perspective, if the tenants were to be surveyed.
Keep government small and less restrictions on the licensing of single family homes in the city. BRING IN MEDIAN
INCOME JOBS. IT WOULD SOLVE A MAJORITY OF THE PROBLEMS.
Large family does not have a big house because the humility and the weather. No a lot of apartment in the city and
a large family need home such as four bathroom. so people can't buy a house such as getting help in the bank or
help with finance problems. Thank You
Listening to our residents and their comments about the need for Senior only housing in our community. A survey of
this magnitude asking multiple opinions on public policy regarding programs and who needs them may not be
understood by most people but a specific question that they can answer to identify needs of actual friends , family
and neighbors would be more useful.
Low income people need greater rent subsidies. They can't come up with the remaining 70% of the rent needed! I
don't want to evict non payers, but after 3 months of no rent payment, they have to go!
Make commuting in and out of st.cloud easier. The south side used to be a safe fun area for students to live in. It is
now over run with crime and individuals who take advantage of the low cost of living but have nothing to contribute to
the community.
Make people aware of the issues people are facing.


St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                         Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                   126                                          November 13, 2013
                                                                                                            VI. Appendices



Many working families are not locating in St. Cloud due to the perception that St. Cloud schools are inferior to Sartell,
Sauk Rapids, Cold Spring and Becker. I know of 3 small to medium size businesses with St. Cloud roots move. I
asked all 3 owners why they relocated. All 3 mentioned they did not want their kids in the St. Cloud school district
as one of the reasons for their relocation.
More affordable housing for new immigrants and refugees and for transitional housing needs
More community based housing for the low income single population
More low income housing. More emergency shelter rooms. Youth shelter.
More low-income housing options. Waiting lists are very long right now.
need more affordable housing units
Need to listen to the people that are homeless, visit local shelters. The words from the people who suffer from lack
of housing/homelessness are priceless in helping our community sucseed!! If you need a leadership team to
address these challenges I would be happy to assist. Contact information below. :-)
not sure
proactive, council more educated and approachable, best interest of the whole instead of some
Provide incentives for maintaining/rehabilitating homes in our core neighborhoods. Strive to increase the diversity
and quality of low income housing. Maintaining a healthy balance of rental and owner occupied single family homes.
Reduce the cost of fee from the city to make housing more affordble
Some very low income seniors/handicapped need assistance to re-roof or paint in order to stay in their home. Labor
is too high for their budgets. Thus we have blighted homes...because their income will not stretch for the unexpected
repair (plumbing etc.). Nursing homes are much more costly than assisted or assistance.
Somehow creating financing incentives or grants to allow renters purchase homes easier.
Start looking at upper level housing areas instead of devoting all efforts to low income.The words development and
redevelopment have traditionally have meant affordable or low ioncome.If a Senior today wants to sell a paid for nice
home and move into a very nice upper level type unit(gated or equivalent) and have a dog,nothing exists.
Stop spending money on regressive tax paid projects, a real barrier to high end housing. Slow growth of government
services-it is turning St. Cloud into an urban mess. Stop retro fitting neighborhoods with current design elements that
do not fit the space and need has not been proven (roundabouts, bike trails, etc. ) Develop planning for the over
abundance of park space that is not being maintained.
Support necessary capital bond referendums for construction and maintenence of public schools. Tech Senior
High School, a new middle school and Clearview K-8 Community School.
Talk to Wedum Foundation about intergenerational housing near SCSU, in remodeld houses or apartments/or new
in the redevelope zones of the master plan. Two of their top goals are student and senior housing. This could be a
great way to stabilize the area, connect generations, and connect SCSU students with a great learning opportunity!
The loss of transfer of knowledge between generations is detrinmental to all of us. Also, in the South Side we need
to REMEMBER THE MASTER PLAN.
Talk with the contractors and builders in the area and get them on board to assist in upgrading homes that could be
liveable. Work with families to assist them in maintaining their current homes so that we don't have people without
housing and leaving the community.
There should be more opportunities to spear head volunteers to help with housing needs for those who are
underprivilieged and need a paint job, a step repaired, or new windows, etc. and don't have the means to get it
repaired/replaced. Employers could be offered incentives to have a volunteer day for a homeowner to get things
done, because they other wise could not afford it. Things like that are lacking in our community. Programs like this
have been cut due to budgets, etc. and we truely need them now more than ever. TriCap no longer does as much
as they use too and we need more programs like they provided in the past. Now we just get more run down
properties with no repairs being made. Money is even tighter for those trying to hang onto their homes, let alone put
money into the house or property.
We need to build a pedestrian and bike friendly city. More greenspace to offset the retail. More family friendly
opportunities and more access to affordable housing. This is the greatest need I see working with families struggling
in poverty. Having housing that they can afford would make an enormous difference for our communities and the
paybacks would be tremendous.
We really need more assistance with the Elderly and Disabled. Having people come in to hold classes for the Elderly
and Disabled addressing many issues. Also need more services where Groceries are delivered at a reasonable
price for them.
We really need to demolish the rundown properties because they are bringing down the rest of the neighborhood
with it. Also rundown properties attract bad tenants and bad homeowners.
Work in partnership with people who need the housing; ask them what they need rather than ignoring them. This is
especially true for the large families living here. I prefer not to share my name. Thank you for asking me to
participate in the survey.
Zoning laws on unlicensed vehicles needs strengthening. Unlicensed vehicles should not be allowed to remain on a
property just because they are under a tarp! This is insane!!!!



St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                         Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                   127                                          November 13, 2013
D. ADDITIONAL 2013 ST. CLOUD RENTAL SURVEY DATA
This appendix presents a complete tabulation of the Rental Vacancy Survey, with
additional details and tables about the outcome of the telephone survey.

                                                             Table D.1
                                                     Rental Vacancy Survey
                                                           City of St. Cloud
                                                     2013 St. Cloud Rental Survey
                                                                                                           Vacancy
                 Place                    Observations             Total Units         Vacant Units
                                                                                                            Rate

                 City of St. Cloud                371                 9,079                  348            3.8%


                                                             Table D.2
                                                Are your units designed for a
                                                      particular group?
                                                           City of St. Cloud
                                                     2013 St. Cloud Rental Survey
                                          Period                              Respondent
                                          Yes                                          66
                                          No                                           289


                                                             Table D.3
                                                Which groups are your rental
                                                 properties designed for?
                                                           City of St. Cloud
                                                     2013 St. Cloud Rental Survey
                                          Type of Utility Provided            Respondent
                                          Elderly/senior                                6
                                          Disabled                                      6
                                          Families                                     12
                                          Students                                     45
                                          Anyone/everyone                              24
                                          Other                                        14
                                          Don’t Know                                    1


                                                             Table D.4
                                            Rental Vacancy Survey by Type
                                                           City of St. Cloud
                                                     2013 St. Cloud Rental Survey

                          Place                         Total Units       Vacant Units         Vacancy Rate

                          Single Family                    622                   74                11.9%
                          Apartments                       7,858                 250               3.2%
                          Mobile Homes                      8                     0                .0%
                          “Other” Units                    591                   24                4.1%
                          Total                            9,079                 348               3.8%




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                        Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                             128                                               November 13, 2013
                                                                                                            VI. Appendices



                                                      Table D.5
                                       Single Family Units by Bedroom Size
                                                    City of St. Cloud
                                              2013 St. Cloud Rental Survey
                          Number of
                                              Units       Available Units    Vacancy Rates
                          Bedrooms
                          Efficiency            2                0               0.0%
                          One                  17                2              11.8%
                          Two                  72               14              19.4%
                          Three                188              25              13.3%
                          Four                 256              22               8.6%
                          Don’t know           87               10              11.5%
                          Total                622              74              11.9%




                                                      Table D.6
                                        Apartment Units by Bedroom Size
                                                    City of St. Cloud
                                              2013 St. Cloud Rental Survey
                          Number of
                                              Units       Available Units    Vacancy Rates
                          Bedrooms
                          Efficiency           185               3               1.6%
                          One                 1,724             17               1.0%
                          Two                 1,615             56               3.5%
                          Three                586              18               3.1%
                          Four                 116              23              19.8%
                          Don’t know          3,632             133              3.7%
                          Total               7,858             250              3.2%




                                                      Table D.7
                                         “Other” Units by Bedroom Size
                                                    City of St. Cloud
                                              2013 St. Cloud Rental Survey
                          Number of
                                              Units       Available Units    Vacancy Rates
                          Bedrooms
                          Efficiency            2                0                0%
                          One                  46                0                0%
                          Two                  181              11               6.1%
                          Three                200               4               2.0%
                          Four                 137               6               4.4%
                          Don’t know           25                3              12.0%
                          Total                591              24               4.1%




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                         Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                   129                                          November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                 VI. Appendices



                                                       Table D.8
                                 How long will it be before your vacant units
                                                become filled?
                                                      City of St. Cloud
                                                2013 St. Cloud Rental Survey
                                                            Market Rate
                            Period                                               Assisted Units
                                                                Units
                            Less than 1 week                       6                    .
                            1 week to 1 month                     49                   3
                            1 to 2 month                          31                    .
                            2 to 3 months                         15                    .
                            More than 3 months                     5                    .



                                                       Table D.9
                              How long will it be before your filled units become
                                                    vacant?
                                                      City of St. Cloud
                                                2013 St. Cloud Rental Survey
                                                            Market Rate
                            Period                                               Assisted Units
                                                                Units
                            Less than 1 week                       2                    .
                            1 week to 1 month                      7                   0
                            1 to 2 month                          17                    .
                            2 to 3 months                         11                    .
                            More than 3 months                    206                  10




                                                      Table D.10
                                       Do any of your rental units receive
                                         rental subsidy or assistance?
                                                      City of St. Cloud
                                                2013 St. Cloud Rental Survey
                                      Period                            Respondent
                                      Yes                                   58
                                      No                                   294
                                      % Offering Assistance               16.5%



                                                      Table D.11
                          How many of your units have some sort of rental subsidy
                                             or assistance?
                                                      City of St. Cloud
                                                2013 St. Cloud Rental Survey
                                                                                 Percentage of Units
                      Place                        Total Assisted Units
                                                                                  with Assistance
                      Single Family                         66                         10.6%
                      Apartments                            964                        12.3%
                      Mobile Homes                           0                          0.0%
                      “Other” Units                         207                        35.0%
                      Total                                1,237                       13.6%



St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                              Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                     130                                             November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                    VI. Appendices




                                                            Table D.12
                                           Average Rental Rate by Unit Type
                                                        City of St. Cloud
                                                  2013 St. Cloud Rental Survey
                                                            Market Rate
                                     Place                                  Assisted Rents
                                                              Rents
                                     Single Family            $998.0             $511.8
                                     Apartments               $638.6             $337.7
                                     Mobile Homes             $566.7              $0.0
                                     “Other” Units            $792.5             $503.0
                                     Total                    $850.7             $486.6




                                                            Table D.13
                             Single Family Market Rate Rents by Vacancy Status
                                                         City of St. Cloud
                                                   2013 St. Cloud Rental Survey
                                                                         Available
                                                  Single Family
                          Average Rents                                Single Family      Vacancy Rate
                                                      Units
                                                                           Units
                          Less Than $500                7                   3                42.9%
                          $500 to $1,000               168                 20                11.9%
                          $1,000 to $1,500             226                 14                6.2%
                          Above $1,500                 23                   5                21.7%
                          Missing                      198                 32                16.2%
                          Total                        622                 74                11.9%




                                                            Table D.14
                                  Apartment Market Rate Rents by Vacancy Status
                                                        City of St. Cloud
                                                  2013 St. Cloud Rental Survey
                                                                        Available
                                                  Apartment
                          Average Rents                                Apartment          Vacancy Rate
                                                     Units
                                                                          Units
                          Less Than $500               316                 12                3.8%
                          $500 to $1,000              5,730               171                3.0%
                          $1,000 to $1,500             130                 19                14.6%
                          Above $1,500                  .                   .                  .
                          Missing                     1,682                48                2.9%
                          Total                       7,858               250                3.2%




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                 Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                         131                                            November 13, 2013
                                                                                                    VI. Appendices



                                                 Table D.15
                                       Average Market Rental Rates
                                                 City of St. Cloud
                                           2013 St. Cloud Rental Survey
                Number of
                             Single Family       Apartment        Mobile Homes     “Other”
                Bedrooms
                Efficiency       $400.0             $460.5                 .          .
                One              $517.3             $514.6                 .       $438.8
                Two              $729.7             $643.1            $550.0       $640.3
                Three            $974.6             $830.7                 .       $875.3
                Four            $1,210.1            $994.2                 .       $1,153.9
                Total            $998.0             $638.6            $566.7       $792.5



                                                 Table D.16
                                       Average Assisted Rental Rates
                                                 City of St. Cloud
                                           2013 St. Cloud Rental Survey
               Number of
                             Single Family       Apartment         Mobile Homes     “Other”
               Bedrooms
               Efficiency          .                  .                        .          .
               One                 .                $230.5                     .     $240.0
               Two              $188.0              $398.3                     .     $469.0
               Three            $420.3              $173.0                     .     $705.4
               Four             $859.2               $.0                       .     $447.0
               Total            $511.8              $337.7                     .     $503.0




                                                 Table D.17
                                  Are there any utilities included with
                                               the rent?
                                                 City of St. Cloud
                                           2013 St. Cloud Rental Survey
                                 Period                          Respondent
                                 Yes                                 228
                                 No                                  119
                                 % Offering Assistance              65.7%




                                                 Table D.18
                                  Are there any utilities included with
                                               the rent?
                                                 City of St. Cloud
                                           2013 St. Cloud Rental Survey
                                 Type of Utility Provided        Respondent
                                 Electricity                          57
                                 Natural Gas                         114
                                 Water/Sewer                         218
                                 Trash Collection                    196




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                 Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                132                                     November 13, 2013
                                                                                                              VI. Appendices




                                                       Table D.19
                                             Do you keep a waiting list?
                                                       City of St. Cloud
                                                 2013 St. Cloud Rental Survey

                                      Period                             Respondent
                                      Yes                                    36
                                      No                                    301
                                      Waitlist Size                        2,191




                                                       Table D.20
               How would you rate the need for renovation of existing units in the City?
                                                       City of St. Cloud
                                                 2013 St. Cloud Rental Survey
                    Need             Single Family        Apartments        Mobile Homes       Other Units
                  No Need                   14                15                    11              8
                  Low Need                  23                15                    2               4
               Moderate Need                50                45                    10             18
                 High Need                  33                22                    5               7
                Extreme Need                29                 9                    2               8
                 Don’t Know                 84                68                    57             72




                                                       Table D.21
                How would you rate the need for construction of new units in the City?
                                                       City of St. Cloud
                                                 2013 St. Cloud Rental Survey

                    Need             Single Family        Apartments         Mobile Homes      Other Units
                   No Need                  75                 85                   23             31
                  Low Need                  45                 29                    6             12
                Moderate Need               20                 16                    7              8
                  High Need                  7                  4                                   2
                Extreme Need                 3                  3                    0
                  Don’t Know                81                 49                   52             64




                                                       Table D.22
                                   If new units were to be constructed, what
                                  percentage should offer rental assistance?
                                                       City of St. Cloud
                                                 2013 St. Cloud Rental Survey

                               Rental Assistance                                  Percentage
                               Percentage of new units with assistance              21.4%




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                           Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                      133                                         November 13, 2013
                                                                                                          VI. Appendices




E. ADDITIONAL FORECAST DATA
This appendix presents annual prediction details and breakdowns between the renter and
homeowner households as well as the income groupings addressed earlier in this report.

                                                          

                                                     Table E.1
                                      Forecasted Households by Tenure
                                                 City of St. Cloud
                             2010 Census and Minnesota State Demographic Center Data
                                 Renter Type
                                                        Total         Total
                      Year   Student     All Other                                     Total
                                                       Renters       Owners
                             Rentals     Rentals
                      2010    6,099       5,768         11,867       13,572            25,439
                      2011    6,099       5,894         11,993       14,002            25,994
                      2012    6,099       6,020         12,119       14,431            26,550
                      2013    6,099       6,146         12,245       14,861            27,105
                      2014    6,099       6,272         12,371       15,290            27,661
                      2015    6,099       6,398         12,497       15,720            28,216
                      2016    6,099       6,527         12,626       16,160            28,786
                      2017    6,099       6,656         12,755       16,601            29,356
                      2018    6,099       6,786         12,884       17,041            29,925
                      2019    6,099       6,915         13,013       17,481            30,495
                      2020    6,099       7,044         13,143       17,922            31,065
                      2021    6,099       7,177         13,276       18,376            31,652
                      2022    6,099       7,310         13,409       18,831            32,240
                      2023    6,099       7,444         13,542       19,285            32,827
                      2024    6,099       7,577         13,676       19,739            33,415
                      2025    6,099       7,710         13,809       20,194            34,002
                                                          

                                   




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                       Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                 134                                          November 13, 2013
                                                                                                       VI. Appendices



                                                            

                                                   Table E.2
                           Forecasted Owner-Occupied Households by Income
                                                 City of St. Cloud
                        2010 Census, CHAS Data and Minnesota State Demographic Center Data
                     Less Than
             Year                 30% - 50%    50% - 80%        80% - 95%  Above 95%         Total
                        30%
             2010         517         558          1,461         884          10,152         13,572
             2011         534         576          1,507         912          10,473         14,002
             2012         550         594          1,553         940          10,795         14,431
             2013         566         611          1,599         968          11,116         14,861
             2014         583         629          1,645         996          11,437         15,290
             2015         599         647          1,692        1,023         11,759         15,720
             2016         616         665          1,739        1,052         12,088         16,160
             2017         633         683          1,786        1,081         12,418         16,601
             2018         649         701          1,834        1,110         12,747         17,041
             2019         666         719          1,881        1,138         13,077         17,481
             2020         683         737          1,929        1,167         13,406         17,922
             2021         700         756          1,978        1,196         13,746         18,376
             2022         718         775          2,026        1,226         14,086         18,831
             2023         735         793          2,075        1,256         14,426         19,285
             2024         752         812          2,124        1,285         14,765         19,739
             2025         770         831          2,173        1,315         15,105         20,194
                                                            

                                   




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                    Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                135                                        November 13, 2013
                                                                                                         VI. Appendices



                                                              

                                                    Table E.3
                      Forecasted Student Renter-Occupied Households by Income
                                                   City of St. Cloud
                          2010 Census, CHAS Data and Minnesota State Demographic Center Data
                      Less Than
              Year                  30% - 50%     50% - 80%      80% - 95%    Above 95%        Total
                         30%
             2010         1,525         1,102        1,370         420           1,680         6,099
             2011         1,525         1,102        1,370         420           1,680         6,099
             2012         1,525         1,102        1,370         420           1,680         6,099
             2013         1,525         1,102        1,370         420           1,680         6,099
             2014         1,525         1,102        1,370         420           1,680         6,099
             2015         1,525         1,102        1,370         420           1,680         6,099
             2016         1,525         1,102        1,370         420           1,680         6,099
             2017         1,525         1,102        1,370         420           1,680         6,099
             2018         1,525         1,102        1,370         420           1,680         6,099
             2019         1,525         1,102        1,370         420           1,680         6,099
             2020         1,525         1,102        1,370         420           1,680         6,099
             2021         1,525         1,102        1,370         420           1,680         6,099
             2022         1,525         1,102        1,370         420           1,680         6,099
             2023         1,525         1,102        1,370         420           1,680         6,099
             2024         1,525         1,102        1,370         420           1,680         6,099
             2025         1,525         1,102        1,370         420           1,680         6,099
                                                              

                                     




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                      Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                  136                                        November 13, 2013
                                                                                                         VI. Appendices



                                                                 

                                                       Table E.4
                   Forecasted Non-Student Renter-Occupied Households by Income
                                                   City of St. Cloud
                          2010 Census, CHAS Data and Minnesota State Demographic Center Data
                          Less Than                                 80% -
                 Year                     30% - 50%   50% - 80%             Above 95%          Total
                             30%                                     95%
                 2010       1,443           1,043       1,296       398       1,589            5,768
                 2011       1,474           1,065       1,324       406       1,624            5,894
                 2012       1,506           1,088       1,353       415       1,658            6,020
                 2013       1,537           1,111       1,381       424       1,693            6,146
                 2014       1,569           1,134       1,409       432       1,728            6,272
                 2015       1,600           1,157       1,438       441       1,763            6,398
                 2016       1,633           1,180       1,467       450       1,798            6,527
                 2017       1,665           1,203       1,496       459       1,834            6,656
                 2018       1,697           1,227       1,525       468       1,869            6,786
                 2019       1,730           1,250       1,554       477       1,905            6,915
                 2020       1,762           1,273       1,583       486       1,940            7,044
                 2021       1,795           1,297       1,613       495       1,977            7,177
                 2022       1,828           1,321       1,643       504       2,014            7,310
                 2023       1,862           1,346       1,673       513       2,051            7,444
                 2024       1,895           1,370       1,703       522       2,087            7,577
                 2025       1,928           1,394       1,732       532       2,124            7,710
                                                                 

                                       




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                      Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                    137                                      November 13, 2013
                                                                                                          VI. Appendices



                                                              

                                                     Table E.6
                          Forecasted Total Renter-Occupied Households by Income
                                                    City of St. Cloud
                           2010 Census, CHAS Data and Minnesota State Demographic Center Data
                        Less
              Year                   30% - 50%     50% - 80%     80% - 95%    Above 95%         Total
                      Than 30%
              2010        2,968         2,145        2,667         818          3,269           11,867
              2011        3,000         2,168        2,695         827          3,304           11,993
              2012        3,031         2,191        2,723         836          3,338           12,119
              2013        3,063         2,213        2,751         844          3,373           12,245
              2014        3,094         2,236        2,780         853          3,408           12,371
              2015        3,126         2,259        2,808         862          3,443           12,497
              2016        3,158         2,282        2,837         870          3,478           12,626
              2017        3,190         2,306        2,866         879          3,514           12,755
              2018        3,223         2,329        2,895         888          3,549           12,884
              2019        3,255         2,352        2,924         897          3,585           13,013
              2020        3,287         2,376        2,953         906          3,620           13,143
              2021        3,321         2,400        2,983         915          3,657           13,276
              2022        3,354         2,424        3,013         924          3,694           13,409
              2023        3,387         2,448        3,043         934          3,731           13,542
              2024        3,420         2,472        3,073         943          3,767           13,676
              2025        3,454         2,496        3,103         952          3,804           13,809
                                                              




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                       Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                   138                                        November 13, 2013
                                                                                             VI. Appendices




F. SPECIAL NEEDS POPULATION HOUSING CAPACITY 2013
The following presents a description of the special need population housing capacity, by
function and services available at each facility. Following this narrative is a short table that
presents the physical capacity and a short note on recent facility use.

EMERGENCY SHELTER

Anna Marie’s
    Anna Marie’s is an emergency shelter providing women and their children with a safe place
      and protection from abuse. Anna Marie’s is managed by the Central Minnesota Task Force
      on Battered Women.
    Outreach and educational programs concerning domestic violence is offered for residents
      as well as children and adults in the community i.e. Shelter Children’s Program, School
      Youth Advocacy Program, Hospital Advocacy Program, and Criminal Justice Intervention
      Program.
    Additional services including referrals, child care, meals, counseling, transportation, needs
      of the children, help with schooling and on-site public health nurse is offered for residents
      as well as children and adults in the community.

Salvation Army
     Salvation Army is an emergency shelter for singles as well as families who must follow rules
        and regulations including sobriety, criminal background checks and length of stay
        limitations.
     Salvation Army requires residents to participate in an Individual Program Plan (IPP) assisting
        residents in locating permanent housing and obtaining a source of income.

Church of the Week
    Church of the Week is an emergency temporary shelter program for those in need when
      local shelters are full. A meal is provided and guests sleep on the floor or cots within a
      church.
    It is operated completely by volunteer help with participating churches, church sites and
      trained volunteers.
    Church of the Week guests undergoes initial screening process to explore other alternative
      housing options and to ensure sobriety prior to participation.

TRANSITIONAL HOUSING

Central MN Re-Entry Project
    Central MN Re-Entry provides ex-offenders the opportunity to transform their lives through
       mentoring, resources and community partnerships.
    Programs include a mentoring program offered to ex-offenders at least 120 days prior to
       their release and programs that assess the likely barriers to successful re-entry and connects
       participants to appropriate services to address those barriers i.e. jobs, housing, training,
       mentoring.



St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                          Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                          139                                    November 13, 2013
                                                                                            VI. Appendices



Catholic Charities Veterans Transitional Housing
    Catholic Charities partners with Veterans Administration Medical Center (VAMC) and the
       St. Cloud HRA to provide temporary transitional housing for chemically dependent veterans
       in two to four bedroom single family homes.
    The program specifically targets veterans coming from in-patient chemical dependency
       treatment and requires four months sobriety, no felony record, and stable monthly incomes.

Central MN Transitional Housing Program
    Operated by the Salvation Army, the program offers fully-furnished apartment units to
       singles and families with children at an income-based rent.
    The program provides the following support services: weekly home visits, referral to money
       management classes, advocacy and referral to other community resources. Also, program
       provides assistance with setting and achieving goals in areas such as employment,
       education, and personal development.

Domus Transitional Housing
   Domus, owned and operated by Catholic Charities, provides transitional housing to
      homeless adults with custody of minor children and single women.
   Phase I of Domus Transitional Housing Program is a shared living space with private
      bedrooms, all of whom must be women or children. Phase II is scattered site rental
      assistance.

Jill Eckhoff Transitional House
      Jill Eckhoff Transitional House is an independent, safe, supportive, affordable housing
         program for women and their children managed by the Central Minnesota Task Force on
         Battered Women.
      The program offers a one-year maximum stay with income-based rent. It offers advocacy,
         job counseling, educational assistance, child care, housing advice, emotional support and
         other life skills enabling women to be self-sufficient before moving to a permanent housing
         situation.

New Beginnings
   New Beginnings is a facility providing temporary housing, education and support for
      pregnant women age 16 to 25. Residents are required to be working or in school and there
      is a strict no drug and alcohol policy.
   The length of stay ranges from six to 12 months with strong case management for residents
      including weekly visits from public health nurse, participation in Early Head Start and
      employment and educational programming.

Northway Intensive Residential Treatment (IRT)
    Northway IRT is a transitional living facility operated by the Central Minnesota Mental
      Health Center serving both men and women who are experiencing severe psychiatric,
      emotional, and/or behavioral difficulties.
    The program offers services designed to develop and enhance psychiatric stability, personal
      and emotional adjustment, self-sufficiency, and skills to live in a more independent setting.
      The maximum length of stay is 90-days.



St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                         Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                          140                                   November 13, 2013
                                                                                            VI. Appendices



Overcomers International Fellowship
    Overcomers International Fellowship operates three facilities - the Dream Center,
      Hospitality House, and Caleb House, offering safe, supportive environments for men 18
      and over who desire to get their lives on a productive course.
    Residents of the program attend daily support groups, receive individual counseling and
      have structured accountability that includes working a full-time job or attending school.
      Residents are expected to sign in and out, perform household chores, follow personal
      weekly plan of goals, and participate in activities essential to reintegration into mainstream
      society.

Place of Hope Ministries – Christian Living Hope Residential Center
     Place of Hope’s Christian Living Hope Residential Center is a spiritually-based life skills
        facility for single adults, women and children, who have chemical dependency and/or
        mental health issues.
     The program utilizes curriculum from a national program requiring a commitment of a six-
        month stay to work toward goals, attend chapel every day, be chemical free, attend life-
        skills training, computer and nutrition classes as well as therapy and employment training
        and recovery groups.

PERMANENT HOUSING WITH SERVICES

Al Loehr Veterans and Community Studio Apartments
     Al Loehr Veterans and Community Studio Apartments is permanent housing managed by
       Catholic Charities and is located on Veterans Administration Medical Center property. It is
       targeted to men and women without children who are homeless or near homeless.
     Most residents have difficulty obtaining rental housing due to credit and/or rent and/or
       criminal history issues; therefore, offers service coordination rather than direct support
       services. The use or possession of alcohol or illegal drugs on site is prohibited.

H.O.P.E. on Ninth
    H.O.P.E. (Housing Opportunities for People being Empowered) on Ninth is a supportive
       housing apartment designated for people who have experienced long-term homelessness.
    The program offers low to affordable rents with an on-site supportive services coordinator to
       assist those living in the units.

HUD- VASH
   The Department of Housing and Urban Development – Veterans Affairs Supported Housing
      (HUD-VASH) Program provides long-term case management, supportive services, and
      permanent housing support to eligible homeless veterans.
   Participants of the program receive vouchers designated to participating Public Housing
      Authorities to assist with rent payment. The program provides case management and
      supportive services to aid stability and recovery from physical and mental health, substance
      use, and functional concerns contributing to or resulting from homelessness.

Shelter Plus Care
    Shelter Plus Care is a St. Cloud HRA program operated by the Central Minnesota Mental
        Health Center providing subsidized housing for persons and/or families. Typically,


St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                         Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                          141                                   November 13, 2013
                                                                                            VI. Appendices



        participants have poor credit, poor rental history, or a criminal record along with mental
        illness and/or chemical dependency.
       Participants receive supportive services and must have been homeless prior to participating
        in the program. There is not a maximum program length; however, participants are required
        to remain drug free and crime free, although alcohol is permissible.

Brotts Boarding & Lodging Homes, Inc.
    Brott’s Boarding & Lodging Homes provide supportive housing to people with serious and
        persistent mental illness diagnosed by a doctor, and requires a recommendation by a
        county social worker that the person belongs in a board and lodging facility.

Cummings Care Center
    Cummings Care Center provides supportive housing to men and women with serious and
     persistent mental illness, many of who have a chemical dependency. The facility provides a
     home-like atmosphere with 24-hour on-site staff providing medication, ordering,
     supervision, personal grooming and hygiene reminders, daily laundry, housekeeping and
     home-cooked meals.
    To be eligible a person must have a mental illness diagnosed by a doctor, and a
     recommendation by a county social worker that the person should reside in a board and
     lodging facility. There is also a zero tolerance for drugs and alcohol.

Murphy’s Board and Care Home
    Murphy’s Board and Care Home provides shelter and services to men who suffer from some
      type of mental illness and/or injury affecting their brain. Most residents are veterans while
      others suffer from chemical dependency issues in conjunction with mental illness.

St. Elizabeth Residential Care Facility
      St. Elizabeth is operated by Catholic Charities and is a hybrid of transitional housing and
         lodging. There is not a maximum stay; however, the goal is to transition clients into more
         community based settings achieving independence.
      St. Elizabeth’s does not accept drug users or people that are potentially dangerous to oneself
         or others.

River Crest Apartments
     River Crest Apartments is single-room units for chorionic inebriate men and women. It
       offers 24-hour services to residents staffed by a case manager, site manager, nurse, kitchen
       staff, program assistant, and a front desk staff offering security and support to tenants.
     Residents are selected based on primary diagnosis of alcohol dependency and has frequent,
       regular contact with law enforcement, detoxification centers and emergency services.

TREATMENT FACILITY/HALFWAY HOUSE

EastHaven Halfway House
     EastHaven Halfway House is a drug or alcohol rehabilitation center serving adult men.
       There is staff on duty 24-hours a day including licensed drug and alcohol counselors,
       nursing and physician consultants, licensed social worker, and numerous CD techs to help
       clients make successful transition to a self-sufficient independent living environment.


St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                         Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                          142                                   November 13, 2013
                                                                                            VI. Appendices



       Clients are expected to maintain sobriety, follow all rules and expectations including
        participating in scheduled programming, and setting of individual treatment plan goals.

Focus XII Halfway House
    Focus XII Halfway House provides chemical dependency treatment for men who need
       support when making the transition from a structured primary chemical dependency
       treatment program into independent living.
    Operated by Central Minnesota Mental Health Center and focused on temporary housing,
       the program is usually 90-days; however, the maximum is 180 days. It includes an
       office/therapy center and a recreational area.

Journey Home
     St. Cloud Hospital’s Behavioral Health Services operates Journey Home providing extended
       care and halfway house programming for chemically dependent women and their children.
     The program is structured, recovery-based designed to provide a transition for people
       completing primary chemical dependency treatment. Participants must have completed
       primary treatment.

Passages
    St. Cloud’s Hospital’s Behavioral Health Services operates Passages providing extended care
       and halfway house programming for chemically dependent men age 18 and older.
    The program is structured, recovery-based designed to provide a transition for people
       completing primary chemical dependency treatment program. Participants must have
       completed primary treatment.

Veterans Administration Medical Center (VAMC)
    St. Cloud Veterans Administration Medical Center delivers primary medical care as well as
       mental health programming including acute psychiatric care, Residential Rehabilitation
       Treatment, and an outpatient mental health clinic.
    The programs use a recovery model to treat post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), substance
       abuse, and a variety of mental health conditions. Outpatient programming includes
       treatment for serious mental illness, vocational rehabilitation, and supported employment.

PERMANENT SPECIALIZED HOUSING

Hylla Homestyle Living
    Adult with persistent mental illness

Quarry Heights Apartments
    Low income adults with physical disabilities

Washington Place
   Adults with persistent mental illness




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                         Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                         143                                    November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                                   VI. Appendices




                       Name                                     Housing Type             2009 Statistics       2013 Statistics           Clientele
                                                                                                                                     Battered women
 Anna Marie's                                       Emergency                          34 beds                36 persons
                                                                                                                                     and children
                                                                                                              64 persons -
                                                                                                              includes 7 persons     Single adults and
 Salvation Army                                     Emergency                          43 beds
                                                                                                              in Veterans Per        families
                                                                                                              Diem Program
                                                                                                                                     Single adults and
 Church of the Week                                 Emergency                          NA                     NA
                                                                                                                                     families
                                                                                       77 persons             100 persons
 TOTAL EMERGENCY
                                                                                       benefited              benefited
                                                                                       Not included in 2009                          Single adults with
 Central MN Re-Entry Project                        Transitional Housing                                      9 persons
                                                                                       study                                         criminal histories
                                                                                                                                     Veterans who
                                                                                                                                     complete
 Catholic Charities Veterans Transitional Housing   Transitional Housing               11 persons             11 persons             chemical
                                                                                                                                     dependency
                                                                                                                                     treatment
                                                                                                                                     Single adults and
 Central MN Transitional Housing Program            Transitional Housing               13 persons             13 persons
                                                                                                                                     families
                                                                                                                                     Women and
 Domus Transitional Housing                         Transitional Housing               16 persons             16 persons
                                                                                                                                     children
                                                                                                                                     Women and
 Jill Eckhoff Transitional House                    Transitional Housing               10 persons             10 persons
                                                                                                                                     children
                                                                                                                                     Women ages 14-
                                                                                                                                     25 - pregnant or
 New Beginnings                                     Transitional Housing               18 persons             16 persons
                                                                                                                                     with child under
                                                                                                                                     age 2
                                                                                                                                     Single adults with
 Northway IRT                                       Transitional Housing               10 persons             10 persons
                                                                                                                                     mental illness
                                                                                                                                     Single adults,
 Overcomers International Fellowship                Transitional Housing               34 persons             38 persons             many with
                                                                                                                                     criminal histories
                                                                                                                                     Single adults -
 Place of Hope Ministries - Christian Living Hope
                                                    Transitional Housing               45 beds                64 persons             women and
 Residential Center
                                                                                                                                     children
                                                                                       157 persons            187 persons
 TOTAL TRANSITIONAL HOUSING
                                                                                       benefited              benefited
 Al Loehr Veterans and Community Studio
                                                    Permanent Housing with Services    60 units               60 persons             Single adults
 Apartments
                                                                                                                                     Single adults and
 H.O.P.E. on Ninth                                  Permanent Housing with Services    10 units               63 persons
                                                                                                                                     families
                                                                                                                                     Single veterans
 HUD-VASH                                           Permanent Housing with Services    35 units               75 persons             and veteran
                                                                                                                                     families
                                                                                                                                     Single adults and
 Shelter Plus Care                                  Permanent Housing with Services    37 units               37 persons
                                                                                                                                     families
                                                                                                                                     Single adults with
 Brotts Boarding and Lodging Homes Inc.             Permanent Housing with Services    50 beds                52 persons
                                                                                                                                     mental illness
                                                                                                                                     Single adults with
 Cummings Care Center                               Permanent Housing with Services    36 beds                36 persons
                                                                                                                                     mental illness
                                                                                                                                     Single adults with
 Murphy's Board and Care Home                       Permanent Housing with Services    14 beds                14 persons
                                                                                                                                     mental illness
                                                                                                                                     Single adults with
 St. Elizabeth's Board and Lodging                  Permanent Housing with Services    18 beds                18 persons
                                                                                                                                     mental illness
                                                                                                                                     Chronic
 River Crest                                        Permanent Housing with Services    40 units               40 persons
                                                                                                                                     inebriates
 TOTAL PERMANENT HOUSING WITH                                                          300 persons            395 persons
 SERVICES                                                                              benefited              benefited
                                                                                                                                     Chemically
 East Haven Halfway House                           Treatment Facility/Halfway House   24 beds                24 persons             dependent men
                                                                                                                                     age 18 or over
                                                                                                                                     Recovering
 Focus XII Halfway House                            Treatment Facility/Halfway House   18 beds                18 persons             chemically
                                                                                                                                     dependent men
                                                                                                                                     Chemically
 Journey Home                                       Treatment Facility/Halfway House   68 beds                68 persons
                                                                                                                                     dependent

St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                           Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                                    144                                           November 13, 2013
                                                                                                                    VI. Appendices



                                                                                                                      women
                                                                                                                      Chemically
 Passages                                 Treatment Facility/Halfway House   33 beds                50 persons        dependent men
                                                                                                                      age 18 or over
                                                                                                                      Chemically
 Veterans Administration Medical Center   Treatment Facility/Halfway House   112 beds               148 persons       dependent
                                                                                                                      veterans only
 TOTAL TREATMENT FACILITY/HALFWAY                                            255 persons            308 persons
 HOUSE                                                                       benefited              benefited
                                                                                                                      Adults with
                                                                             Not included in 2009
 Hylla Homestyle Living                   Permanent Specialized Housing                             19 persons        persistent mental
                                                                             study
                                                                                                                      illness
                                                                                                                      Low income
                                                                             Not included in 2009                     adults with
 Quarry Heights Apartments                Permanent Specialized Housing                             30 persons
                                                                             study                                    physical
                                                                                                                      disabilities
                                                                                                                      Adults with
                                                                             Not included in 2009
 Washington Place                         Permanent Specialized Housing                             30 persons        persistent mental
                                                                             study
                                                                                                                      illness
                                                                             0 persons              79 persons
 TOTAL PERMANENT SPECIALIZED HOUSING
                                                                             benefited              benefited


                                                                             789 persons
                                                                             benefited (not         1,069 persons
 TOTALS
                                                                             including Housing      benefited
                                                                             Coaltion facilities




St. Cloud, Minnesota                                                                                 Draft Report for Public Review
Community Housing Study                                        145                                             November 13, 2013

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:66
posted:11/20/2013
language:Latin
pages:144