final dubois county housing strategies

HOUSING STR ATEGYDub o i s Co u n ty

p h o t o c r e d i t : R o s s C h a p i n - Po c k e t N e i g h b o r h o o d s

J U N E 2 0 1 5

TABLE OF CONTENTS

page 4 | REGIONAL COMPETITION

population growth

commuting patterns

commuting populations

new housing construction

housing growth

share of housing

employment growth

share of manufacturing

manufacturing salar y

page 8 | LOCAL HOUSING MARKE T

local housing supply

recent sales trends

new construction

state -wide market

page 12 | LOCAL DEMAND

employment

employee salar ies

employee housing desires

rental affordabil ity

ownership affordabil ity

affordable supply

community as an attractor

employment projections

growth locations

page 18 | HOUSING STRATEGY

*conclusions

employee factor

housing factor

employee projections

key assumptions

community preferences

urban neighborhoods

*Jasper strategy

*Huntingburg strategy

*Ferdinand strategy

pocket neighborhoods

“rural by design”

page 28 | AC TION PLAN

*pilot projec t

project t imeline

par tner roles

sources & uses budget

page 32 | TOOLS & RESOURCES

organizational framework

tools & resources over view

IHCDA programs

employer assisted housing

*tools & resources

*housing tools in ac tion

community/employer loan

conventional loan

neighborhood loan

* indicates key por tions of the document

| Dubois County Housing Strategy

Dubois County continues to be a leader in the

region repor ting some of the higher growth totals

in employment and housing, but competit ion

from surrounding counties is increasing. While

the County has shown signs of recover y, that

recover y lags behind in several key categories

compared to other “strong” counties. This has

created a more competit ive environment that

makes resident and employee attraction and

retention much harder.

The current economic and demographic dynamic

of the Region shows a mobile employment base

that continues to take advantage of regional job

growth and low unemployment. Employees are

now able to make housing decisions independent

of employment and now base decisions even

more on qual ity of l i fe and housing choices.

Dubois County remains the employment center of

the Region, but increased competit ion within the

Region has affected the County ’s abi l i ty to retain

and attract new residents who now have more

choices than ever for jobs and housing.

REGIONAL COMPE TITIONu n d e r s t a n d i n g

D U B O I S CO.

DAV I E S S CO.

P E R RYCO.

P I K ECO.

WA R R I C K CO.

c h a n g e * c h a n g e c h a n g e c h a n g e c h a n g e

Po p u l a t i o n G r o w t hA n n u a l G r o w t h R a t e 0 . 4 3 % 0 . 9 1 % 0 . 4 3 % - 0 . 2 1 % 0 . 5 7 %

N e t G a i n + 7 2 8 + 1 , 1 5 0 + 3 3 4 - 1 0 7 + 1 , 3 5 7

C o m m u t i n g G r o w t hA n n u a l G r o w t h R a t e 2 . 8 0 % 1 2 . 7 % 6 . 4 0 % 8 . 3 0 % 0 . 6 0 %

N e t G a i n + 3 0 2 + 5 3 8 + 1 5 1 + 1 3 0 + 4 4

H o u s i n g G r o w t hA n n u a l G r o w t h R a t e 0 . 6 6 % 0 . 7 9 % 0 . 3 6 % - 0 . 0 7 % 0 . 7 9 %

N e t G a i n + 4 3 8 + 3 7 5 + 1 4 4 - 2 0 + 6 4 0

E m p l o y m e n t G r o w t hA n n u a l G r o w t h R a t e 0 1 . 3 1 % 1 . 7 8 % 3 . 2 0 % 3 . 0 5 % 1 . 6 8 %

N e t G a i n + 9 4 9 + 4 6 0 + 4 1 6 + 2 1 4 + 6 2 5

* i n d i c a t e s g r o w t h / l o s s b e t w e e n 2 0 1 0 - 2 0 1 3 , e xc e p t c o m m u t i n g d a t a 2 0 1 0 - 2 0 1 1i n d i c a t e s c h a n g e b e t w e e n “p r e - r e c e s s i o n” a n d “p o s t - r e c e s s i o n” c h a n g e


P O P U L AT I O N G R O W T H .

2 0 0 0 P O P U L A T I O N 2 0 1 4 P O P U L A T I O N

D u b o i s C o .

D a v i e s s C o .

P e r r yC o .

P i k e C o .

W a r r i c k C o .

6 0 , 0 0 0

7 . 4 %

1 0 . 0 %

4 . 1 %

- 0 . 8 %

1 6 . 5 %

Population growth in Dubois County slowed

coming out of the recent recession (0.43% annual

rate) , while several counties saw increased

population growth during this same t ime period

- including Daviess (0.91%) and Perr y (0.47%

up from 0.28%) Counties. Dubois County was

one of three other counties that saw population

growth rates s low after the recession. While

Dubois County remains one of the more populous

counties in the region, the rate of growth in

Daviess, Perr y and Warr ick indicate that this may

not be the case long-term.

D u b o i s C o .

D a v i e s s C o .

P e r r yC o .

P i k e C o .

W a r r i c k C o .

1 0 , 0 0 0

- 7 . 2 %

4 7 . 2 %

3 5 . 9 %

2 1 . 9 %

1 0 . 3 %

1 2 , 0 0 0

Because of the concentration of avai lable jobs

in Dubois County, the number of people who

commute into the County for work has remained

the highest in the Region, however the County has

suffered from a gradual decl ine - on average 0.80%

annually. This is in comparison to r is ing commuter

populations in the surrounding counties who have

seen the population grow anywhere from 1.14%

to over 5% annually. The commuter workforce in

Dubois County now accounts for only one -f i f th of

the total workforce compared to one - quar ter in

the ear ly par t of the last decade.2 0 0 2 C O M M U T E R S 2 0 1 1 C O M M U T E R S

The majority of commuters into Dubois County

come from Pike, Spencer and Perr y Counties

- approximately 4,000 out of the 11,000 total

commuters. However, because of the job

concentration and low unemployment rate,

employees commute from across the Southern

Indiana Region extending into Kentucky and I l l inois.

C O M M U T I N G PAT T E R N S .

C O M M U T I N G P O P U L AT I O N .


N E W H O U S I N G C O N S T R U C T I O N .

Overal l the Region showed improved construction

numbers for the f irst t ime since dropping during

the recession. In 2013 Dubois County accounted

for 12% of the regional units added, down from

19% in the previous decade. Daviess and Perr y

showed strong improvements in new construction

- gaining larger shares of the regional growth. A

majority of new construction within the Region

is s ingle -family, with Warr ick County building the

majority of mult i- family units (approximately 150

units) and Dubois County adding about 90 two-

family units in 2013.

D u b o i s C o .

D a v i e s s C o .

P e r r yC o .

P i k e C o .

W a r r i c k C o .

3 , 0 0 0

5 , 0 0 0

2 0 0 0 - 2 0 1 3 N E W U N I T S

2 0 0 0 - 2 0 1 3 N E W S I N G L E F A M I L Y U N I T S

D U B O I S C O .

D A V I E S S C O .

P I K E C O .

W A R R I C K C O .

P E R R Y C O .

O T H E R C O U N T I E S

S H A R E O F H O U S I N G .

O ther than Warr ick County, Dubois County

contains the largest share of housing and even

with slowed growth in new construction has

maintained their share (18%) of housing over

the last decade or more. As new construction

continues in counties l ike Daviess and Warr ick ,

Dubois County may begin to lose that share i f no

action is taken to remedy the issue.

Du

bo

i s C

o.

D a v i e s s C o .

P e r r y C o .

P i k e C o .

Wa

rrick

Co

.

O t h e r C o u n t i e s

2 0 0 0 H O U S I N G U N I T S 2 0 1 4 H O U S I N G U N I T S

Over the last decade and a half, Dubois and

Warr ick County have been leading the way

in housing growth. The recent recession has

changed growth patterns and now Daviess and

Warr ick County are growing at a nearly 1% annual

rate (Daviess pre -recession rate was 0.48%),

compared to Dubois County at 0.68% (previously

1.21% annually) . Dubois County continues to

grow its housing stock - with an approximate net

gain of 461 units between 2010 and 2014.D u b o i s C o .

D a v i e s s C o .

P e r r yC o .

P i k e C o .

W a r r i c k C o .

2 0 , 0 0 0

1 5 . 0 %

8 . 1 %

4 . 8 %

1 . 9 %

2 1 . 5 %2 5 , 0 0 0

H O U S I N G G R O W T H .


E M P L O Y M E N T G R O W T H .2 0 0 1 J O B T O T A L 2 0 1 3 J O B T O T A L

3 0 %

D u b o i s C o .

D a v i e s s C o .

P e r r yC o .

P i k e C o .

W a r r i c k C o .

4 0 %- 6 . 8 %

9 . 8 %

1 0 . 6 %

7 . 8 %

1 4 . 4 %

Dubois County remains the economic stronghold

of the Region, but has s lowly been losing its

employment edge. Since 2001, Dubois County

has lost nearly 7% of their employment. While

the County has suffered a net loss in employment

over the last decade and a half, post-recession

growth has al lowed them to remain strong within

the larger Region. Since 2010, Dubois County has

added nearly 1,000 jobs - more than any other

county in the Region, but they have not reached

pre -recession levels.

S H A R E O F M A N U FA C T U R I N G .

Dubois County ’s s lowed employment growth has

al lowed other counties to grow their share of

the Region’s employment - but the County has

been able to retain their share of manufacturing

employment within the larger Region,

approximately 30%. Perr y County is showing

signs of manufacturing growth - growing their job

numbers by 32% between 2001 and 2013. Perr y

County now accounts for 10% of the Region’s

manufacturing jobs, up from just 6% in 2001.

20

13

20

01

2 0 1 3 A V G . S A L A R Y

D u b o i s C o .

D a v i e s s C o .

P e r r yC o .

P i k e C o .

W a r r i c k C o .

$ 5 0 , 0 0 0

$ 7 0 , 0 0 0 M A N U FA C T U R I N G S A L A R Y.

The average annual pay for Dubois County

($41,078) is below the regional average ($45,957)

and well below some of the counties (Perr y, Pike

and Warr ick) that are competing with Dubois

County for employees. This adds to the diff iculty

of attracting and retaining production-level

employees at Dubois County businesses.

D U B O I S C O . D A V I E S S C O .

P I K E C O . W A R R I C K C O .

P E R R Y C O .

O T H E R C O U N T I E S

Du

bo

is C

o.

Da

vie

ss

Co

.

Pe

rry

Co

.

Pik

e C

o.

Wa

rric

k C

o.

Oth

er

Co

.

Du

bo

is C

o.

Da

vie

ss

Co

.

Pe

rry

Co

.

Pik

e C

o.

Wa

rric

k C

o.

Oth

er

Co

.


The housing supply in Dubois County is

dominated by single -family homes built over the

last 30-40 years. Predominately these homes are

owner- occupied and valued between $100,000 to

$250,000. The avai labi l i ty of alternative housing

options is l imited and more affordable options

are often older and of lesser qual ity than most

households would desire.

The recent recession affected housing markets

across the entire US and Dubois County cer tainly

felt i ts affects. The local housing market is in

a recover y mode, increasing sales activity and

home values over the last few years. The vast

majority of those transactions have occurred in

Jasper ; addit ional ly most new construction has

taken place in Jasper as well . New construction

has continued to increase coming out of the

recession, however the rate at which new homes

are built has s ignif icantly decl ined. Higher

pr iced homes are recovering much quicker, with

construction of new more “affordable” units st i l l

struggling to take hold in the current market

dynamic.

LOC AL HOUSING MARKE Td e f i n i n g t h e

S F = S I N G L E - F A M I L Y D E T A C H E D

D U B O I S CO.

C I T Y O F J A S P E R

C I T Y O F H U N T I N G B U R G

TO W N O F F E R D I N A N D

o w n e r - o cc o w n e r - o cc o w n e r - o cc o w n e r - o cc

H o u s e h o l d ( H H ) P r o f i l eA g e o f H H 4 5 - 5 4 4 5 - 5 4 3 5 - 5 4 2 5 - 5 4

Fa m i l y / N o n - Fa m i l y H H 7 7 % / 2 3 % 7 3 % / 2 7 % 7 6 % / 2 4 % 7 3 % / 2 7 %

Av e r a g e H H S i z e 2 . 6 7 2 . 5 3 2 . 7 5 2 . 7 5

M e d i a n H H I n c o m e $ 6 2 , 2 7 4 $ 5 9 , 5 1 0 $ 6 2 , 5 0 0 $ 6 0 , 5 4 7

Ye a r H H M o v e d t o U n i t 1 9 9 5 1 9 9 8 1 9 9 6 1 9 9 5

H o u s i n g P r o f i l ePr o d u c t Ty p e S F S F S F S F

N u m b e r o f B e d r o o m s 3 3 3 3

% O n e - B e d r o o m 2 1 % 2 4 % 2 0 % 2 5 %

% Tw o - B e d r o o m s 3 9 % 4 0 % 3 8 % 4 0 %

M e d i a n Ye a r B u i l t 1 9 7 7 1 9 7 4 1 9 5 9 1 9 6 8

Va c a n c y R a t e 1 . 9 % 2 . 8 % 6 . 3 % 2 . 1 %

s o u r c e : U n i t e d S t a t e s C e n s u s a n d D C I a n a l y s i s - d a t a r e p r e s e n t s a v e r a g e s a n d m o s t c o m m o n o c c u r a n c e si n d i c a t e s c o m p a r i s o n t o D u b o i s C o u n t y s t a t


s o u r c e : U n i t e d S t a t e s C e n s u s a n d D C I a n a l y s i s - d a t a r e p r e s e n t s a v e r a g e s a n d m o s t c o m m o n o c c u r a n c e s

D U B O I S CO.




r e n t a l - o cc r e n t a l - o cc r e n t a l - o cc r e n t a l - o cc

H o u s e h o l d ( H H ) P r o f i l eA g e o f H H 2 5 - 3 4 2 5 - 3 4 2 5 - 3 4 6 0 +

Fa m i l y / N o n - Fa m i l y H H 5 4 % / 4 6 % 4 6 % / 5 4 % 6 2 % / 3 8 % 3 3 % / 6 8 %

Av e r a g e H H S i z e 2 . 3 2 2 . 1 2 2 . 8 3 1 . 6 1

M e d i a n H H I n c o m e $ 3 1 , 9 1 4 $ 3 4 , 5 3 1 $ 2 4 , 7 9 2 $ 3 1 , 5 0 0

Ye a r H H M o v e d t o U n i t 2 0 0 8 2 0 1 0 2 0 0 7 2 0 0 5

H o u s i n g P r o f i l ePr o d u c t Ty p e S F S F / D S F / M F S F / D

N u m b e r o f B e d r o o m s 2 2 2 . 5 1 . 5

% O n e - B e d r o o m 4 1 % 4 7 % 3 3 % 6 6 %

% Tw o - B e d r o o m s 2 5 % 2 1 % 1 6 % 1 8 %

M e d i a n Ye a r B u i l t 1 9 8 0 1 9 8 7 1 9 7 0 1 9 7 0

Va c a n c y R a t e 1 0 . 5 % 1 2 . 7 % 1 4 . 2 % 0 %

S F = S I N G L E - F A M I L Y D E T A C H E D D = S I N G L E - F A M I L Y A T T A C H E D / D U P L E X M F = S M A L L M U L T I - F A M I L Y

L O C A L H O U S I N G S U P P LY.

Within Dubois County there are approximately

18,000 housing units - 44% of those units are

located outside of the three major municipal it ies.

Jasper contains the largest share of housing and

with an annual growth rate of 1.06% it wil l l ikely

remain that way. This might be attr ibuted to the

fact that Huntingburg is home to just 14% of the

County ’s units and has a much slower growth

rate - 0 .26% annually. Addit ional ly, over the last

decade Ferdinand’s housing supply has grown by

0.95% annually, but with only 4% of the County ’s

housing that does not translate to a s ignficant

number of new units.2 0 1 3 H O U S I N G U N I T S

D u b o i s C o .

C i t y o f J a s p e r

C i t y o f H u n t i n g b u r g

T o w n o f F e r d i n a n d

2 , 0 0 0

6 , 0 0 0

1 0 , 0 0 0

2 0 1 3 S I N G L E - F A M I L Y U N I T S

i n d i c a t e s c o m p a r i s o n t o D u b o i s C o u n t y s t a t


Dubois County, l ike most of the US, saw home

values dramatical ly decl ine beginning in late 2007

and bottoming out in 2009. Since then, values

have improved with 2013 -2014 sales indicating

a recovering market. The submarkets ( Jasper,

Huntingburg and Ferdinand) fol low similar sales

trends with the exception of Huntingburg - where

homes values faired sl ightly better during the

recession, but have f luctuated greatly s ince then.

Year to year, sales trends ref lect a healthy market

with a ver y s imilar number of sales each year.

R E C E N T S A L E S T R E N D S .

2 0 0 5 2 0 0 6 2 0 0 7 2 0 0 8 2 0 0 9 2 0 1 0 2 0 1 1 2 0 1 2 2 0 1 3 2 0 1 4

$ 1 2 4 , 0 0 0

$ 1 2 8 , 0 0 0

R E C E S S I O N Y E A R S A V E R A G E S A L E S P R I C E

D U B O I S CO.




To t a l N u m b e r o f S a l e s 3 6 6 2 4 9 5 6 1 6

M e d i a n S a l e s Pr i c e $ 1 2 6 , 7 5 0 $ 1 3 9 , 0 0 0 $ 7 6 , 0 0 0 $ 1 4 4 , 5 0 0

Av e r a g e # o f B e d r o o m s 3 . 1 3 . 2 2 . 9 3 . 1

Av e r a g e S q u a r e Fo o t a g e 1 , 7 2 3 1 , 7 6 3 1 , 6 1 6 1 , 7 0 4

D a y s o n M a r e k e t 1 0 7 1 0 6 1 1 9 6 9

* s o u r c e : M u l t i p l e L i s t i n g S e r v i c e ( M L S ) r e c e n t s a l e s d a t a t r a n s a c t i o n s p r o v i d e d b y l o c a l R E A LTO R

2 0 1 2 2 0 1 3 2 0 1 4

C L O S E D S A L E S P E R Y E A R

1 0 0 , 0 0 0

7 5 , 0 0 0

s o u r c e : M o n t h l y I n d i c a t o r s p r o v i d e d b y t h e I n d i a n a A s s o c i a t i o n o f R E A LTO R S - D e c e m b e r 2 0 1 4

2 0 1 2 2 0 1 3 2 0 1 4

A V E R A G E L I S T P R I C E

A V E R A G E S A L E S P R I C E



Indiana has experienced a s ignif icant

improvement in the residential real estate

market s ince the 2008/09 recession. However,

the number of sales in 2014 fel l shor t of 2013

by -1.6%. Median sales pr ices did increase

over 2014 to end the year at $126,000 a 5.2%

increase from December of 2013. Year after

year, the percentage of the or iginal l ist pr ice

received continues to improve. With a good

outlook for job growth projected in 2015,

the real estate market in Indiana should see

overal l improvements.

STATE-WIDE MARKE Tl e a r n m o r e

The construction cost per unit in Dubois County

has continued to cl imb post-recession, only

s l ightly dropping during the height of the cr is is

in 2008. The average construction cost in 2013

was $293,305, compared to just under $140,000 in

2000 and $186,587 going into the recession. While

the recession had l i tt le effect on the average

construction cost, the number of units bui lt

greatly decreased across the entire County. One

factor may be reduced construction of lower cost

homes, l ikely t ied to a changing housing market

and effects of the recent recession.

N E W C O N S T R U C T I O N .

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

$ 2 0 0 , 0 0 0

$ 2 5 0 , 0 0 0

R E C E S S I O N Y E A R S A V E R A G E C O N S T R U C T I O N C O S T

* s o u r c e : U S C e n s u s - C e n S t a t s B u i l d i n g Pe r m i t s , n u m b e r s r e p r e s e n t a v e r a g e n u m b e r o f b u i l d i n g p e r m i t s p e r y e a r

D U B O I S CO.




c h a n g e c h a n g e c h a n g e c h a n g e

A n n u a l C o n s t r u c t i o n R a t e Pr e - R e c e s s i o n ( 2 0 0 0 - 2 0 1 0 ) * 1 3 5 6 3 1 6 5

Po s t - R e c e s s i o n ( 2 0 1 0 - 2 0 1 3 ) * 3 4 2 8 2 4

2 0 1 2 2 0 1 3 2 0 1 4

M E D I A N S A L E S P R I C E P E R Y E A R

$ 1 2 5 , 0 0 0

+ 3 . 4 % + 3 . 3 %



The job market saw a drop in total employment

during the recession, but quick ly picked back

up, but has yet to reach pre -recession highs.

Unemployment, l ike employment, is improving as

Dubois County transit ions through its economic

recover y. Through conversations with employers,

many are struggling with employee recruitment

and retention - c it ing recruitment as their number

one chal lenge. Low unemployment rates and

growth in the surrounding counties continues

to affect the effor ts of Dubois County ’s largest

employers.

Even with the challenges they face, many of the

major employers are projec ting growth over

the next 3 to 5 years - with some estimates as

high as 1,500 new jobs over the next 5 years. The

majority of those jobs wil l l ikely be production-

type jobs with an average star t ing wage of $12.20

per hour, somewhat below the regional average.

Regional competit ion adds to the diff iculty of

attracting and retaining qual ity employees,

who often take advantage of the area’s high

concentration of jobs, var ying wages between

employers, thereby creating a c ycle of employee

trading and low tenure which al l adds to the cost

of doing business.

The projected growth is l ikely to attract low- to

middle -income residents seek ing affordable

housing options near centers of employment.

The avai labi l i ty of these homes is not the issue -

58% of the County ’s homes are “affordable” - but

product type, age, qual ity and location become

increasingly impor tant factors when look ing at

attracting a workforce to Dubois County.

LOC AL DEMANDe x am i n i n g

A L L R E S P O N D E N TS

P R O D U C T I O N R E S P O N D E N TS

ave ra g e * ave ra g e

D e m o g r a p h i c P r o f i l e% M a l e / Fe m a l e 5 0 % / 5 0 % 5 3 % / 4 7 %

Av e r a g e A g e ( i n y e a r s ) 3 5 - 4 4 4 5 - 5 4

% H i g h S c h o o l O n l y / C o l l e g e D e g r e e 3 0 % / 4 6 % 6 0 % / 1 3 %

% M g m t . / Pr o f e s s i o n a l / Pr o d u c t i o n 2 2 % / 3 6 % / 3 1 % n / a

T i m e i n C u r r e n t J o b ( i n y e a r s ) 5 - 1 0 1 - 2

H o u s e h o l d ( H H ) I n c o m e $ 4 5 , 0 0 0 - $ 6 5 , 0 0 0 $ 2 5 , 0 0 0 - $ 4 5 , 0 0 0

O n e - Wa y C o m m u t e ( i n m i n u t e s ) 1 0 - 2 0 1 0 - 2 0

* i n f o r m a t i o n d e r i v e d f r o m D C I s u r v e y o f t o p D u b o i s C o u n t y e m p l o y e r s ( Fe b r u a r y 2 3 - M a r c h 3 , 2 0 1 5 )

i n d i c a t e s c o m p a r i s o n t o “A l l R e s p o n d e n t s”


P r o f e s s i o n a l

P r o d u c t i o n

E M P L O Y E E S A L A R I E S .

Regionally, Dubois County ’s average

manufacturing wage ($41,078) is below the

regional average ($45,957) and signif icantly

below several of the County ’s peers - Perr y County

($51,338) and Warr ick County ($65,681) . The

hourly wages provided by several large area

employers indicate that an average entr y level

production worker would earn approximately

$25,000 a year (based on 40 hour work week) and

a senior level employee would earn $36,000 - both

well under the County ’s average. Professional

staff earn sl ightly more and are l ikely some of the

reason for the higher County salar y average.

E M P L O Y M E N T.

A majority of the top employers’ workforce is

made up of production level employees - 85%

on average. Accounting for 64% of the County ’s

jobs, over 14,000 workers are employed at the 16

companies who par ticipated - 12,000 of which

are production level employees. Jasper contains

the largest concentration of jobs - 67%, whereas

Huntingburg (19%) and Ferdinand (12%) have

smaller, yet st i l l s ignif icant job clusters.

P R O D U C T I O N E M P L O Y E E S P R O F E S S I O N A L E M P L O Y E E S

A V E R A G E H O U R L Y R A T E

E n t r y L e v e l P r o d u c t i o n

E n t r y L e v e l P r o f e s s i o n a l

S e n i o r L e v e l P r o d u c t i o n

$ 1 4 . 0 0

$ 1 8 . 0 0

J a s p e r

H u n t i n g b u r g

F e r d i n a n d

M U N I C I P A L I T Y B O U N D A R I E S

M A J O R E M P L O Y M E N T L O C A T I O N


* i n f o r m a t i o n d e r i v e d f r o m D C I s u r v e y o f t o p D u b o i s C o u n t y e m p l o y e r s ( Fe b r u a r y 2 3 - M a r c h 3 , 2 0 1 5 )

E M P L O Y E E H O U S I N G D E S I R E S .

Overal l , housing desires by the employees who

completed the sur vey were reasonable and closely

matched their exist ing housing choices. People

were more l ikely to choose a s ingle -family detached

unit and rural sett ing. Only 34% of the respondents

indicated they were l ikely to move in the future - of

those that did, only 38% had plans to move in the

next 5 years. When mak ing future housing decisions,

cost was given the most weight fol lowed by proximity

to work - this presents some oppor tunity to direct

those employees to modestly pr iced homes near

exist ing job clusters. The char t to the r ight shows

the breakdown of responses to the question “ I f your

average commute is longer than 20 minutes, what

was the pr imar y reason for your housing choice?”

Over whelmingly the choice was proximity to family

and fr iends, fol lowed by high housing cost and lack

of options near their current job.


P R O D U C T I O N R E S P O N D E N TS


ex i s t i n g ex i s t i n g d e s i r e d *

H o u s i n g P r o f i l e% R u r a l S e t t i n g 4 3 % 5 1 % 6 4 %

% S u b u r b a n S e t t i n g 2 0 % 1 4 % 1 2 %

% C i t y S e t t i n g 3 7 % 3 4 % 2 4 %

% O w n 8 1 % 7 1 % 8 7 %

% R e n t 1 9 % 2 9 % 1 3 %

H o u s i n g Te n u r e ( i n y e a r s ) 5 - 1 0 5 - 1 0 n / a

% Single -Family Detached / Attached 8 7 % / 8 % 8 1 % / 1 1 % 8 9 % / 1 6 %

% M u l t i - Fa m i l y 5 % 8 % 4 %

# B e d r o o m s 3 3 3

M o n t h l y H o u s i n g C o s t $ 5 0 1 - $ 7 5 0 $ 2 5 0 - $ 5 0 0 $ 5 0 1 - $ 7 5 0

E s t i m a t e d H o m e Va l u e $125,000 - $150,000 $100,000 - $125,000 $100,000 - $150,000

% H o m e Va l u e < $ 1 5 0 , 0 0 0 5 2 % 8 2 % 5 1 %

P R O X I M I T Y T O F A M I L Y / F R I E N D S

H O U S I N G C O S T T O O H I G H N E A R J O B

P R O X I M I T Y T O S P O U S E S J O B

R E C E N T L Y C H A N G E D J O B S

N O D E S I R A B L E O P T I O N S N E A R J O B

P R O X I M I T Y T O C H I L D ’ S S C H O O L

P r o x i mi t y t o

F a mi l y / F r i e n d s

Ho

us

i ng

Co

st

To

o H

i gh

N o D e s i r a b l e H o u s i n g

O p t i o n s N e a r My J o b

P r o x i m i t y T o

S p o u s e ’ s J o b

R e c e n t l y

C h a n g e d J o b s

P r ox i m

i t y T o

Ch

i l d’ s S c h

oo

l


R E N TA L A F F O R D A B I L I T Y.

< $ 2 5 0

$ 2 5 1 - $ 4 9 9

$ 7 5 0 - $ 9 9 9

$ 1 , 0 0 0 - $ 1 , 4 9 9

$ 5 0 0 - $ 7 4 9

Av

era

ge

Re

nt

Based on the entr y level production salar y

(est imated at $25,000 annually) an affordable rent

range for a s ingle earner household - one that

does not exceed 30% of total income - would be

$425 - $625. Approximately 60% of the exist ing

rental supply in Dubois County fal ls within or

below that range indicating there is a supply

of “affordable” units. However, the location,

avai labi l i ty and qual ity of that unit is unk nown

and may affect a renters decision to rent that unit

over one outside the County.

O W N E R S H I P A F F O R D A B I L I T Y.

The average entr y- level production worker could

afford a $150,000 mor tgage, assuming a 20%

down payment and no other income earners in the

household. This would al low that same household

to afford approximately 58% of the County ’s

housing supply, indicating there is suff ic ient

“affordable” product within the County. The age,

condit ion, location, type/size and avai labi l i ty of

these units is unk nown and may present some

issues for potential homeowners. There are areas

where a high concentration of units exist and areas

where it would be hard to f ind an affordable unit .< 2 5 % 2 5 - 3 4 % 4 5 - 5 0 % > 5 0 %3 5 - 4 4 %

% o f “ A f f o r d a b l e ” U n i t s ( < $ 1 5 0 , 0 0 0 )

A F F O R D A B L E S U P P LY.

< $ 1 5 0 , 0 0 0> $ 1 5 0 , 0 0 0

P R O D U C T I O N E M P L O Y E E S

P R O F E S S I O N A L E M P L O Y E E S

There are several factors that lead to housing

decisions - s ize/type, location, qual ity and age

of the unit . Without an in- depth analysis of the

exist ing supply it is hard to quantify how much

this impacts Dubois County ’s abi l i ty to regionally

compete for housing. While 58% of the County ’s

housing units are below $150,000, a large por tion

of those are l ikely older construction - average

value for a house built between 1950-1959 is

just $99,900. Due to the stabi l i ty of the market,

affordable housing is l ikely to be a long-term issue.

< $

25

0

$2

51

- $

49

9

$5

00

- $

74

9

$7

50

- $

99

9

$1

,00

0 -

$1

,49

9


M A S T E R B R A N D J A S P E R E N G I N E S & E N G I N E S

E M P L O Y M E N T P R O J E C T I O N S .

I f businesses meet their projections, i t is

est imated that there wil l be at least 900 to 1,100

new jobs created by the top 16 employers in

Dubois County, but possibly as many as 1,500.

Their abi l i ty to attract and retain employees has

gotten “somewhat ” to “much harder ” over the last

few years due in par t to low employment rates,

avai labi l i ty of qual i f ied employees and getting

people to move to the area. Init ial growth

is expected to be pr imari ly production level

employees at approximately 9 to 10 businesses.

On average, the growing companies expect to

hire around 50 new employees each year with the

exception of a few f irms who plan to add much

greater numbers i f candidates are avai lable.

2 0 1 5 2 0 1 6 2 0 1 7 2 0 1 8 2 0 1 9

3 5 0

4 5 0

2 5 0

2 0 0 1 J O B T O T A L 2 0 1 3 J O B T O T A L


One of the most impor tant factors to consider in any economic development effor t is

the people who wil l choose to make a decision to l ive or not l ive in your community.

This is especial ly impor tant for places l ike Dubois County, where the unemployment

rate is far below the national average and exist ing businesses identify relocation as

a cr it ical hurdle to growing their business. New studies have shown that investing

in a sense of place, qual ity of l i fe and community init iat ives offer greater returns

than tradit ional economic development incentives. Ball State Universit y ’s Center for

Business and Economic Research c ites four key components that affect a town or city ’s

abi l i ty to attract new, qual i f ied employees - K-8 schools, qual ity of place / l ivabil i ty,

responsive government and health care / healthy options. With plans already in place

to improve their downtowns and shared public spaces, Dubois County must continue

to focus on a hol ist ic, county-wide economic development init iat ive that improves the

area’s sense of place and al lows it to compete regionally for new employees, residents

and businesses.

COMMUNIT Y AS AN AT TR AC TION TOOLl e a r n m o r e

G R O W T H L O C AT I O N S .

Based on exist ing employment information

provided by the employers and their projections

for future growth, i t can be assumed that a

majority of the new job creation wil l be in

Jasper - approximately 1,000 new jobs (70%.)

Ferdinand wil l see the next largest increase in

jobs - approximately 400 (26%) with Huntingburg

capturing only a small por tion (5%) of projected

employment growth - approximately 70 new jobs.

Sh

are

of

Pro

jec

ted

Jo

bs

20

%

40

%

60

%

80

%

J A S P E R H U N T I N G B U R G F E R D I N A N D


There is an obvious shor t-term market

oppor tunity that can be capital ized on to

br ing new or rehabil itated “affordable” housing

options to Dubois County. While growth rates

for traditional housing indicators - population,

housing and employment growth - have been

anemic and less robust than other peer cit ies,

there is sti l l an oppor tunity to implement a

successful housing strategy in a thoughtful,

well- organized manner. A signif icant workforce

housing issue has been identif ied and the current

supply, while affordable, is not easy to identify

and is often scattered, dated and of lower qual ity.

Inventor y is not the issue in Dubois County.

Affordable s ingle -family options exist , but may

require some level of rehabil itat ion or renovation

to satisfy the County ’s potential customer base

- putting the burden on the home -buyer, who

is l ikely unexperienced or uncer tain of what

that entai ls. Addit ional ly there is no direct

connection between housing oppor tunit ies and

job concentrations.

A housing response in Dubois County must not

be just about building homes, but about l inking

oppor tunities to jobs and housing; reinforcing

communities with improved infrastruc ture,

home values and an influx of new residents

as well as suppor ting local employers who are

the economic back bone of the Region so they

are able to continue to do business in Dubois

County.

HOUSING STR ATEGYb u i l d i n g a

C O N C L U S I O N 1 .

Tradit ional market

indicators for

Dubois County

do not ref lect a

s ignif icant increase

in housing demand.


There is l imited

oppor tunity

for s ignif icant

new housing

construction based

on past trends and

current, tradit ional

demand levels.


The age and qual ity

of housing stock

may present an

oppor tunity for

a “replacement ”

housing strategy

within specif ic

neighborhoods.


The current rental

inventor y is

inadequate in both

qual ity and options

within each of the

communities.



The majority

of housing is

“affordable” to

the workforce,

but l imited in

age, qual ity and

location.


Current commuters

are not l ikely to

dr ive s ignif icant

housing demand;

other factors

are inf luencing

their housing

decision besides

employment.


Exist ing

development

standards, cost of

construction and

avai labi l i ty of land

impede and / or

dis incentivize new

workforce housing

construction.


Employer job

growth projections

for the next 5 years

are an impor tant

component that wil l

impact the level of

housing demand in

the near future.

E M P L O Y E E FA C T O R .

The concentration of jobs, approximately

22,000 , within Dubois County is i ts greatest

asset and l ikely to dr ive any future housing

development. With only a l imited number

of employee sur vey responses indicating a

desire to move in the near future, the exist ing

customer base - while a potential customer

pool - is less l ikely to be a future housing

consumer than a new employee - one moving

from outside the Region. Of the exist ing

employees, there is some l ikel ihood that a small

por tion of the commuter population could be

enticed to relocate to Dubois County with high

qual ity, affordable options near employment

centers. But again the 1,000+ projec ted new

employees - 200 new employees a year - are

more l ikely to consume new housing and are

therefore the target market for a Dubois

County Housing Strategy .

H O U S I N G FA C T O R .

The Region’s housing market is growing -

by nearly 40% over the last few years - but

Dubois County is not keeping pace . The

County ’s share of new construction has

decreased from 19% (pre -recession) to just

12% (post-recession) . Addit ional ly, s ince 2010

new construction in Dubois County accounts

for just 13% of the new units added to the

Region . Within Dubois County, Jasper is the

housing driver, building approximately 84%

of the County ’s new units in 2013. However,

a majority of these new homes do not fal l into

what ’s been defined as “affordable” for the

growing workforce in the area. The average

construc tion value in 2013 was in excess of

$260,000 - $110,000 over the recommended

“affordable” pr ice threshold. While Dubois

County, and more specif ical ly Jasper, are

adding to the exist ing housing supply, they are

not providing a produc t that is accessible

to one of their largest consumer markets -

production level manufacturing employees.


f u t u r e e m p l o y e e s

1 0 - 1 5 %

The abil i ty of Dubois County and its communities

to capture new residents is dependent on several

factors - qual ity of housing product, pr ice points,

perceived value, neighborhood amenit ies and

the qual ity of l i fe present in each community.

Addit ional ly, capture rates (percent of the potential

market that can be attracted) wil l var y based on the

target markets as well as the proposed locations

for new housing within Dubois County. Based on

recent trends, sur vey responses and histor ic data it

is l ikely that both exist ing and future employees are

the most l ikely housing driver. To take advantage of

this potential housing customer base, pr imar y job

clusters and the neighborhoods in their immediate

vicinity should be targeted due to their proximity to

employment, community ser vices and amenit ies.

e x i s t i n g e m p l o y e e s

3 - 5 %

E M P L O Y M E N T P R O J E C T I O N S .e s t i m a t e d c a p t u r e r a t e s

g e n e r a l p o p u l a t i o n

0 - 1 %

J A S P E R2 3 1 J o b C l u s t e r

( 5 m i n . d r i ve t i m e D i v i s i o n & U S 2 3 1 )

H U N T I N G B U R G N e a r D ow n t ow n

J o b C l u s t e r( 2 . 5 m i n . d r i ve t i m e 9 t h S t . & C h e s t n u t )

F E R D I N A N DI n d u s t r i a l D r

J o b C l u s t e r( 2 . 5 m i n . d r i ve t i m e

3 r d S t . & S ce n i c H i l l )

# E m p l o y e e s 7 , 0 0 0 + / - 2 , 5 0 0 + / - 2 , 5 0 0 + / -

Pr o j e c t e d N e w J o b s ( i n 5 y e a r s ) 8 0 0 - 1 , 0 0 0 l i m i t e d 3 5 0 - 5 0 0

# H o u s e h o l d s 2 , 1 7 1 6 5 2 4 1 5

# H o u s i n g U n i t s 2 , 3 5 5 7 3 0 4 4 3

Va c a n c y R a t e 8 % 1 1 % 6 %

% O w n e r O c c u p i e d 7 0 % 5 3 % 7 9 %

% Renter Occupied 3 0 % 4 7 % 2 1 %

% R e n t a l i n S i n g l e - Fa m i l y U n i t s 5 0 % 1 3 % 2 %

M e d i a n H o m e Va l u e $ 1 1 9 , 3 0 4 $ 8 1 , 1 9 0 $ 1 2 2 , 9 1 7

M e d i a n R e n t $ 5 0 4 $ 4 9 6 $ 4 6 6

M e d i a n A g e o f H o u s i n g 1 9 7 1 1 9 4 8 1 9 7 6


K E Y A S S U M P T I O N S .

• Inventor y is not the biggest issue - location,

age and condit ion are key concerns.

• Affordable s ingle -family options exist in

Jasper and Huntingburg, but may require

some level of rehab or renovation to satisfy

today ’s customer.

• Ferdinand’s exist ing inventor y of housing is

l imited.

• Currently there are few l ink ages between

job clusters and housing oppor tunit ies.

• Land cost/avai labi l i ty, development

regulations/standards and better defined

“higher end” market act as barr iers to

affordable housing construction.

• Several key housing products are not

apparent in the Dubois County market -

affordable mixed-income, high qual ity mult i-

family product and affordable s ingle -family

housing in high amenity neighborhoods.

Ever y two years, the Urban Land Institute (ULI) completes

a community preference sur vey to gauge trends and

feedback on what Americans want in their community.

This national- level information is helpful as Dubois

County looks to attract new employees and households

from outside the Region. Based on employment

projections, the mil lennial (ages 18-36) population and

their housing and community desires becomes a cr it ical

market segment. They are l ikely to dr ive demand for

more compact, mixed-use developments and general ly

desire communities that are more walk able, bikeable and

diverse. Addit ional ly, 63% of those sur veyed want to

l ive in a community where they do not need to use their

car often. These trends reinforce the need to create new,

diverse housing oppor tunit ies near exist ing job clusters

that integrate community amenit ies and access to local

retai l and ser vices. Understanding and incorporating

these national trends into local community and economic

development policies wil l a l low Dubois County to

compete on a much broader level.

CO M M U N I T Y PREFERENCESl e a r n m o r e

C O M M U N I T Y F E AT U R E S .

want to be in walk able

neighborhoods with s idewalks,

crosswalks and other

pedestr ian-fr iendly features.

50% O F AM E R I C A N S

R U R A L L I V I N G .

desire to l ive in rural / small-

town areas - but st i l l desire

proximity to destinations and

ser vices.


D I V E R S I T Y.

repor ted a desire to l ive in

a community with a mix of

ages. Two-thirds prefer to l ive

in a community with a mix of

cultures and backgrounds.


s o u r c e : “A m e r i c a i n 2 0 1 5 : A U L I S u r v e y o f V i e w s o n H o u s i n g, Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n , a n d C o m m u n i t y ” - M a y 2 0 1 5


Herron Mor ton Place, a near-Downtown Indianapolis

neighborhood experienced a successful revital ization

by restoring / rehabbing its diverse housing stock

- which includes s ingle -family, duplexes, cour tyard

apar tments and small mult i- family buildings - as

well as integrating well- designed new construction

into the exist ing neighborhood fabric. This two-fold

approach has brought new l i fe to the neighborhood

and created greater density by reducing the number

of empty or underuti l ized lots. The integration

of diverse housing types provides something for

ever yone from large histor ic mansions, new modern

inf i l l homes, and affordable apar tments, condos and

town homes. Pr ices in the neighborhood range from

$140,000 condos just down the street from ful ly

restored homes priced upwards of $1 mil l ion dollars

and ever ything in between.

U R B A N N E I G H B O R H O O D Sc a s e s t u d y

J A S P E R S T R AT E G Y.

g o a l : Ta k e a d v a n t a g e o f J a s p e r ’s D o w n t o w n a n d a d j a c e n t n e i g h b o r h o o d r e v i t a l i z a t i o n e f f o r t s b y e n c o u r a g i n g i n - f i l l a n d n e w h o u s i n g i n v e s t m e n t i n t a r g e t e d a r e a s n e a r t h e “ 2 3 1 J o b C l u s t e r.”

2 2 5 - 3 7 5 u n i t sp o t e n t i a l 5 Y e a r D e m a n d f o r W o r k f o r c e H o u s i n g

The exist ing job base combined with

projected job growth creates a strong

argument for a well- defined, quantif iable

housing market in Jasper. With the average

cost of construction in 2014 at $260,000,

most entr y level employees - the job

categor y projected to grow - cannot afford

what is being constructed. Jasper should

consider focusing much of their effor ts

on a single -family initiative - both new

construc tion (120-230 units) and the

rehabilitation of existing units (30-50

units) to provide a diversity of housing

choices for its growing workforce . Mult i-

family development must also play a role to

ful ly address the gap in workforce housing.

Over the next 1-3 years, Jasper has the

potential to create an additional 50-100

new units of high quality apar tments or

other attached (townhomes, stacked flats,

lof ts, etc.) produc t .

I N D I A N A P O L I S , I N


B a s e N u m b e r.

Ca p t u r e R a t e.

Po t e n t i a l A n n u a l

D e m a n d.

J A S P E R 2 3 1 J o b C l u s t e r M a r k e t Po t e n t i a lE x i s t i n g J o b B a s e * 5 , 0 0 0 3 - 5 % 3 0 - 5 0

E s t i m a t e d A n n u a l J o b G r o w t h * * 7 6 5 1 0 - 1 5 % 1 5 - 2 5

E s t i m a t e d H o u s e h o l d G r o w t h 3 3 0 0 - 1 % 0 - 3

Po t e n t i a l N e w A n n u a l D e m a n d 4 5 - 7 5 u n i t s a n n u a l l y

* a c c o u n t s f o r a p p r ox i m a t e p r o d u c t i o n a n d s e r v i c e j o b s o n l y * * b a s e d o n p r o j e c t e d g r o w t h w i t h i n t h e 2 3 1 J o b C l u s t e r.

S T R AT E G Y 1 .

Focus new housing oppor tunit ies within a 5 minute dr ive of the 231 Job Cluster.

S T R AT E G Y 2 .

Create or reinforce qual ity neighborhoods with strong connection to community

amenit ies, ser vices, and employment oppor tunit ies.

S T R AT E G Y 3 .

Focus on a qual ity mult i- family project that reinforces targeted Downtown areas.

S T R AT E G Y 4 .

Identify s ingle -family blocks in near-Downtown neighborhoods that would

benefit from reinvestment and have rehab and inf i l l oppor tunit ies.

S T R AT E G Y 5 .

Identify a strategical ly located proper ty that would suppor t the development

of 30-50 new workforce homes in a hol ist ic neighborhood sett ing.


With the philosophy of “better rather than bigger,” Danielson

Grove in K irk land, Washington is set within a larger

neighborhood context where each home is constructed on a

pr ivate lot with shared access to park ing and common outdoor

areas. Home prices in this Seattle neighborhood star t in the

Mid-$500,000’s with homes ranging from 1,500-1,700 square

feet. People are wil l ing to pay the higher cost in return for the

community sett ing, amenit ies and dist inct detai ls that make

these homes unique. In some ways these homes are “affordable”

- more tradit ional homes in the area star t at $545,000 and exceed

the multi-mil l ion dollar mark . The compact design al lows for a

higher density development with a more spacious, community-

emphasized designed that encourages social interaction and

value -added amenit ies at a lower cost to the consumer.

P O C K E T N E I G H B O R H O O D Sc a s e s t u d y * S i t e S p e c s.

LOT

1 1 0 x 1 6 0 f t .

0 . 4 a c r e s

U N I T S

8 - 8 4 0 s q . f t .

D E N S I T Y

1 9 . 8 d u / a c r e

PA R K I N G

1 s p a c e / d u

S E T B AC K S

1 0 f t . f r o n t

5 - 6 f t . s i d e / r e a r

B U I L D I N G

2 4 x 3 5 f t .

* s p e c s n o t fo r D a n i e l s o n G rove d u = d we l l i n g u n i t

H U N T I N G B U R G S T R AT E G Y.

g o a l : M o d e r n i z e t h e C i t y ’s h o u s i n g i n v e n t o r y t h r o u g h a c o n c e n t r a t e d r e n o v a t i o n a n d n e w h o u s i n g p r o g r a m a s p a r t o f a l a r g e r e c o n o m i c d e v e l o p m e n t p r o g r a m , i m p r o v e i t s a b i l i t y t o c o m p e t e r e g i o n a l l y f o r r e s i d e n t i a l g r o w t h & r e i n f o r c e r e v i t a l i z a t i o n e f f o r t s .

7 5 - 1 2 5 u n i t sp o t e n t i a l 5 Y e a r D e m a n d f o r W o r k f o r c e H o u s i n g

The projected absorption of workforce housing is based

on the assumption that Huntingburg can capture some

por tion of the projec ted County-wide job growth . There

is some abil i ty to capture a greater share of the market i f

the City can capital ize on its qual ity of l i fe and create the

types of units needed to attract the employee market. A

majority of the shor t-term housing effor ts should focus

on bringing new single -family units onto the market. With

a decent housing stock to star t with, Huntingburg should

focus 50% of i ts effor t (35-70 units) on rehabilitation in

exist ing neighborhoods combined with infrastructure and

other neighborhood amenit ies. New construc tion (35-70

units) a lso presents an oppor tunity, i f the development is

within a well- designed neighborhood contex t located near

amenities, ser vices and employment clusters .




D e m a n d.

H U N T I N G B U R G N e a r D o w n t o w n J o b C l u s t e r M a r k e t Po t e n t i a l

E x i s t i n g J o b B a s e * 2 , 5 0 0 3 - 5 % 1 5 - 2 5

E s t i m a t e d A n n u a l J o b G r o w t h * * 1 , 2 7 5 0 - 1 % 0 - 3

E s t i m a t e d H o u s e h o l d G r o w t h * * * 1 - 2 1 0 - 2 5 % 1 - 2


| Dubois County Housing Strategy K I R K L A N D , W A

S T R AT E G Y 1 .

Focus on a compact area near exist ing job clusters and the Downtown area.

S T R AT E G Y 2 .

Reinforce exist ing neighborhoods near job clusters - both emerging / newer

neighborhoods near 12th Street and the histor ic core south of Downtown.

S T R AT E G Y 3 .

Emphasize curb appeal and unique market features that al low the City to

market the community ’s diverse housing options and small town quality of l i fe.

S T R AT E G Y 4 .

Create neighborhoods with a var iety of housing choices that integrates or

physical ly connects to surrounding jobs, ser vices and recreational oppor tunit ies.

S T R AT E G Y 5 .

Evaluate the role of Main and Jackson Streets as potential improved nor th-

south connectors between neighborhoods and the Downtown core.

* a c c o u n t s f o r a p p r ox i m a t e p r o d u c t i o n a n d s e r v i c e j o b s o n l y

* * b a s e d o n p r o j e c t e d g r o w t h o f 1 , 2 7 5 p r o d u c t i o n l e v e l j o b s w i t h i n t h e C o u n t y

* * * b a s e d o n l i m i t e d h o u s e -h o l d f o r m a t i o n t h a t i s p r o -j e c t e d f o r H u n t i n g b u r g


Taken from Rural by D esign - “most residents

also l ive within walk ing distance of typical town

amenit ies, such as schools, shops, churches, and

playgrounds. They often feel a real attachment to

their neighborhood and a definite sense of place

about their street, where they k now many of their

neighbors. When queried about what they l ike about

l iving in a tradit ional town, the same items sur face

t ime and again: they enjoy the var iety, convenience,

and neighborl iness that comes with l iving in such

places.” These features, already evident in many

of Dubois County ’s towns and cit ies, should be the

focal point of redevelopment, revital ization and new

development effor ts. The authentic sense of place /

community and access to tradit ional town amenit ies

is something that can be marketed and promoted to

improve regional competit iveness. Rural by D esign

is a vast col lection of design t ips and guidance,

development standards and relevant best practices

and case studies from around the countr y that are

applicable to Dubois County ’s housing effor ts.

R U R A L BY D E S I G Nc a s e s t u d y

1 0 0 - 1 7 5 u n i t sp o t e n t i a l 5 Y e a r D e m a n d f o r W o r k f o r c e H o u s i n g

As one of the largest concentrations of

jobs and potential job growth, Ferdinand

- if desired - is in a position to grow its

residential population base . There is a

need for addit ional workforce housing, both

for-rent and ownership that is currently

missing from the market. The Town’s

low vacanc y rate and limited supply of

units indicates an abi l i ty to absorb new

housing units i f they were made avai lable.

Addit ional ly, the Town has a locational

advantage over other par ts of Dubois

County due to its access to I -64 which could

translate to an oppor tunity to attrac t

additional regional households . To

increase its residential base, the strategy for

Ferdinand focuses on predominately new

construc tion single -family (75-125 units)

and the modernization / rehabilitation of

existing homes (15-25 units) near Main

Street . With a rental vacanc y at 0% there

is an obvious demand for quality multi-

family units . The Town could l ikely suppor t

between 25-50 new multi-family units over

the next 1-3 years.

F E R D I N A N D S T R AT E G Y.

g o a l : R e i n f o r c e M a i n S t r e e t ( H w y 1 6 2 ) a n d t h e N o r t h Fe r d i n a n d G a t e w a y b y e s t a b l i s h i n g n e w h o u s i n g o p p o r t u n i t i e s t h a t u t i l i z e r e m n a n t a g r i c u l t u r a l l a n d , u n d e r u t i l i z e d i n d u s t r i a l p a r c e l s a n d i n f i l l l o t s i n d e s i g n a t e d t a r g e t a r e a s .


S T R AT E G Y 1 .

Establ ish goals and objectives designed to stabl ize and / or grow the population

and reintroduce Ferdinand as a qual ity option within the larger regional market.

S T R AT E G Y 2 .

Focus the Town’s 5 year housing and redevelopment program at the Nor th

Gateway target area.

S T R AT E G Y 3 .

Reconfigure industr ial and underuti l ized proper ties for future s ingle -family

development.

S T R AT E G Y 4 .

Introduce new housing products along Main Street that create appropriate scale

and attractive design while addressing the need for newer workforce rentals.




D e m a n d.

F E R D I N A N D I n d u s t r i a l D r. J o b C l u s t e r M a r k e t Po t e n t i a l

E x i s t i n g J o b B a s e * 2 , 5 0 0 3 - 5 % 1 5 - 2 5

E s t i m a t e d A n n u a l J o b G r o w t h * * 1 , 2 7 5 1 0 - 1 5 % 6 - 1 0

E s t i m a t e d H o u s e h o l d G r o w t h * * * 0 0 % 2 - 3 * * * *


* a c c o u n t s f o r a p p r ox i m a t e p r o d u c t i o n a n d s e r v i c e j o b s o n l y * * b a s e d o n p r o j e c t e d g r o w t h o f 1 , 2 7 5 p r o d u c t i o n l e v e l j o b s w i t h i n t h e C o u n t y* * * b a s e d o n l i m i t e d h o u s e h o l d f o r m a t i o n p r o j e c t e d f o r Fe r d i n a n d* * * * t a r g e t e d e f f o r t s t o c h a n g e t r a j e c t o r y o f h o u s e h o l d g r o w t h a n d a t t r a c t r e g i o n a l h o u s e h o l d s


For Dubois County, economic development

is inherently l inked to the major employers’

abil ity to attrac t qualif ied employees and their

families to l ive and work in one of its many

cit ies and towns. A function of that abi l i ty is

the supply of housing, specif ical ly workforce

housing. For Dubois County to offer long-

term suppor t to one of i ts most valuable assets

- i ts high concentration of jobs - they must

adapt their economic development effor ts to

incorporate growing workforce housing options

near exist ing job clusters.

While tradit ional housing indicators are weak ,

employees represent an obvious shor t-term

market oppor tunity for housing development.

Exist ing options at affordable pr ice points are

dated, scattered and often lower qual ity units.

With average new construction values around

$260,000 per unit , local bui lders have primari ly

focused on meeting a higher income market

segment, leaving a gap in the much needed

workforce housing market. In order to br ing

new or renovated housing into the market, i t

must compete pr ice wise with these older, less

expensive options - identifying a need for some

type of inter vention. This inter vention wil l

l ikely come in as a “value -added” component of

a larger housing init iat ive. The response must

be as much about economic vital ity as i t is a

response to a specif ic housing need.

To this point, no one approach or tool wil l solve

Dubois County ’s current housing issues, but a

multi-faceted, organized approach wil l offer

the best results for not only the employers,

but the towns and cit ies, and ultimately the

residents who have already chosen Dubois

County as their home. By integrating economic

and community development, the recommended

approach aims to ser vice many different

constituent groups and improve the County ’s

abi l i ty to attract new residents and investments

in the future.

Independent of what direction is chosen

for future housing init iat ives, the selected

approach should be designed in a manner that

ensures both local community objectives are

met in addit ion to expanding housing options.

The community must define their individual

objectives but should focus on reinforcing

existing neighborhoods, developing new

neighborhoods with a sense of place, attrac ting

developers with the abil ity to provide desired

produc t types with added features at the right

price points and growing job clusters by mak ing

Dubois County a desirable place to l ive.

AC T I O N P L A No u t l i n i n g t h e


P I L O T P R O J E C T.

The goal of the proposed pi lot project is two-fold - define the market oppor tunities of the employee customer base and create local capacity that can transit ion into a long-term

county-wide housing init iat ive.

The housing market, most notably workforce housing, is not well- defined to those outside of Dubois County - but

presents a s ignif icant oppor tunity to those that understand it and k now how to take advantage of i t . Therefore,

investment of any scale has been l imited and does not adequately meet the needs of the exist ing employers and their

employees. There is a need to “prove” the market and help define the oppor tunit ies that exist within Dubois County.

By uti l iz ing a demonstration or pi lot program, the County wil l be able to effectively demonstrate the strength of the

employee market to potential developers, investors, employers and future customers. The project wil l a lso show how

community- or iented amenit ies l ike - mixed-use neighborhoods, open space, mix of product types and qual ity design -

become cr it ical pieces in attracting a regional market to Dubois County.

A pi lot project al lows those involved with local housing init iat ives and development a chance to build capacity

that currently doesn’t exist within any one municipal ity. The need to hire mult iple staffs and engage employers,

developers and customers individual ly is l imited and wil l greatly reduce the t ime commitment of each

implementation par tner. Even more, by par tnering several municipal it ies and organizations, the overal l burden and

potential r isk associated with a new housing program is l imited for the individuals. A pi lot project becomes a way to

“test ” out var ious methods and organizational structures with no long-term commitments or fear of tak ing on more

than any one organization can handle.

3 0 - 5 0 u n i t sp o t e n t i a l s c a l e o f 1 s t j o i n t e f f o r t

d e m o n s t r a t i o n p r o j e c t t o i n c l u d e o w n e r & r e n t e r p r o d u c t i n a l l 3 c o m m u n i t i e s

w h y c o u n ty - w i d e a p p r o a c h? To many

potential investors, employees and residents

Dubois County is viewed as one community.

As a diverse community of 42,000 people with

different l i festyle options for ever yone, Dubois

County competes better than it can as three

smaller communities with l imited options.

This requires cooperation between the cit ies

and towns with the shared goal of economic

prosperity for the entire County.

$ 1 5 0 , 0 0 0t a r g e t e d p r i c e p o i n t f o r o w n e r s h i p

w i t h p r i c e s r a n g i n g f r o m $ 9 0 , 0 0 0 - $ 2 0 0 , 0 0 0

$ 6 7 5 p e r m o n t ht a r g e t e d p r i c e p o i n t f o r r e n t a l u n i t s

w i t h m o n t h l y r a t e s b e t w e e n $ 3 5 0 - $ 1 , 0 0 0

3 : 2r a t i o o f n e w c o n s t r u c t i o n t o

r e h a b , b u t b a s e d o n s p e c i f i c n e e d , a v a i l a b i l i t y o f l a n d a n d p r o d u c t


2 0 1 5 2 0 1 6 2 0 1 7 2 0 1 8 2 0 1 9

K e y Ta s k Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4

D e f i n e G o a l s / O b j e c t i v e s o f D u b o i s C o u n t y H o u s i n g Pr o g r a m

O r g a n i z e Pa r t n e r s & B e g i n O u t r e a c h t o O t h e r Fu n d e r s

I d e n t i f y H o u s i n g Pa r t n e r & D e f i n e R o l e / E x p e c t a t i o n s

E s t a b l i s h H o u s i n g Pr o g r a m Fr a m e w o r k

D e f i n e & I d e n t i f y D e m o n s t r a t i o n / P i l o t Pr o j e c t

Ta r g e t S i t e s f o r A c q u i s i t i o n / L a n d C o n t r o l

Wo r k w i t h Lo c a l B a n k s t o D e v e l o p Fa v o r a b l e Fi n a n c i n g

B e g i n D i s c u s s i o n s w i t h D e v e l o p e r / B u i l d e r

B u i l d M o d e l U n i t s f o r b o t h R e h a b a n d N e w H o u s i n g Pr o d u c t

M a r k e t i n g & O u t r e a c h t o H o m e - B u y e r s

Pr e - S e l l U n i t s t o Q u a l i f i e d H o m e - B u y e r s

O n - g o i n g C o n s t r u c t i o n o f N e w a n d R e n o v a t e d U n i t s

E v a l u a t e O u t c o m e s a n d A d j u s t / E x p a n d t o M e e t D e m a n d

Pr o j e c t e d C o m p l e t i o n o f 5 0 u n i t D e m o n s t r a t i o n Pr o j e c t

P R O J E C T R O L E S .

P R O J E C T T I M E L I N E .

Pa r t n e r s.

K e y Ta s kD e f i n e G o a l s / O b j e c t i v e s o f D u b o i s C o u n t y H o u s i n g Pr o g r a m

O r g a n i z e Pa r t n e r s & B e g i n O u t r e a c h t o O t h e r Fu n d e r s

I d e n t i f y H o u s i n g Pa r t n e r & D e f i n e R o l e / E x p e c t a t i o n s

E s t a b l i s h H o u s i n g Pr o g r a m Fr a m e w o r k

D e f i n e & I d e n t i f y D e m o n s t r a t i o n / P i l o t Pr o j e c t

Ta r g e t S i t e s f o r A c q u i s i t i o n / L a n d C o n t r o l

Wo r k w i t h Lo c a l B a n k s t o D e v e l o p Fa v o r a b l e Fi n a n c i n g

B e g i n D i s c u s s i o n s w i t h D e v e l o p e r / B u i l d e r

B u i l d M o d e l U n i t s f o r b o t h R e h a b a n d N e w H o u s i n g Pr o d u c t

M a r k e t i n g & O u t r e a c h t o H o m e - B u y e r s

Pr e - S e l l U n i t s t o Q u a l i f i e d H o m e - B u y e r s

O n - g o i n g C o n s t r u c t i o n o f N e w a n d R e n o v a t e d U n i t s

E v a l u a t e O u t c o m e s a n d A d j u s t / E x p a n d t o M e e t D e m a n d

Pr o j e c t e d C o m p l e t i o n o f 5 0 u n i t D e m o n s t r a t i o n Pr o j e c t

D E V E L O P E R / B U I L D E R ( D )

P U B L I C S E C T O R ( P )

H O U S I N G P A R T N E R ( H )

O T H E R F U N D E R S ( F )

E M P L O Y E R S ( E )

(E) (P) (H) (F) (D)

*s e e p a g e 3 2 f o r i n f o r m a t i o n o n k e y p l a y e r s


To t a l Co s t .Pe r U n i t

Co s t . *

U s e s .a c q u i s i t i o n 1 $ 4 5 0 , 0 0 0 $ 1 0 , 0 0 0

c o n s t r u c t i o n 2 $ 5 , 4 6 0 , 0 0 0 $ 1 2 1 , 3 3 3

s i t e c o s t s $ 1 1 2 , 5 0 0 $ 2 , 5 0 0

a r c h i t e c t u r e & e n g i n e e r i n g ( A & E ) $ 2 1 8 , 4 0 0 $ 4 , 8 5 3

s o f t c o s t s $ 2 4 0 , 9 0 0 $ 5 , 3 5 3

c o n s t r u c t i o n m a n a g e m e n t $ 1 1 1 , 4 5 0 $ 2 , 4 7 7

f i n a n c i n g $ 3 5 , 0 0 0 $ 7 7 8

r e s e r v e s $ 6 7 , 5 0 0 $ 1 , 5 0 0

To t a l P r o j e c t Co s t $ 6 , 6 9 6 , 7 5 0 $ 1 4 8 , 7 9 4

S O U R C E S & U S E S B U D G E T.



O T H E R F U N D E R S ( F )E M P L O Y E R S ( E )

H O M E - B U Y E R S ( B ) P U B L I C S E C T O R ( P )

To t a l Fu n d i n g.Pe r U n i t

Fu n d i n g. *

S o u r c e s .h o m e - b u y e r d o w n p a y m e n t $ 2 0 0 , 8 7 3 $ 4 , 4 6 4

l o c a l i n v e s t m e n t $ 8 0 3 , 4 9 0 $ 1 0 , 0 0 0

o t h e r p u b l i c i n v e s t m e n t $ 3 3 4 , 7 8 8 $ 1 6 , 6 6 7

c o n v e n t i o n a l d e b t $ 5 , 2 9 4 , 8 7 8 $ 1 1 7 , 6 6 4

To t a l P r o j e c t Co s t $ 6 , 6 9 6 , 7 5 0 $ 1 4 8 , 7 9 4

1 a s s u m e s a v e r a g e l a n d c o s t o f $ 3 0 , 0 0 0 p e r a c r e , a v e r a g e h o m e p r i c e o f $ 2 0 , 0 0 0 a n d r e q u i r e s s o m e t o s i g n i f i c a n t r e n o v a t i o n a n d $ 5 , 0 0 0 p e r u n d e v e l o p e d i n f i l l p a r c e l

2 a s s u m e s a v e r a g e n e w c o n s t r u c t i o n c o s t o f $ 9 0 / s q . f t . , r e n o v a t i o n c o s t o f $ 8 5 / s q . f t . a n d a v e r a g e h o m e s i z e o f 1 , 4 0 0 s q . f t .

* a s s u m e s 4 5 n e w o r r e h a b i l i t a t e d u n i t s a s p a r t o f t h e d e m o n s t r a t i o n p r o j e c t - 1 5 r e n o v a t e d u n i t s , 1 5 i n f i l l n e w c o n s t r u c t i o n a n d 1 5 n e w c o n s t r u c t i o n u n i t s i n n e w o r e x p a n d e d n e i g h b o r h o o d


TO O L S & R E S O U R C E Si d e n t i f y i n g

In order to achieve the key objectives of a joint

housing effor t , i t is necessar y to have a complete

“toolk it ” of resources and funding sources

to assist with the task . Tools can be used to

faci l i tate development, reduce f inancial r isk or

increase affordabil ity of units. With each tool

there is a different intended user - developers and

home -buyers - but some may be f lexible enough

for both. The tools provided are intended to

increase employment attraction in the targeted

job cluster areas, develop an economic and

housing development program that benefits

businesses and reinforces core neighborhoods

with addit ional investment and establishes an

effective public-pr ivate par tnership focused on

accomplishing those tasks.

E M P L O Y E R S . P U B L I C S E C T O R .

H O U S I N G PA R T N E R .

H O M E - B U Y E R S . D E V E L O P E R / B U I L D E R . O T H E R F U N D E R S .

The employers are a cr it ical component of identifying and attracting qual i f ied home -

buyers and wil l benefit from improved employee attraction and retention which wil l

faci l i tate their projected expansion plans.

The public sector wil l be pr imari ly responsible for infrastructure improvements, expedited

entit lement processes and pre - development activit ies. They wil l benefit from an improved

and expanded tax base as well as a greater abi l i ty to attract new residents and businesses.

The housing par tner may be an exist ing or newly created nonprofit or for profit entity that par tners with the employers and public sector to lead housing effor ts within Dubois

County. This organization or individual wil l be responsible for organizing and leading the housing init iat ives which may include activit ies such as col laborating with the par tners to meet broader community/ economic development goals, pre - development, marketing and

sales, construction management and transactions with potential home -buyers.

Home -buyers wil l benefit from an improved process

as well as a menu of f inancial resources that make Dubois County a

more desirable location.

Benefits to the builders wil l be both f inancial in

the form of incentives and ease of entit lement as well as identif ication of qual i f ied customers.

Federal, State and private funders wil l br ing resources

that meet their goals of affordabil ity, homeownership

and community/economic development.

D U B O I S CO U N T Y H O U S I N G P R O G R A M O R G A N I Z AT I O N F R A M E W O R K


Us e r. Pr ov i d e r.

To o l s a n d R e s o u r c e s *C o n s t r u c t i o n Fi n a n c i n g

D o w n Pa y m e n t A s s i s t a n c e ( D PA )H o u s i n g C o u n s e l i n g

H o m e - B u y e r I d e n t i f i c a t i o nH o m e O w n e r Ta x C r e d i t s

I n d i v i d u a l D e v e l o p m e n t A c c o u n t ( I D A )I n t e r e s t R a t e B u y - D o w n

L a n d A s s e m b l yL a n d Wr i t e - D o w n

Lo a n G u a r a n t e eS e c o n d M o r t g a g e

Ta x A b a t e m e n tWe a l t h B u i l d i n g

The Indiana Housing and Community Development Authority ( IHCDA)

has a var iety of programs and incentives for both housing developers

and home -buyers, with the goals of creating expanded housing

oppor tunit ies and revital iz ing neighborhoods. Several programs

would be beneficial in assist ing Dubois County grow their supply of

workforce housing. For more information vis it www.in.gov/ihcda.

• Affordable Home - below market interest rates

• My Home Conventional - low, f ixed interest rate

• Next Home - down payment assistance of up to 4%

• Mor tgage Credit Cer t i f icate - 20-25% tax credit on interest

• Development Fund - up to $500,000 loan on el igible activit ies

I H C D A H O U S I N G P R O G R A M Sl e a r n m o r e

* a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n o n e a c h t o o l p r o v i d e d o n t h e f o l l o w i n g p a g e s

H O U S I N G TO O L S & R E S O U R C E S O V E R V I E W

(H) (F) (P) (E)(D) (B)



O T H E R F U N D E R S ( F )E M P L O Y E R S ( E )

H O M E - B U Y E R S ( B ) P U B L I C S E C T O R ( P )


TAX

AB

AT

EM

EN

T.

For many home -buyers the most diff icult period in adjusting to the expense of buying a home is in the

f irst few years. Tax abatement al lows a s ignif icant expense to be phased in over a period of t ime. The tax

abatement tool is a direct benefit to the home -buyer and can be used as a pol ic y tool to suppor t local

neighborhood revital ization objectives.

Employer Assisted Housing (EAH) comes in a var iety of forms from programming to

actual development and ownership of residential units. Typical ly i t comes in the form

of a f inancial incentive from the employer to the employee to assist with housing cost -

l ikely in the form of down payment assistance. Cash contr ibutions may be either grants,

loans or some type of matching that al lows employees to purchase housing around

employment centers. O ther EAH programs may involve providing funding for a nonprofit

organization to develop and manage a program, often in col laboration with other area

employers. While employers are providing f inancial incentives it can be a cost effective

means of providing a benefit to the employee. In some industr ies EAH programing costs

less than the cost associated with recruit ing and training new employees and assists

with attraction and stabil i ty of the workforce. Addit ional ly, i t al lows businesses to lead

community revital ization effor ts and build a better qual ity of l i fe for their famil ies as well

as their employees.

s o u r c e : E m p l o y e r - A s s i s t e d H o u s i n g R e s o u r c e G u i d e - G r e a t e r M i n n e s o t a H o u s i n g Fu n d

E M P LOY E R A S S I S T E D H O U S I N Gl e a r n m o r e

SE

CO

ND

MO

RT

GA

GE

.

A Second Mor tgage Program is a form of down payment assistance. I ts purpose is to both make it easier

for a homebuyer to qual i fy for a conventional mor tgage and to assure that the mor tgage payments are

affordable. The second mor tgage is normally offered by a local program sponsor and can be based on

household income and other program objectives. The second mor tgage amount var ies but typical ly fal ls

within 5% to 10% of the home purchase pr ice. The second mor tgage i f in loan form often carr ies more

favorable terms compared to a conventional mor tgage. A loan deferral or termination can occur i f program

condit ions are satisf ied often over a 5-10 year period. There are several potential funding sources to

suppor t a second mor tgage program. I t is not unusual to see Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)

or Home Investment Par tnership (HOME) monies used to fund this type of tool. These federal monies which

are avai lable directly to cit ies and/or the State of Indiana can be used to suppor t the housing needs of low

and moderate income famil ies. In addit ion, an employer assisted housing program can ser ve as a vehicle

for employer contr ibutions to be used for the purpose of providing second mor tgages to home -buyers.

L E A D

E X PA N D E D I N F O R M AT I O N O N H O U S I N G TO O L S & R E S O U R C E S


P U B L I C S E C T O R ( P )L E A D


DO

WN

PA

YM

EN

T A

SS

ISTA

NC

E.

A down payment assistance program typical ly introduces a “new ” source of outside funds designed to

assist a homebuyer in meeting a mor tgage loan provider ’s down payment requirements while at the

same t ime reducing the mor tgage amount. The down payment assistance can range from a small token

contr ibution to satisfying the total funds needed. Often in those areas where housing prices are inf lated

or not at an affordable level the mor tgage assistance tends to be at the higher end.

There are often several rules or commitments that the home -buyer must agree to in order to be

considered for the assistance. They can include but are not l imited to the fol lowing -

• Must satisfy the programs objectives typical ly t ied to household income and/or geography,

• Must qual i fy for the mor tgage amount required to purchase the home,

• Must personally be able to provide a por tion of the down payment amount (often 3-10%),

• Must agree to l ive in the house for a specif ied period of t ime, and

• Must agree to par t icipate in housing counsel ing classes (subject to home -buyers experience.)

The down payment assistance can be provided as a loan or as a deferred loan/grant. I f a loan, i t is often

provided with favorable terms ( i .e. lower interest rate and extended t ime on principle payments) . I f the

latter, the home -buyer must be in good standing with mor tgage provider as well as in compliance with

the program requirements.

INT

ER

ES

T B

UY

-DO

WN

.

One tool that can be used to reduce the monthly housing expenses for lower-income homeowners is an

interest rate buy- down program. This program al lows a third par ty funder - potential ly a nonprofit housing

organization or employer - to either pay some por tion of a home -buyers monthly interest payment or to

pay an upfront fee, effectively lowering their interest rate. As the interest payments decrease, the amount

paid by the third par ty funder may be reduced or discontinued. This tool is most appropriate in higher

cost housing markets and when affordable product is in l imited supply.

MO

RT

GA

GE

AS

SIS

TAN

CE

. A Mor tgage Assistance Program is designed to help home -buyers secure affordable mor tgages. The

programs normally offer lower down payment requirements, below market interest rates and reduced

closing costs. Guarantees are also provided, in most cases through public-sector backed mor tgage

insurance programs that encourage lenders to loan to households that may be considered a s l ightly higher

r isk given the lender ’s under writ ing requirements. Both the United States Depar tment of Agriculture

(USDA) and the Indiana Housing and Community Development Authority ( IHCDA) offer programs that are

designed to secure mor tgage loans for households that are deemed to be reasonable credit r isk but are

f inding it dif f icult to qual i fy for conventional f inancing.

L E A D H O U S I N G P A R T N E R ( H )




HO

US

ING

CO

UN

SE

LIN

G.

A housing counsel ing program can be an effective tool to inform f irst t ime and inexperienced home -buyers

about the responsibi l i t ies and pitfal ls associated with home buying and ownership. Issues ranging from

avai lable f inancing programs to assessing a household’s housing needs to maximizing housing value can

be addressed in a well-structured housing counsel ing program. The housing counsel ing program may be a

col laborative effor t between f inancial inst itutions, local housing entit ies and public sponsors who have an

interest in promoting local housing init iat ives.

TAX

CR

ED

ITS

.

The Indiana Housing and Community Development Authority ( IHCDA) provides lower-income f irst t ime

home -buyers with an annual tax credit of up to $2,000 on their federal taxes over the entire term of the

buyer ’s mor tgage. The annual credit is based on a 20-35% tax credit rate on the buyer ’s yearly interest

payments and increases the amount of the home -buyers income that is avai lable for other expenses

such as home repairs, improvements or savings. Income l imits for the program are based on 125% of

the Area Median Income (AMI.) The Mor tgage Credit Cer t i f icate can be used with both conventional and

government mor tgages and can be paired with other IHCDA programs.

IDA

.

An Individual Development Account ( IDA) is a State or Federal matched savings account for households

earning less than 175% of the Federal Pover ty Guidel ines (2015: $42,437 for a family of 4) and are

employed. Households receive a $3 dollar match for each dollar saved up to $4,800 match over the

required 3 year period. Par t icipants are required to deposit $300 annually to remain in the program. This

program creates oppor tunit ies for individual and family wealth building and provides a structure and

incentive for saving for future home - ownership, down payments or other large investments.

LO

AN

GU

AR

AN

TE

E.

Loan guarantees can be offered to “ low r isk ” households that f ind it dif f icult to qual i fy for a conventional

mor tgage. The loan guarantee can be used to address perceived credit r isk by the lender. Often the loan

guarantee is not for the ful l mor tgage amount.

There are a number of loan guarantee programs designed to ser ve households either with l imited incomes

or credit issues. Loan guarantee program platforms can be through an exist ing institutional lender/

program entity such as the United States Depar tment of Agriculture (USDA) or established local ly by a

program sponsor.




O T H E R F U N D E R S ( F )L E A D


LA

ND

WR

ITE

-DO

WN

.

Depending on the community, land can comprise 10-20% of the cost of a home. In urban in-f i l l areas there

may have been both an acquisit ion and site clean-up cost (demolit ion, s ite issue) that creates an addit ional

expense. In cer tain cases the land parcel may both be expensive as well as elusive – individual land parcels

may be diff icult to secure. Recognizing this, a public sector or mission driven entity may work to secure

targeted land parcels to make avai lable to either developers or home -buyers to encourage single -family

construction and homeownership. In such instances it is not unusual for the entity to write - down the cost

of the land to the builder/buyer. This can make a s ignif icant difference in enticing new home development

and also help the builder/buyer secure the necessar y f inancing for the building activity. The land write -

down is often t ied to specif ic program requirements and objectives. The assistance with land cost can also

be provided in some form of deferred payment.

CO

NS

TR

UC

TIO

N F

INA

NC

ING

.

New residential development programs often require that model homes be built and made avai lable for a

period of t ime. The homes are used to market an area or program and to inform the targeted home -buyer

market about the oppor tunit ies t ied to the new housing program.

Construction Finanncing Assistance (CFA) is intended to assist and incentivize the builder / developer

with their f inancing for new housing construction. I t is not unusual for bui lders to f ind it dif f icult

or undesirable to borrow monies to build on speculation or to provide model homes. In such cases

construction f inancing may either be diff icult to obtain or carr y an above market interest rate. In such

cases the builder feels as though he/she may be carr ying higher r isk than they wish to.

In the case of a CFA project, an entity ( i .e. public or program sponsor) wil l provide some level of guarantee

for the construction f inancing to build speculative or model homes. The assistance may range from help

with the interest rate paid by the builder during the t ime in which the home is under construction and

being marketed, to guaranteeing a por tion of the construction loan. Rarely wil l the guarantee be for more

than 50% of the loan amount and often much less. Both the f inancial inst itution and the builder wil l feel

the loan exposure rests somewhere between the construction loan amount and the minimum sales pr ice

required to real ize a sale. The guarantor wil l often require the builder/developer to leave its profit and

some por tion of i ts overhead in the home unti l the guarantee is no longer in place and/or the home is sold.

BU

YE

R I

DE

NT

IFIC

AT

ION

.

Having a readily avai lable pool of qual i f ied buyers can al leviate or manage some of the r isk developers

and home -builders face in an uncer tain market. Home -buyer identif ication may be a joint effor t by

par t icipating employers and the housing par tner to market oppor tunit ies and incentives to potential

buyers. This wil l require effor t on the par t of the employer to be sure that their employees k now the

resources and f inancial assistance are avai lable and how to access them. By connecting the qual i f ied

buyers with developers and builders, the employers are ser ving a cr it ical function - ensuring there is

suff ic ient demand to suppor t creation of new or improved housing units.

P U B L I C S E C T O R ( P )L E A D

O T H E R F U N D E R S ( F )L E A D

L E A D E M P L O Y E R S ( E )


There is no one tool, resource or incentive to get the job done, but l ikely a combination of two or three are

needed and wil l var y on a case -by- case basis. Below is an example of how the tools and funding sources

can be layered together to make purchasing a home in Dubois County a value proposit ion. Incentivizing

households to purchase homes within the County is a win-win for al l involved par t ies - i t expands the

municipal it ies’ tax base, improves the qual ity of l i fe in target neighborhoods and eases employee attraction

and retention effor ts of the local employers while strengthening the employer- employee bond.

The fol lowing three examples demonstrate how tools such as down payment assistance, second mor tgages

and tax abatement can effectively reduce the exist ing barr iers to affordable homeownership. The models

assume that most production level employees are unl ikely to have suff icient savings and f inancial standing

to suppor t a conventional loan and down payment. Using these assumptions a conventional, community/

employer loan program and neighborhood reinforcement model were developed and show potential savings

to the homeowners and includes a 3% program overhead charge to account for administer ing the programs.

Each model is to be used as an example and al l aspects - from interest rates to down payment amounts - are

subject to change based on the lending requirements of each f inancial inst itution.

The housing par tner and the home -buyer

would work with local banks to determine

a financing struc ture that satisfies local

mor tgage under writing requirements, while

sti l l creating a value proposition for the

employee. Under this scenario, the employee

would work directly with the selected housing

par tner to locate and purchase a qual i f ied home

- most l ikely within a targeted development or

neighborhood. This model would assume that the

employee would be required to occupy the home

for a specif ic period of t ime and would potential ly

also have requirements t ied to job tenure with

their current employer. This t ies the incentives to

the larger community and economic development

objectives such as homeownership, community

investment and employee retention.

This model assumes the homeowner is purchasing

a $150,000 home and receiving a forgivable loan

to assist with meeting under writ ing standards.

Te r m s.

C o m m u n i t y / E m p l o y e r L o a n .m o r t g a g e t e r m 3 0 y e a r s

i n t e r e s t r a t e 1 4 . 5 %

d o w n p a y m e n t 2 1 % / $ 1 , 5 4 5

s e c o n d m o r t g a g e 3 6 % / $ 9 , 2 7 0

t o t a l m o r t g a g e a m o u n t $ 1 4 3 , 6 8 5

m o n t h l y m o r t g a g e p a y m e n t $ 7 3 5

i n s u r a n c e ( P M I ) 4 0 . 2 5 % / $ 3 0

m o n t h l y p r o p e r t y t a xe s 5 1 % / $ 6 0

To t a l M o n t h l y P a y m e n t 6 $ 8 2 5t o t a l m o n t h l y s a v i n g s ( $ 1 1 5 )

s a v i n g s o v e r l i f e o f l o a n ( $ 4 1 , 4 0 0 )

C O M M U N I T Y / E M P L O Y E R L O A N .

1 a s s u m e s s l i g h t l y b e t t e r i n t e r e s t r a t e d u e t o c o m m u n i t y /e m p l o y e r p a r t i c i p a t i o n a n d i n v e s t m e n t

2 s i g n i f i c a n t l y r e d u c e d d o w n p a y m e n t a m o u n t t o b e s u p p l e m e n t e d b y a n o n - t r a d i t i o n a l s o u r c e o f f u n d i n g

3 a c t s a s f o r g i v a b l e l o a n i f a l l r e q u i r e m e n t s ( c o m m u n i t y o b j e c t i v e s , h o u s i n g a n d e m p l o y m e n t t e n u r e ) a r e m e t

4 a s s u m e s b a n k w i l l h a v e l e s s s t r i n g e n t r e q u i r e m e n t s d u e t o c o m m u n i t y / e m p l o y e r p a r t i c i p a t i o n

5 a s s u m e s a g r a d u a t e d t a x a b a t e m e n t e q u a l t o 5 0 % a v e r a g e r e d u c t i o n o v e r t h e 1 0 - y e a r t i m e p e r i o d

H O U S I N G T O O L S I N A C T I O N .


By uti l iz ing a conventional loan, an employee

must work directly with a real estate broker and

bank to locate and purchase a home. This is the

most traditional method of purchasing a home,

but may be unrealistic for many produc tion

level employees. Given the modest incomes of

many employees, down payment amounts and

the abi l i ty to satisfy loan under writ ing, may be

impediments to homeownership under this model.


a $150,000 home using current mor tgage rates.

C O N V E N T I O N A L L O A N .Te r m s.

C o n v e n t i o n a l L o a n .m o r t g a g e t e r m 3 0 y e a r s

i n t e r e s t r a t e 5 %

d o w n p a y m e n t * 1 0 % / $ 1 5 , 4 5 0



i n s u r a n c e ( P M I ) 0 . 5 % / $ 6 0

m o n t h l y p r o p e r t y t a xe s 1 % / $ 1 2 9

To t a l M o n t h l y P a y m e n t $ 9 4 0

The Neighborhood (Reinvestment) Loan would

target inf i l l and rehabil itat ion oppor tunit ies

in exist ing neighborhoods adjacent to job

clusters. The public sector and housing par tner

would work together to identify distressed

single -family homes to purchase and renovate

to be made avai lable as par t of the employee -

purchase program. Employers would work

with the housing par tner and local banks to

determine a financing struc ture that satisfies

under writing requirements, while sti l l creating

a value proposition for the home -buyer. This

model incorporates occupanc y and employment

requirements that directly l ink the housing

incentives to larger community and economic

development objectives such as increased

homeownership, neighborhood stabil ization and

employee attraction and retention.


a recently renovated home ($131,000 *) and

receiving a forgivable loan to assist with meeting

under writ ing standards.

Te r m s.

N e i g h b o r h o o d L o a n .m o r t g a g e t e r m 3 0 y e a r s

i n t e r e s t r a t e 1 4 . 5 %

d o w n p a y m e n t 2 1 % / $ 1 , 3 1 1

s e c o n d m o r t g a g e 3 3 % / $ 3 , 9 3 3



i n s u r a n c e ( P M I ) 0 . 5 % / $ 5 5

m o n t h l y p r o p e r t y t a xe s 1 % / $ 1 0 9

To t a l M o n t h l y P a y m e n t 6 $ 8 0 8t o t a l m o n t h l y s a v i n g s ( $ 1 3 2 )

s a v i n g s o v e r l i f e o f l o a n ( $ 4 7 , 5 0 0 )

N E I G H B O R H O O D L O A N .

1 a s s u m e s s l i g h t l y b e t t e r i n t e r e s t r a t e d u e t o c o m m u n i t y /e m p l o y e r p a r t i c i p a t i o n a n d i n v e s t m e n t

2 s i g n i f i c a n t l y r e d u c e d d o w n p a y m e n t a m o u n t t o b e s u p p l e m e n t e d b y n o n - t r a d i t i o n a l s o u r c e o f f u n d i n g

3 a c t s a s a f o r g i v a b l e l o a n i f a l l r e q u i r e m e n t s ( c o m m u n i t y o b j e c t i v e s , h o u s i n g a n d e m p l o y m e n t t e n u r e ) a r e m e t

* r e n o v a t e d h o m e p r i c e a s s u m e s a c q u i s i t i o n c o s t o f $ 5 0 , 0 0 0 , h o m e s i z e o f 1 , 2 0 0 , r e n o v a t i o n c o s t a t $ 6 5 / s q . f t . a n d a 3 % p r o g r a m f e e . I n o r d e r t o h a v e a r e a d y s u p p l y o f q u a l i f i e d h o m e s , i t i s a s s u m e d t h e h o u s i n g p a r t n e r - i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h t h e e m p l o y e r, p u b l i c a n d p r i v a t e s e c t o r s - w i l l b e r e s p o n s i b l e f o r a c q u i s i t i o n , r e h a b a n d o t h e r n e i g h b o r h o o d i n v e s t m e n t s n e e d e d t o c r e a t e m a r k e t - f r i e n d l y u n i t s f o r t h i s p r o g r a m .

L E A R N M O R E .

for more information please contact

ED COLE, PRESIDENT Dubois Strong 961 College Avenue Jasper, IN 47546 (812) 482-9650

final dubois county housing strategies

News & Politics

housing tools

housing choices

growth loss

p o p u

higher growth totals

i o n d u b o i s c

e s s c o

r r i c