HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023/10/09 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Study SessionAGENDA
OCTOBER 9, 2023
6:30 p.m. City council study session – council chambers
Discussion items
1. 45 min. Race, equity and inclusion policy framework
2. 90 min. Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer
3. 15 min. Proposed agenda topic
Written reports
4. Housing programs updates
The St. Louis Park City Council meets in person at St. Louis Park City Hall, 5005 Minnetonka
Blvd. Members of the public can attend the meeting in person, watch by webstream at
bit.ly/watchslpcouncil, or watch on local cable (Comcast SD channel 17/HD channel 859).
Recordings are available to watch on the city’s YouTube channel at
https://www.youtube.com/user/slpcable, usually within 24 hours of the end of the council
meeting or study session.
The council chambers is equipped with Hearing Loop equipment and headsets are available to borrow. If you need special
accommodations or have questions about the meeting, please call 952.924.2505.
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: October 9, 2023
Discussion item: 1
Executive summary
Title: Race, equity and inclusion policy framework
Recommended action: None currently. This report provides an update on the design of a race,
equity and inclusion policy for future council acceptance.
Policy consideration: None at this time.
Summary: St. Louis Park has affirmed its dedication to advancing Race, Equity and Inclusion
(REI) as a strategic priority, with the goal of being a leader in this field. As part of this
unwavering commitment, the city is in the process of creating a comprehensive REI policy. This
policy is designed to focus on internal operations, with the intention of resulting in a
comprehensive strategy for internal and external change.
To ensure the policy accurately encompasses a wide variety of perspectives and concerns, a
series of focused discussions were held with a wide variety of stakeholders around four central
themes: accountability, communication, community engagement and internal engagement.
Staff is providing this update to council before finalizing a draft REI policy, which will be vetted
and refined through further internal and external engagement. The council will be asked to
accept the final REI policy.
Financial or budget considerations: None
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in racial equity
and inclusion in order to create a more just and inclusive community for all.
Supporting documents: REI policy phase 1 themes
Prepared by: Radious Guess, race, equity and inclusion director
Michael Birchard, REI consultant
Reviewed by: St. Louis Park leadership team
Jocelyn Hernandez-Swanson, race, equity and inclusion specialist
Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 1) Page 2
Title: Race, equity and inclusion policy framework
Discussion
Background: In the United States today, structural racism drives outcome gaps between
historically marginalized communities across every indicator for success from birth to death,
from infant mortality to life expectancy. Often, these gaps are explained away by blaming
individual people – promoting “hard work” as the way to get ahead. Hard work is important but
may be of little effect in the face of underlying systems that perpetuate inequities.
Advancing racial equity means closing the gaps so that race does not predict one’s success,
while simultaneously improving outcomes for all. Because underlying systems are the force
driving inequities, the focus must be on structural transformation. To close the gaps, the city is
centering race, equity and inclusion (REI) to transform policies, institutions and structures. This
helps target improvements for those most burdened by racial inequity.
Residents, staff, elected officials and others expect the city to live up to its adopted REI
strategic priority. This commitment involves ensuring diverse voices are heard and included in
decision-making processes and using a REI lens to review and assess city policies, procedures
and processes. Leadership’s visible support and communication about REI initiatives are also
seen as essential. Community feedback and community engagement, especially with historically
marginalized communities, are pivotal in making city government more accessible and
responsive.
As the racial landscape in the United States changes, it is also important to recognize that
greater numbers do not equal greater power. Even as historically marginalized communities
become larger numerical populations, their daily lives will not change unless the systems and
institutions that create barriers to opportunity undergo transformation. Overwhelmingly, social
economic indicators, from housing to criminal justice to health access, demonstrate that
historically marginalized communities face disproportionately unequal outcomes. These
conditions will not automatically change with the increase in the populations of historically
marginalized groups. The City of St. Louis Park works together to correct course through
thoughtful and inclusive programs and services.
We work to build internal and external capacity for REI work through coalition building,
convenings, leadership development, workshops and trainings.
Present considerations: The City of St. Louis Park has a strategic priority of being a leader in
REI. In 2016, the city participated in a yearlong program with the Government Alliance on Race
and Equity (GARE) that formalized its commitment to advance REI. Since then, city leadership
has made collaborative efforts to create a culture that encourages learning and acting with REI
in the forefront of decision making. To sustain this culture externally as well as internally, city
departments are actively working with the REI division to embed an REI analysis into policies
and systems. This work, coupled with advisory teams or workgroups such as employee resource
groups (ERGs) and the race equity employee leaders (REEL) team, provides foundational
support.
The REI division regularly consults and collaborates with GARE, League of Minnesota Cities and
Race Forward to keep up with the latest approaches in this field. REI division staff also
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 1) Page 3
Title: Race, equity and inclusion policy framework
participate regularly with a cohort of municipal REI practitioners from across the state of
Minnesota who share personal and professional experience and intersectional best practices
for race equity and organizational psychology. These resources equip city staff with tools to
effectively talk about racism and address systemic racism across our jurisdiction.
The scope of the REI policy is internal, with a focus on city operations. The impacts of the policy
will be felt broadly in the community by creating clarity and accountability for the city’s
commitment to REI. The policy development process includes two phases of engagement, input
and feedback. The input phase included establishing a volunteer group of staff members – a
design team – to help guide the policy development as well as several focus groups and
interviews with different groups working closely in or with the city. These included ERGs, the
REEL team, representatives from union leadership, the Human Rights Commission, council
members and the city leadership team. These stakeholders were included in the first phase of
engagement due to the level of responsibility we anticipate they will have to implement the
policy and the impact the policy will have on their day-to-day work. Responses resulted in the
four themes below. Following this report is a summary of the engagement responses.
• Accountability – Feedback from stakeholders emphasized the need for accountability to
support the strategic priority of REI which includes data-driven accountability, clear
accountability measures, consistent enforcement of policies and a commitment to
measurable outcomes.
• Communication – Key themes included the need for transparent communication that
effectively and explicitly demonstrates the city’s commitment and efforts to being
leaders in REI while remaining relevant and accessible to the broader community.
• Community Engagement – Comments highlighted the importance of broadening
community outreach strategies; building, engaging and sustaining relationships with
historically marginalized communities; continuously enhancing methods to authentically
seek community feedback.
• Internal Engagement – Feedback from stakeholders included training and
accountability, leadership commitment, support of employee resource group and REEL
team participation, shared responsibility (employee and manager) for employee growth
in their REI knowledge and creating an overall supportive environment for staff involved
in REI work.
Based on the engagement above and a review of REI policies across the public sector, we
anticipate the race, equity and inclusion policy to contain the following sections:
Chapter 1. Race, Equity and Inclusion Policy Statement
This section provides background and clarity for the policy and reiterates the city’s
commitment to REI. It captures the city’s rationale for creating a policy, what the policy
addresses, and what the policy requires of the city.
Chapter 2. Definitions
This section provides definitions for race, equity and inclusion terms used throughout
the policy to create a common understanding of how words or phrases are being used.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 1) Page 4
Title: Race, equity and inclusion policy framework
Chapter 3. Mode of Practice
This section outlines objectives of the REI analysis that will be used as the main
approach to embedding REI within city decision-making.
Chapter 4. Policy implementation and accountability
This section brings clarity to the leadership and responsibilities of the REI division as it
relates to this policy, as well as the city manager’s role in ensuring accountability.
Chapter 5. Training
This section outlines the expectations for city staff on REI-related goals as they relate to
performance evaluations as well as describing how training will be offered.
Chapter 6. Related Documents
This section lists adopted policies and plans related to REI work.
Following the creation of a draft policy, feedback will be gathered. The feedback phase will
continue to be guided by the REI division and design team; feedback will be sought from
additional internal voices, the city council and targeted external stakeholders.
Next steps: Staff will incorporate feedback from council and develop internal and external
engagement opportunities that help to refine the draft policy.
1
Phase 1 of the REI Policy Engagement represents the consult level of the IAP2 Spectrum of
Public Par�cipa�on in two different ways. First, through the Design Team, which works with the
REI division to design the engagement strategy. The REI division also consulted with several
addi�onal stakeholder groups via focus groups and individual interviews. Stakeholders from the
following groups responded to five reflec�on and experien�al ques�ons individually and/or as a
focus group: St. Louis Park leadership team, City Council members, Police & fire union stewards,
employee resource groups and the Human Rights Commission.
Focus groups and interviews consisted of the following five ques�ons:
•Ques�on 1: What would demonstrate to you that the City of St. Louis Park government
priori�zes race, equity and inclusion?
•Ques�on 2: How can the City of St. Louis Park support you as we advance, race, equity
and inclusion work?
•Ques�on 3: What do you see as the organiza�onal challenges to staying commited to
being leaders in advancing race, equity and inclusion?
•Ques�on 4: What do you see as the communal challenges to staying commited to being
leaders in advancing race, equity and inclusion?
•Ques�on 5: Is there anything else you want us to know?
Below are the four overall themes analyzed from the focus group and interview responses:
•Accountability – Feedback from stakeholders emphasized the need for accountability to
support the strategic priority of race, equity and inclusion which includes data-
driven accountability, clear accountability measures, consistent enforcement of
policies and a commitment to measurable outcomes.
•Communication – Key themes included the need for transparent communication that
effectively and explicitly demonstrates the city’s commitment and efforts to being
leaders in REI while remaining relevant and accessible to the broader community.
•Community Engagement – Comments highlighted the importance of broadening
community outreach strategies, building, engaging, and sustaining relationships with
historically marginalized communities; continuously enhancing methods to authentically
seek community feedback.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 1)
Title: Race, equity and inclusion policy framework Page 5
2
• Internal Engagement – Feedback from stakeholders included training and accountability,
leadership commitment, support of Employee Resource Group participation, shared
responsibility (employee and manager) for employee growth in their REI knowledge and
creating an overall supportive environment for staff involved in REI work.
***************************
Below are the themed responses for each of the five ques�ons:
• Question One: What would demonstrate to you that the City of St. Louis Park
government prioritizes race, equity and inclusion?
Strategic Priority: Many comments emphasize that REI should con�nue to be a strategic
priority for the city, indica�ng that it is a fundamental focus area.
Inclusive Decision-Making: Inclusivity is a key theme, with a focus on ensuring that all voices
are heard and that decisions are made with a diverse perspec�ve.
Data-Driven Accountability: Comments men�on the importance of using racial data and
metrics to hold the government accountable for its ac�ons and decisions.
Cultural Outreach: There is a strong emphasis on targeted outreach and inten�onal
engagement with various cultural communi�es, including outreach for vo�ng, running for
office, and community engagement.
Police and Law Enforcement: Several comments highlight the need for equity within law
enforcement and policing, as well as efforts to address racial dispari�es.
Workforce Representa�on: The representa�on of people of color in the workforce and in
leadership posi�ons is a recurring theme.
Community Engagement: The importance of ac�vely engaging with residents, especially those
from marginalized communi�es, is men�oned, with a focus on making city government more
accessible and responsive.
Accountability Measures: The need for clear accountability measures, par�cularly in
procurement, hiring prac�ces, and community engagement, is highlighted.
Training and Educa�on: Many comments men�on the importance of ongoing training and
educa�on on REI topics for all city employees.
Consistency: Consistency in implemen�ng REI ini�a�ves across all city departments is stressed
as essen�al.
Transparency: Transparency in hiring processes, decision-making, and policy implementa�on is
seen as crucial for building trust.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 1)
Title: Race, equity and inclusion policy framework Page 6
3
Leadership Commitment: Several comments emphasize the importance of leadership
commitment and visible support for REI ini�a�ves.
Employee Resource Groups (ERGs): ERGs are seen as valuable pla�orms for employee
engagement and support in REI efforts.
Communica�on: Clear and consistent communica�on about REI ini�a�ves and their
importance is men�oned as a key factor.
Community Feedback: The comments highlight the need to ac�vely seek and listen to
community feedback on REI efforts.
Diversity and Inclusion in Hiring: The importance of diverse hiring prac�ces and opportuni�es
for internal promo�on is noted.
Consistent Enforcement: Consistent enforcement of REI policies and prac�ces across all
departments is seen as essen�al.
Commitment to Ac�on: Commitment to taking tangible ac�ons rather than just aspira�onal
statements is emphasized.
Protec�on and Support: Providing protec�on and support for employees involved in REI work,
as well as addressing discrimina�on or harassment, is noted.
• Question 2: How can the City of St. Louis Park support you as we advance race, equity
and inclusion work?
Training and Accountability: Many comments stress the need for support through training and
accountability measures, including integra�ng competencies related to REI into performance
reviews and hiring prac�ces. This indicates a desire for concrete measures to drive change.
Data-Driven Decision-Making: The importance of data-driven decisions, including se�ng actual
benchmarks and collec�ng high-quality community engagement data, is highlighted.
Procurement and Hiring Prac�ces: Several comments emphasize the significance of ensuring
equity in procurement and hiring prac�ces, indica�ng that these prac�ces need to be reviewed
and adjusted for greater inclusion.
Leadership Accountability: Leadership accountability for REI efforts is a recurring theme. This
includes holding leadership to higher standards and not passing the responsibility for REI onto
others.
Unified Approach and Buy-In: There is a call for a unified approach and buy-in from all
employees, reflec�ng a desire for a collec�ve commitment to REI work.
Community Engagement: The need for beter community engagement, especially with
historically marginalized communi�es, is men�oned. This includes reevalua�ng boards and
commissions to ensure they are invi�ng and relevant to all community members.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 1)
Title: Race, equity and inclusion policy framework Page 7
4
Personal Growth and Vulnerability: Several comments stress the importance of personal
growth, vulnerability, and self-awareness in advancing REI work.
Communica�on and Transparency: The need for clear and transparent communica�on, both
internally and externally, is highlighted. This includes beter communica�on about the city's REI
ini�a�ves and impacts.
Suppor�ve Environment: Crea�ng a safe and suppor�ve environment for asking ques�ons,
discussing biases, and seeking understanding is emphasized.
Accessible Training: Ensuring that training opportuni�es are accessible to all employees,
including those who work non-tradi�onal shi�s, is men�oned.
Con�nual Learning: Encouraging con�nual learning and providing opportuni�es for employees
to apply what they've learned in their work is seen as important.
Employee Resource Groups (ERGs): Support for ERGs and opportuni�es for employees to
par�cipate in them is men�oned as a valuable resource.
Community Outreach: There's a desire for more outreach to the community, par�cularly to
underrepresented groups, to involve them in REI conversa�ons and ini�a�ves.
Engaging Leadership: Engaging elected officials and leadership in the REI conversa�on and
involving them in outreach and engagement efforts is seen as important.
Accessible Informa�on: Ensuring that informa�on about REI ini�a�ves is easily accessible, such
as through the website and social media, is suggested to increase awareness and engagement.
Clear Goals and Metrics: Clear, non-biased goals and metrics related to REI are requested to
guide efforts and evaluate progress.
Community Involvement: Involving the community in decision-making and recognizing that
community members' perspec�ves can differ based on their backgrounds is emphasized.
Resource Alloca�on: Efficient resource alloca�on to support REI ini�a�ves and outreach is
men�oned.
Recruitment of Diverse Commissioners: Encouraging the recruitment of diverse commissioners
for boards and commissions is seen as important for represen�ng the community's diversity.
• Question 3: What do you see as the organizational challenges to staying committed to
being leaders in advancing race, equity and inclusion?
Sustainability and Long-Term Commitment: Many comments express concerns about
sustaining commitment to REI work over the long term. This includes ensuring that policies and
expecta�ons remain in place and demonstra�ng the long-term importance and flexibility of REI
efforts.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 1)
Title: Race, equity and inclusion policy framework Page 8
5
Mo�va�on and Engagement: Challenges related to keeping people mo�vated and engaged in
REI work are highlighted. This includes the need for clear goals, transparency, and sharing
success stories to maintain enthusiasm.
Mee�ng People Where They Are: The challenge of mee�ng individuals at various levels of
understanding and commitment to REI work is men�oned. This includes addressing the
skep�cism of those who view REI as a passing trend.
Alignment and Common Language: Several comments emphasize the importance of having a
common language and clear goals to ensure that everyone in the organiza�on is on the same
page regarding REI efforts.
Leadership Buy-In and Consistency: The commitment of leadership and consistency in their
support for REI work is seen as crucial. This includes addressing leadership changes and
ensuring a shared vision.
Communica�on and Transparency: Communica�on challenges related to effec�vely conveying
the importance of REI work and sharing informa�on are noted. There is also a need for clear,
transparent communica�on about REI goals and progress.
Cultural Shi� and Dismantling Whiteness: Several comments delve into the need for a cultural
shi� within the organiza�on and the dismantling of systemic biases, especially whiteness, as a
fundamental challenge in advancing REI.
Resource Constraints: Resource limita�ons, including budget constraints and staffing issues, are
men�oned as challenges to advancing REI work.
Resistance and Unsuppor�ve Staff: Addressing resistance and unsuppor�ve staff members,
especially in leadership roles, is a recurring theme. This includes the challenge of ge�ng staff to
ac�vely par�cipate in REI ini�a�ves.
Inclusivity and Diversity: Comments highlight the need to create an inclusive environment for
all staff members, acknowledging that certain groups may feel marginalized or unsupported.
Con�nuous Learning: Ensuring that staff members have access to ongoing educa�on and
training in REI is viewed as a challenge, especially in a crisis-driven work environment.
Equity in Leadership Roles: Concerns are raised about the lack of diversity in leadership roles
and the need for more pipelines for people of color to hold leadership posi�ons.
Policy and Accountability: Several comments stress the importance of having policies that
mandate and sustain REI work. Policies are seen as a way to ensure con�nuity even as staff and
leadership change.
Safe Spaces and Support: Ensuring that staff members have safe spaces to engage in REI
discussions and receive support, par�cularly from the REI division, is men�oned as a challenge.
Engaging Marginalized Communi�es: The need to reach marginalized communi�es effec�vely
and ensure their voices are heard is highlighted as a significant challenge, especially when the
organiza�on is predominantly white.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 1)
Title: Race, equity and inclusion policy framework Page 9
6
Dismantling Bias: Addressing bias, both implicit and explicit, within the organiza�on is noted as
a substan�al challenge in advancing REI.
Balancing Priori�es: The challenge of balancing mul�ple compe�ng priori�es, especially in a
crisis-driven field, is emphasized.
• Question 4: What do you see as the communal challenges to staying committed to being
leaders in advancing race, equity and inclusion?
Communica�on and Educa�on: Many comments emphasize the need for beter
communica�on and educa�on within the community. This includes educa�ng residents about
the importance of REI, sharing the racial history of the community and addressing
misconcep�ons about REI work.
Historical Mistrust of Government: Several comments men�on the historical mistrust of
government, par�cularly among communi�es of color. Building trust and overcoming this
historical mistrust is viewed as a significant challenge.
Community Engagement and Relevance: Engaging underserved and underrepresented
communi�es, as well as helping people see the relevance of ge�ng involved in REI efforts, is
seen as challenging. Crea�ng opportuni�es for community members to have an impact is
crucial.
Resistance and Lack of Understanding: Resistance to REI efforts and a lack of understanding
about systemic racism are common challenges. Educa�on and communica�on are key to
addressing these issues.
Resource Alloca�on and Representa�on: The need to re-examine resource alloca�ons and
ensure that different communi�es are represented on boards and commissions is highlighted.
Making the applica�on process more accessible and transparent is also men�oned.
Community Support and Buy-In: While there is reported communal support for REI
commitments, there are also challenges related to buy-in from all segments of the community,
par�cularly when people don't see REI as directly affec�ng their lives.
White Privilege and Lack of Lived Experience: The privilege and lack of lived experience with
racial inequi�es in predominantly white, progressive communi�es are noted as challenges. This
can result in a lack of awareness or mo�va�on to address REI issues.
Sustainability and Long-Term Commitment: Ensuring that the commitment to REI remains over
the long term, even when faced with resistance or compe�ng priori�es, is viewed as a
challenge.
Community Culture and Values: Community values and beliefs, especially when equity issues
don't directly impact individuals' lives, can pose challenges to advancing REI efforts.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 1)
Title: Race, equity and inclusion policy framework Page 10
7
Resource Constraints: Limited resources, both in terms of budget and personnel, are
men�oned as challenges in advancing REI work.
Diverse Perspec�ves and Priori�es: Recognizing that different cons�tuents may have diverse
priori�es and beliefs, and finding ways to create a shared vision, is seen as a challenge.
Percep�ons of Tokenism: Addressing concerns about tokenism and superficial efforts to
address REI issues without deeper understanding or impact is men�oned.
Resistance to Change: There can be resistance to change, especially when people are
comfortable with the status quo. Pushback from certain segments of the community is
reported.
Representa�on on Commissions: Ensuring that different communi�es are represented on
boards and commissions, and that the purpose and applica�on process for these posi�ons are
clear, is noted as important.
Resistance to Funding for REI: Challenges can arise when funding for REI ini�a�ves is proposed,
as there may be resistance from some community members.
• Question 5: Is there anything else you want us to know?
Affordable Housing and Racial Equity: There is a concern about equa�ng affordable housing
with racial equity. Some express the view that focusing on affordable housing alone may not
address the root causes of racial dispari�es and that a more comprehensive approach is
needed.
Voluntary Compliance and Pipeline Challenges: It is men�oned that the DEI policy is currently
voluntary, and there is a sense of disappointment about the lack of enforcement. Pipeline
challenges, such as a lack of qualified candidates for DEI roles, are also noted.
Support for the School District: There's a desire for the city to support the school district more,
par�cularly in retaining diverse students and addressing the changing culture of schools as they
commit to racial equity.
Telling the City's Story: Par�cipants express a desire to tell the story of their city,
acknowledging both its history, including issues of equity and stolen equity, and its evolu�on
towards a more inclusive future.
Fear and Resistance: There's acknowledgment of fear and resistance among some white
community members regarding equity ini�a�ves. The collateral damage of this resistance is
men�oned.
Proud of Progress: Several par�cipants expressed pride in the progress that has been made in
their city regarding REI. They highlight that their city is progressive and commited to doing the
right thing.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 1)
Title: Race, equity and inclusion policy framework Page 11
8
Community Educa�on and Opportuni�es: The importance of crea�ng opportuni�es for the
community to learn about REI is emphasized. It is suggested that more community programs
and discussions are needed.
Accountability and Measurement: Par�cipants want ac�onable items and accountability in the
REI policy. They emphasize the importance of measurable goals and outcomes.
Frontline Worker Engagement: Engaging frontline workers and recognizing their support for
REI ini�a�ves is seen as essen�al. It is noted that not all decisions are made by policymakers,
and clarity and understanding are needed to get everyone on board.
Learning from Past Atempts: Previous REI atempts are viewed as building blocks, and there is
a commitment to understanding and suppor�ng REI efforts moving forward.
Incen�ves and Accountability: Sugges�ons are made for incen�vizing par�cipa�on in REI
ini�a�ves and establishing accountability for those who do not engage.
Safe Spaces and Intersec�onality: The need for safe spaces to celebrate and interact with REI
ini�a�ves is men�oned. Intersec�onality and inclusivity are highlighted, with the LGBTQ
community noted as an important part of this work.
Visual Representa�on and Engagement: Par�cipants want the REI policy and engagement plan
to be visually engaging and inclusive, with diagrams that illustrate intersec�onality and make
people excited to be part of the ini�a�ve.
Rejec�ng Performa�ve Allyship: There is a call to move beyond performa�ve allyship and focus
on meaningful, impac�ul ini�a�ves.
Sharing Best Prac�ces: Sharing best prac�ces in REI is seen as valuable, as is crea�ng a
scorecard to track progress and make the work more engaging and measurable.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 1)
Title: Race, equity and inclusion policy framework Page 12
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: October 9, 2023
Discussion item: 2
Executive summary
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer
Recommended action: None at this time. Maxfield Research & Consulting will present an
overview of the results of the comprehensive housing market study and respond to questions
from the council. Following the Maxfield report staff will present the housing dashboard.
Policy consideration: None at this time.
Summary: The city regularly contracts to have a comprehensive housing study conducted that
provides detailed information about the city’s current housing stock, demographics and
anticipated future needs. This study is a valuable resource to help effectively guide the city’s
efforts to meet the housing needs of the city’s current and future residents. Staff engaged
Maxfield Research to update the city’s housing study earlier this year. The study examines
demographic and economic factors, current rental market and for-sale housing analysis,
housing demand analysis, as well as conclusions and recommendations.
The study identifies a potential demand for nearly 5,300 new housing units through 2030
divided between general-occupancy housing and age-restricted senior housing. The report
recommends the development of 600 – 1200 owner-occupied units, 850 – 1170 general
occupancy rental housing (which includes market-rate, affordable, and subsidized units) and
790 – 1015 senior housing/age restricted units.
Detailed information regarding the demand can be found in the demand section of the report
and information regarding recommended housing concepts can be found in the
recommendations and conclusions section at the end of the report.
Matt Mullins from Maxfield Research and Consulting will present the findings and answer
questions from council. Following the Maxfield housing report staff will do a demonstration of
the housing dashboard.
Financial or budget considerations: None at this time.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of
housing and neighborhood oriented development.
Supporting documents: Comprehensive housing needs analysis for St. Louis Park
Prepared by: Marney Olson, housing supervisor
Reviewed by: Karen Barton, community development director
Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager
Comprehensive Housing
Needs Analysis for
St. Louis Park, Minnesota
Prepared for:
City of St. Louis Park
St. Louis Park, MN
August 2023
2823 Hamline Avenue N
Roseville, MN 55113
612.338.0012
www.maxfieldresearch.com
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 2
May 12, 2023
Ms. Karen Barton
Community Development Director
City of St. Louis Park
5005 Minnetonka Boulevard
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
Dear Ms. Barton:
Attached is the Comprehensive Housing Needs Analysis for St. Louis Park, Minnesota conducted by
Maxfield Research and Consulting, LLC. The study projects senior demand over this decade and general
occupancy housing demand through 2035. The study also provides recommendations on the amount
and type of housing that could be built in St. Louis Park to satisfy demand from current and future resi-
dents through this decade. The study identifies a potential demand for nearly 5,300 new housing units
through 2030 divided between general-occupancy housing (79%) and age-restricted senior housing
(21%).
Overall, the housing market in St. Louis Park within all sectors has been strong during and through the
COVID-19 pandemic. St. Louis Park continues to be one of the most active new construction rental
housing submarkets in The Twin Cities and several more projects are under construction and approved.
Despite new supply, the rental housing vacancy rate is 4% and below market equilibrium. St. Louis Park
has also been a high-demand for-sale market through the pandemic as buyers desired an inner-ring sub-
urb location. Median sales prices are up nearly 20% from early 2020. However, the recent uptick of
mortgage rates led by the Federal Reserve’s fight on inflation has moderated appreciation and sales ve-
locity is down. Service-based senior housing is still recovering from the pandemic, but product targeting
active seniors is in strong demand. Senior housing is poised for strong growth this decade due to the
ageing of the population. Detailed information regarding recommended housing concepts can be found
in the Conclusions and Recommendations section at the end of the report.
We have enjoyed performing this study for you and are available should you have any questions or need
additional information.
Sincerely,
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC
Matt Mullins Andrew McIntyre
Vice President Research Associate
Attachment
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
KEY FINDINGS ............................................................................................................... 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................. 4
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS ............................................................................................. 12
Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 12
St. Louis Park PMA ............................................................................................................ 12
Historical Population ......................................................................................................... 19
Population and Household Growth from 2000 to 20 40 ................................................... 21
Population and Household Estimates and Projections ..................................................... 21
Age Distribution Trends .................................................................................................... 25
Race and Ethnicity ............................................................................................................. 28
Household Income by Age of Householder ...................................................................... 31
Tenure by Age of Householder ......................................................................................... 37
Tenure by Household Income ........................................................................................... 39
Tenure by Household Size ................................................................................................. 41
Household Type ................................................................................................................ 43
Net worth .......................................................................................................................... 46
Demographic Summary ..................................................................................................... 49
HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS ......................................................................................... 52
Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 52
Residential Construction Trends ....................................................................................... 52
American Community Survey ............................................................................................ 54
Occupied Housing Units by Tenure ................................................................................... 54
Age of Housing Stock......................................................................................................... 55
Housing Units by Structure and Tenure ............................................................................ 58
Owner Occupied Units by Mortgage Status...................................................................... 59
Owner Occupied Housing Units by Value ......................................................................... 61
Renter Occupied Units by Contract Rent .......................................................................... 62
Tenure by Household Income ........................................................................................... 64
Mobility in the Past Year ................................................................................................... 65
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS ................................................................................................. 67
Employment Growth and Projections ............................................................................... 67
Resident Labor Force......................................................................................................... 69
Covered Employment by Industry .................................................................................... 72
Employment and Wages ................................................................................................... 74
Commuting Patterns ......................................................................................................... 77
Inflow/Outflow .................................................................................................................. 79
Resident Profile ................................................................................................................. 81
Major Employers ............................................................................................................... 83
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 4
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
Page
RENTAL MARKET ANALYSIS........................................................................................... 87
Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 87
Rental Market Overview ................................................................................................... 87
General-Occupancy Rental Projects .................................................................................. 90
Rental Summary by Year ................................................................................................... 103
Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing (i.e. Unsubsidized Affordable) .......................... 104
Legacy Program ................................................................................................................. 113
Rental Licensing Program .................................................................................................. 113
SENIOR HOUSING ANALYSIS ......................................................................................... 116
Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 116
Senior Housing Defined ..................................................................................................... 116
Older Adult (Age 55+) Population and Household Trends ............................................... 118
Supply of Senior Housing .................................................................................................. 122
Skilled Nursing Facilities .................................................................................................... 126
FOR-SALE HOUSING ANALYSIS ...................................................................................... 130
Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 130
Home Resales in St. Louis Park ......................................................................................... 130
Current Supply of Homes on the Market .......................................................................... 133
Owner-Occupied Turnover ............................................................................................... 140
Condominium Developments ........................................................................................... 141
School District ................................................................................................................... 146
PLANNED/PENDING RENTAL & SENIOR DEVELOPMENTS ............................................... 149
Planned and Proposed Rental and Senior Developments ................................................ 149
HOUSING AFFORDABILITY ............................................................................................ 154
Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 154
Housing Cost Burden.......................................................................................................... 158
Housing Vouchers .............................................................................................................. 160
Housing Costs as Percentage of Household Income ......................................................... 161
HOUSING DEMAND ANALYSIS....................................................................................... 163
Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 163
Demographic Profile and Housing Demand ...................................................................... 163
Housing Demand Overview ............................................................................................... 164
Estimated Demand for For-Sale Housing .......................................................................... 168
Estimated Demand for General-Occupancy Rental Housing ............................................. 171
Demand for Active Adult (55+) Housing ............................................................................ 174
Demand for Subsidized/Affordable Active Adult Housing ................................................ 175
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 5
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
Page
Demand for Independent Living Housing .......................................................................... 177
Demand for Assisted Living Housing .................................................................................. 178
Demand for Memory Care ................................................................................................. 182
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS .......................................................................... 184
Introduction/Overall Housing Recommendations ............................................................ 184
CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES ............................................................................... 195
APPENDIX .............................................................................................................................. 205
Definitions ......................................................................................................................... 206
LIST OF MAPS
Map Title Page
Met Council Thrive 2040 Community Designations ............................................................. 13
City of St. Louis Park and Seven County Metro .................................................................... 14
St. Louis Park City Boundaries ............................................................................................... 15
City of St. Louis Park Neighborhoods ..................................................................................... 16
City of St. Louis Park Zoning Districts ..................................................................................... 17
Future Stops on the SW Light Rail Transit Metro Green Line in and Near St. Louis Park...... 18
St. Louis Park Median Household Income by Block Group, 2022 ......................................... 36
Median Net Worth by Census Block in and Near St. Louis Park ............................................ 48
St. Louis Park Employment Inflow/Outflow .......................................................................... 80
Hennepin County Employment Inflow/Outflow .................................................................... 81
City of St. Louis Park: Major Employers ................................................................................. 85
St. Louis Park Percentage of Population 65 and Older by Block Group. 2022 ..................... 121
Senior Housing & Skilled Nursing Location Map: St. Louis Park ........................................... 128
St. Louis Park Median Home Value by Block Group, 2022 .................................................... 138
St. Louis Park Average Home Value by Block Group. 2022 .................................................. 139
St. Louis Park Condominiums ................................................................................................ 143
St. Louis Park and Neighboring School District Boundaries ................................................... 148
Planned/Pending Rental/Senior Projects in St. Louis Park .................................................... 152
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 6
LIST OF TABLES
Table Number and Title Page
D1. Population and Household Growth Trends and Projections, St. Louis Park Market
Area, 2000 to 2040........................................................................................................ 22
D2. Population Age Distribution, St. Louis Park Market Area, 2010 to 2028 ..................... 26
D3. Race, St. Louis Park Market Area, 2010 & 2023 ........................................................... 29
D4. Ethnicity, St. Louis Park Market Area, 2010 & 2023 ..................................................... 30
D5. Household Income by Age of Householder, City of St. Louis Park, 2023 & 2028 ......... 33
D6. Tenure by Age of Householder, St. Louis Park Market Area, 2010 & 2028 .................. 38
D7. Tenure by Household Income, St. Louis Park Market Area, 2023 ................................ 40
D8. Household Size, St. Louis Park Market Area, 2023 ....................................................... 42
D9. Household Type, St. Louis Park Market Area, 2010 & 2023 ......................................... 45
D10. Net worth by Age of Householder, St. Louis Park Market Area, 2023 ......................... 47
D11. Demographic Summary, St. Louis Park Market Area, 2023 .......................................... 51
HC1. Residential Construction Building Permits, St. Louis Park, Hennepin County,
& Seven County Metro 2010-2022 ............................................................................... 53
HC2. Occupied Housing Units by Tenure, St. Louis Park Market Area, 2021 ........................ 54
HC3. Age of Housing Stock, St. Louis Park Market Area, 2021.............................................. 57
HC4. Housing Units by Structure & Tenure, St. Louis Park Market Area, 2021 .................... 59
HC5. Owner-Occupied Housing Units by Mortgage Status, St. Louis Park Market Area, 2021 60
HC6. Owner-Occupied Units by Value, St. Louis Park Market Area, 2021 ............................ 62
HC7. Renter-Occupied Units by Contract Rent, St. Louis Park Market Area, 2021 ............... 63
HC8. Tenure by Household Income, St. Louis Park Market Area, 2021 ................................ 65
HC9. Mobility in the Past Year by Age of Current Residence, St. Louis Park Market Area,
2021 .............................................................................................................................. 66
E1. Employment Projections, St. Louis Park, Hennepin County, & Seven County Metro,
2000-2030 ..................................................................................................................... 68
E2. Annual Average Resident Employment, St. Louis Park, Hennepin County, Seven County
Metro, Minnesota, & US, 2010 to 2021 ........................................................................ 70
E3. Covered Employment Trends, City of St. Louis Park, Hennepin County, & Seven County
Metro 2000, 2005, 2010, 2015, 2020, & 2021 (NAICS) ................................................ 73
E4. Quarterly Census Employment and Wages, City of St. Louis Park, Hennepin County,
& Seven County Metro, Q1 2021 & Q1 2022 ................................................................ 78
E5. Commuting Patterns, City of St. Louis Park, 2020 ........................................................ 78
E6. Commuting Patterns, Hennepin County 2020 .............................................................. 77
E7. Commuting Inflow/Outflow Characteristics, City of St. Louis Park, 2020 .................... 79
E8. Commuting Inflow/outflow Characteristics, Hennepin County, 2020 ......................... 80
E9. Resident Profile – St. Louis Park, Hennepin County, Seven County Metro, & MN,
2020 .............................................................................................................................. 82
E10. Major Employers, City of St. Louis Park ........................................................................ 84
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 7
LIST OF TABLES (CONTINUED)
Table Number and Title Page
R1. Average Rents/Vacancies Trends, St. Louis Park & Neighboring cities, 2nd Quarter
2021 & 2022 .................................................................................................................. 88
R2. Rental Projects – 12 Units & Higher, St. Louis Park, Feb 2023 .................................... 91
R3. Rent Summary, General Occupancy Rental Projects, St. Louis Park, Feb 2023............ 98
R4. Rental Summary by Year, General Occupancy Rental Developments. St. Louis Park,
2013, 2018, & 2023, May 2023 ..................................................................................... 103
R5. Maximum Rent Based on Household Size and Area Median Income, Minneapolis-St.
Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI HUD Metro FMR Area, 2022 ............................................. 105
R6. Multifamily Market Rate Rental Developments, Assessment of Market Rate Rental
Housing by Affordability Calculation, City of St. Louis Park, Feb 2023 ......................... 106
R7. Multifamily Market Rate Rental Developments, Natural Occurring Summary, City of
St. Louis Park, Feb 2023 ................................................................................................ 112
SN1. Senior Housing Projects, St. Louis Park, November 2022 ............................................. 123
SN2. Skilled Nursing Facilities, St. Louis Park, November 2022 ............................................ 126
FS1. Closed Resales: St. Louis Park, PMA, Hennepin County, and the Seven County
Metro, 2010 to 2022 ..................................................................................................... 130
FS2. Median Resale Prices: St. Louis Park, PMA Remainder, Hennepin County, and the
Seven County Metro, 2010 to 2022 .............................................................................. 131
FS3. Homes Currently Listed For-Sale, St. Louis Park & Hennepin County, As of Nov 3,
2022 .............................................................................................................................. 133
FS4. Active Listings by Housing Type, St. Louis Park, As of Nov 3, 2022 .............................. 135
FS5. Active Listings by Housing Type, Hennepin County, As of Nov 3, 2022 ....................... 136
FS6. Owner-Occupied Turnover, St. Louis Park, Hennepin County, & Seven County
Metro ............................................................................................................................ 140
FS7. Multifamily Condominium Developments, St. Louis Park, Nov 2022 ........................... 142
FS8. Condominium Developments by Decade, St. Louis Park .............................................. 144
FS9. St. Louis Park & Nearby Communities 2022 High School Rankings .............................. 147
P1. Rental & Senior Housing Development Pipeline, St. Louis Park, May 2023 ................. 150
HA1. MHFA/HUD Income and Rent Limits, Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI
HUD FMR Area, 2022 .................................................................................................... 156
HA2. Maximum Rent Based on Household Size and Area Median Income, Minneapolis-
St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI HUD Metro FMR Area, 2022 ........................................ 157
HA3. Housing Cost Burden, St. Louis Park, Hennepin County, & Minnesota, 2021 .............. 159
HA4. St. Louis Park Market Area Housing Affordability – Based on Household Income ...... 162
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 8
LIST OF TABLES (CONTINUED)
Table Number and Title Page
HD1. For-Sale Housing Demand, St. Louis Park, 2023 to 2030 .............................................. 169
HD2. For-Sale Housing Demand, St. Louis Park, 2030 to 2035 .............................................. 170
HD3. Rental Housing Demand, St. Louis Park, 2023 to 2030 ................................................ 172
HD4. Rental Housing Demand, St. Louis Park, 2030 to 2035 ................................................ 173
HD5. Market Rate Active Adult/Few Services Housing Demand, St. Louis Park, 2023 &
2030 .............................................................................................................................. 175
HD6. Deep-Subsidy/Shallow Subsidy Active Adult Housing Demand, St. Louis Park Market
Area, 2023 & 2030 ........................................................................................................ 176
HD7. Independent Living Rental Housing Demand, St. Louis Park, 2023 & 2030 ................. 178
HD8. Assisted Living Demand, St. Louis Park, 2023 & 2030 .................................................. 179
HD9. Memory Care Demand, St. Louis Park, 2023 & 2030 ................................................... 183
CR1. Housing Demand Summary, St. Louis Park, MN, 2023 to 30/35 .................................. 184
CR2. Recommended Housing Development, City of St. Louis Park, 2023 to 2030 ............... 186
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 9
KEY FINDINGS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 1
This section highlights key findings from the Comprehensive Housing Needs Analysis completed
for the City of St. Louis Park. Calculations of projected housing demand are provided through
2035 for general occupancy rental housing and through 2030 with respect to for sale housing.
In addition, recommendations for housing products to meet demand over the short-term are
found in the Conclusions and Recommendations section of the report.
Key Findings
1. Despite the COVID-19 pandemic, the St. Louis Park housing market and economy has
fared better than expected and outperformed many Metro Area communities. In fact,
St. Louis Park continued to be a preferred location for new construction rental housing
while home buyers flocked to St. Louis Park during the pandemic. Home prices in-
creased nearly 20% since early 2020 as younger home buyers sought out homeowner-
ship opportunities in a first-ring suburb. At the same time, the unemployment rate hit a
new record low (1.5%) and the labor force has nearly recovered from 2020.
2. Although St. Louis Park is largely built-out, the City continued to experience growth
over the last two decades. Between 2000 and 2010 the city grew by 2.5% while be-
tween 2010 and 2020 the city grew by an even greater 10.5%. More recently, over the
past three years, St. Louis Park has grown by 3.0% to 51,500. Growth of the city can
largely be attributed to the multifamily housing boom that has occurred over the past
decade. Continued growth in the City will be reliant on infill, redevelopment, and rather
dense housing types. The city can also capitalize on its transportation access, including
the future opening of the SW Light Rail line, and the community’s walkability compared
to other suburban communities.
3. St. Louis Park’s near-term growth is led by the Millennials and Baby Boomers and sen-
iors. The aging of the population is led by growth in the 75 to 84 age cohort (27.9%).
This shift will result in demand for alternative housing products; both for-sale and rental
housing types. At the same time, there is strong growth in the Millennial generation
(+5.4%) that will be seeking first-time home ownership opportunities and quality rental
housing.
4. Rental housing is the key driver to St. Louis Park and its growth. Since 2010, St. Louis
Park has permitted over 3,300 multifamily units compared to only 116 single-family
units. This is evidenced by the City being comprised of nearly 42% renters. Numeri-
cally, those 25 to 34 represent the largest number of renters (4,562 people), or 18.4% of
all renters. This is followed by those 35 to 44 (1,527 people - 6.1% of all renters) and
those 15 to 24 (1,168 people - 4.7% of all renters).
5. Rental housing in the City is primarily comprised of market rate housing. In Maxfield’s
survey, market rate rental housing comprised over 92% of all units followed by income
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 10
KEY FINDINGS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 2
restricted affordable housing, representing 4.8% of all units, and subsidized units, repre-
senting 2.8% of all units. Combined, the overall vacancy rate is less than 4% across all
stabilized projects regardless of income. At the same time, about one-half of the market
rate rental stock is considered naturally occurring affordable housing affordable at 50%
and 60% of AMI.
6. As detailed previously, St. Louis Park’s senior population grew over the course of the
decade. However, the senior housing market is still recovering from lost occupancies
through the course of the pandemic. Although active adult product has virtually no va-
cancies (1.6% - all active adult types), independent living (10.9%), assisted living (25.8%),
and memory care (24.6%) all posted high vacancy rates. Maxfield Research projects an-
other year plus to reach stabilized occupancy after the pandemic. Therefore, demand
will be strongest for active adult and independent seniors in the short-term while ser-
vice-intensive demand will grow over the course of the decade.
7. The for-sale market has boomed since 2020 as the median sale price is up about 20% to
an all-time high of over $350,000 through year-end 2022. St. Louis Park has been an ex-
ceptionally strong housing market as buyers flocked to the inner-ring suburban location
as buyers desired yards and more elbowroom during the pandemic. However, price ac-
celeration has leveled with the rapid uptick in mortgage rates over the past year that
has resulted in few homes for sale and an affordability crunch on buyers. Home sales
will remain depressed until buyer confidence returns with stabilized mortgage rates and
consumer confidence related to the health of the economy.
8. The lack of available land, comprised with the high cost of redevelopment, make the
construction of new for sale and rental housing a challenge especially in a high interest
rate environment. This makes housing affordability a pressing issue in the City as buyers
are on the sidelines and renters are facing rent inflation due in-part to the high inflation
conditions property owners are facing for labor, property taxes, insurance, utilities, etc.
New construction is expected to be muted in the short-term as buyers put new home
purchases on-hold while apartment developers are faced with increasing debt service
and tighter underwriting policies. As such, new multifamily construction should slow in
the short-term as buyers and developers wait out the market in anticipation for lower
interest rates.
9. The unemployment rate in St. Louis Park has been dangerously low since recovering jobs
from the pandemic. The unemployment rate hit an all-time low in 2022 at 1.6% before
rising to just above 2% in late 2022 and early 2023. St. Louis Park’s labor force is still
about 1,000 employees short its early 2020 peak. This is a result of a lower labor partici-
pation rate due to employees leaving the workforce or retiring early. As such, employ-
ers face difficulty in attracting workers given the number of job openings and lower la-
bor force. Employment industries in St. Louis Park are largely diverse. The Education
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 11
KEY FINDINGS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 3
and Health Services industry accounted for 33.1% of employment as of the fourth quar-
ter of 2022. The Park Nicollet Health system and its Methodist Hospital and 3850 Clinic
and Specialty Center Building likely play a big role in it being the largest industry. The
next largest industry is the Professional and Business Services sector. The West End Dis-
trict of the City particularly has a large number of commercial office space including 10
West End, a new class A office space and is a desirable location for business seeking an
excellent location out of Downtown Minneapolis.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 12
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 4
Purpose and Scope of Study
Maxfield Research and Consulting, LLC. was engaged by the City of St. Louis Park to conduct a
Comprehensive Housing Needs Analysis for St. Louis Park, Minnesota building upon the previous
2018 study. The scope of this study includes: an analysis of the demographic and economic
characteristics of the City; a review of the characteristics of the existing housing stock and
building permit trends; an analysis of the market condition for a variety of rental and for-sale
housing products; and an assessment of the need for housing by product type in the City. Rec-
ommendations on the number and types of housing products that should be considered in the
City are also supplied. The Housing Needs Analysis provides recommendations on the amount
and types of housing that should be developed in order to meet the needs of current and future
households who choose to reside in the city
Demographic Analysis
• As of 2023, the City of St. Louis Park is estimated to have 51,500 persons. The city has con-
tinued to experience growth over the last decade (2010 to 2020 – 10.5%), but at a faster
rate than in the 2000s (2000 to 2010 – 2.5%). We project that St. Louis Park will grow by
4,000 persons (8.0%) and by 3,170 households (13.3%) between 2020 and 2030. Maxfield
Research is projecting a higher growth rate than the Met Council (+5.4%).
• Between 2030 and 2040, St. Louis Park’s population is forecast to experience an increase of
2,000 people (3.6%) from 55,000 people in 2030 to 57,000 people in 2040 while its house-
holds are projected to increase by 1,500 (5.6%) from 27,000 households in 2030 to 28,500
households in 2040. This growth will likely be a result of infill development.
• The 25 to 34 age cohort was the largest cohort in St. Louis Park comprising 18.9% as of
2023. This age cohort comprised a significantly higher proportion in St. Louis Park th an
Hennepin County (14.8%) and the Metro Area (14.7%).
• St. Louis Park’s population of 18 to 34-year-olds, which consists primarily of renters and
first-time homebuyers, increased by only 0.5% between 2010 and 2023. However, the
same age cohort is projected to increase by 6.0% over the next five years; increasing the de-
mand for rental units and starter homes.
• St. Louis Park had an estimated median household income of $94,491 in 2023. It is pro-
jected to increase over the next 5 years to $110,233 in 2028 (16.7%, or 3.3% annually).
• The median resale price of homes in St. Louis Park was $359,900 through 2022 (see Table
FS-1). The income required to afford a home at this price would be about $102,829 to
$119,967; based on the standard of 3.0 to 3.5 times the median income (and assuming
these households do not have a high level of debt).
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 13
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 5
• In 2010, 60.7% of all households in St. Louis Park owned their housing. By 202 3, that per-
centage decreased to 58.1%. This is primarily due to the large number of new rental build-
ings recently completed or under construction in the city. However, the homeownership
rate has been declining for the last decade.
• In 2023, 92.5% of St. Louis Park’s households between the ages of 15 and 24 rented their
housing, compared to 63.8% of households between the ages of 25 and 34. St. Louis Park’s
households between 65 and 74 were overwhelmingly homeowners with a homeownership
rate of 78.7%.
• An estimated 52.6% of renter households in the City of St. Louis Park in 2023 have one per-
son while an additional 37.5% renter households have two people. The one-person house-
holds would primarily seek one-bedroom units and two-person households that are couple
would primarily seek one-bedroom units. Two-person households that consist of a parent
and child or roommate would primarily seek two-bedroom units. Larger households would
seek units with multiple bedrooms.
• Persons Living Alone grew significantly adding 1,470 households (16.9%) between 2010 and
2023. As of 2023, Persons Living Alone comprised the largest percentage (41.0%) of all
households consisting of an estimated 10,186 households. This household type is signifi-
cantly larger in St. Louis Park compared to Hennepin County (32.8%) and the Metro Area
(28.9%). This could indicate an aging senior population or millennials moving to the area.
• The City of St. Louis Park has an average net worth of $882,911 in 2022, 32.9% lower than
the average net worth of a householder in Hennepin County ($1,336,214) and 32.3% lower
than the average net worth of a householder in the Metro Area ($1,304,543). St. Louis Park
has a median net worth of $110,945 in 2022, 18.6% lower than the median net worth in
Hennepin County ($204,345) and 30.4% less than the median net worth in the Metro Area
($239,052).
Housing Characteristics
• Between 2010 and 2022 there were 3,286 new residential units permitted in St. Louis Park,
only 3.5% of those permitted units were issued for single-family units while 99.5% were is-
sued for multifamily units.
• St. Louis Park’s housing stock skews older with the largest percentage of its homes built in
the 1950’s followed by the 1940s.
• Single-family detached units are the dominate housing type for owner-occupied units in the
City of St. Louis Park (78.8%), Hennepin County (79.9%), and Minnesota (85.3%).
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 14
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 6
• In the City of St. Louis Park, 68.1% of homes have a mortgage while 31.9% own their homes
without a mortgage. Thus, the percentage of housing units in St. Louis Park owned without
a mortgage is less than the State of Minnesota (34.0%).
• The median rent in St. Louis Park was estimated at $1,271 in 2021, 3.8% higher than in
Hennepin County ($1,225), 7.6% higher than in the Metro Area, and 25.7% higher than in
Minnesota.
• The median income of renter households was 41.5% less than the median income owner
households in St. Louis Park. In 2021, owner-occupied households in St. Louis Park reported
a median income of $111,272 compared to $65,118 among renter-occupied households.
• The majority of St. Louis Park residents (81.2%) did not move during the last year. In
Hennepin County (83.6%) of its residents did not move in the last year while 85.9% of Metro
Area residents did not move.
Employment Trends
• Unemployment in St. Louis Park was at its highest in 2010 during the Great Recession in
2010 at 6.0% before dropping to 2.4% in 2018.
• St. Louis Park began the 2010s with a high unemployment rate of 6%, reached a low of 2.4%
in 2018, before peaking again at 5.7% in 2020. It is important to note that the steep rise in
unemployment in 2020 was a result the COVID-19 pandemic and its related shutdowns and
layoffs. The unemployment rate has since decreased rapidly down to 2.2% through 2022.
• By 2020, at the height of the COVID-19 Pandemic, unemployment went up to 5.7% in St.
Louis Park before decreasing to 2.3% as of December 2022.
• In the City of St. Louis Park, the Information industry reported the highest weekly wage,
$2,165; or approximately $86,600 annually in the fourth quarter of 2022. Following not far
behind is the Financial Services sector with an average weekly wage of $2,109 ($84,360 an-
nually).
• As Table E-5 illustrates, Minneapolis was the largest work destination for St. Louis Park resi-
dents (27.2%) and the largest home destination for St. Louis Park workers (12.9%).
• St. Louis Park was the second largest work destination for St. Louis Park residents (10.6%)
and the second largest home destination for St. Louis Park workers (7.1%).
• The City of St. Louis Park is a net importer of workers, with 37,337 workers commuting into
the city compared to 23,826 workers leaving the city for work. In addition, 2,839 workers
live and work in the city.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 15
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 7
• Health Partners, at 3800 Park Nicollet Boulevard, and in the Health Services industry, is the
largest employment location in St. Louis Park with 6,708 employees. The city’s next largest
employer, at 600 Highway 19 South, is Wells Fargo Home Mortgage with 1,450 employees.
• Among the largest employers in St. Louis Park many were in the technology, business, medi-
cal, and retail related fields.
Rental Housing Market Analysis
• All rental projects represent a combined total of 9,002 units, including 8,316 market rate
units (92.4%) of all units, 434 affordable units (4.8% of all units) and 252 subsidized units
(2.8% of all units).
• At the time of our survey, St. Louis Park had an overall stabilized vacancy rate of 3.7% (322
vacancies), below market equilibrium (5% vacancy rate). Market rate properties had a sta-
bilized vacancy rate of 4.0% (322 vacancies) while affordable and subsidized units each had
a vacancy rate of 0% (no vacancies). As a result, all unit types have pent up demand.
Senior Housing Market Analysis
• Between 2010 and 2022, the fastest growing proportion of the population in St. Louis Park
was those between the ages of 65 and 74, which experienced a 68.6% increase in popula-
tion, an addition of 1,757 people. In addition, over the next five years, the fastest popula-
tion growth in St. Louis Park is projected to be those between the ages of 75 and 84, which
are forecast to experience a 23.9% increase in population, an addition of 606 people.
• St. Louis Park maintains relatively high rates of homeownership in the older adult age co-
horts. The homeownership rate as of 2022 is 80.7% for households 55 to 64. Seniors typi-
cally begin to consider moving into senior housing alternatives or more convenient housing
such as apartment buildings or twin homes in their early to mid -70s. This movement pat-
tern is demonstrated by the drop in homeownership between the 65 to 74 age cohort
(78.5%) and the 75+ age cohort (59.2%).
• Maxfield Research identified eight senior housing properties in the Primary Market Area
(PMA). Combined, these projects contain a total of 1,004 senior housing units. Of those
1,004 units, 693 units (69.0%) are market rate units while 123 units are shallow subsidy/in-
come-restricted (12.3%), and 188 units (18.7%) are deep subsidy units.
• Based on our survey, 63.7% of the units provide service-enhanced housing, for a total of 640
units. These include 432 independent living units, 120 assisted living units, 57 memory care
units, and 31 enhanced care/dementia care units. The remaining 36.3% (364 units) are ac-
tive adult, including 205 affordable (deep- and shallow-subsidy), 53 market rate rental, and
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 16
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 8
106 cooperative/ownership units. Of the 1,004 senior housing units, 99 are currently va-
cant, representing a 9.9% vacancy rate. Generally a vacancy rate of 7% is considered equi-
librium for service based senior housing.
• The affordable active adult properties are predominantly project-based Section 8 facilities
with rents based on 30% of gross monthly household income. There are two project -based
Section 8 properties (Menorah West – 45 units and Menorah Plaza – 143 units) totaling 188
units, of which are three are vacant (1.6%). These facilities target persons 62 and older.
There is also one project, Elmwood (2021), that contains income -restricted units (shallow
subsidy. The development is mixed income and primarily contains market rate but also 17
one (5 units) and two-bedroom (12 units) income restricted units.
• There are three independent living with services available facilities, totaling 432 independ-
ent living units in the PMA, 47 of which are vacant (10.9% vacancy rate). In addition, there
are 120 assisted living units in the PMA, 31 of which are vacant for a 25.8% vacancy rate.
The PMA also has two facilities providing 57 memory care units in the PMA. These memory
care facilities are currently 24.6% vacant (15 vacant units).
Housing Affordability
• In St. Louis Park, 18.9% of owner households and 34.3% of renter households are consid-
ered cost burdened. In comparison, 16.6% of owner households and 43.9% of renter
households are considered cost burdened in Hennepin County. The Seven-County Metro
Area has 19.1% of its owner households cost burdened and 44.2% of its renter households
cost burdened. Across the State of Minnesota 17.9% of owner households and 42.9% of
renter households are considered cost burdened. The median income of all St. Louis Park
households in 2021 was about $87,639. However, the median income varies by tenure. Ac-
cording to the 2021 American Community Survey, the median income of a homeowner is
$111,272, 70.9% higher than that of renters ($65,118).
• Approximately 50% (49.5%) of all households and 62.0% of owner households could afford
to purchase an entry-level home in St. Louis Park ($300,000). When adjusting for move-up
buyers ($450,000) 28.8% of all households and 39.6% of owner households would income
qualify.
• About 61% (61.2%) of existing renter households can afford to rent a one-bedroom unit in
St. Louis Park ($1,300/month). The percentage of renter income -qualified households de-
creases to 34.7% that can afford an existing three -bedroom unit ($2,100/month). After ad-
justing for new construction rental housing, the percentage of renters that are income-qual-
ified decreases.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 17
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 9
For-Sale Housing Market Analysis
• Between 2010 and 2022, there has been an average of 884 residential sales per year in St.
Louis Park.
• Between 2021 and 2022 St. Louis Park’s median resale prices increased 5.9% to $359,900
while Hennepin County’s median resale price increased 5.1% to $368,000 and the Seven
County Metro’s median resale price increased 6.7% to $365,000.
• As of November 3, 2022, there were 95 homes listed for sale in St. Louis Park and 2,786
homes listed for sale in all of Hennepin County.
• The median list prices in St. Louis Park and Hennepin County for single-family and multifam-
ily homes is $349,900 and $386,853.
• Based on a median list price of $349,900 for St. Louis Park, the income required to afford a
home at this price would be between $99,971 and $116,633; based on the standard of 3.0
to 3.5 times the median income (and assuming these households do not have a high level of
debt). A household with significantly more equity (in an existing home and/or savings)
could afford a higher priced home. About 45% (45.2%) of St. Louis Park households have
annual incomes at or above $99,971.
• The majority of single and multifamily homes listed for sale in St. Louis Park are priced be-
tween $300,000 and $399,999 (27.4%) and $200,000 and $299,999 (22.1%).
• Of the 95 listings in St. Louis Park, 55 (57.9%) are single family homes while 40 listings
(42.1%) are multifamily homes. In Hennepin County, of 2,786 listings, 1,812 are single family
homes (65.0%) while 974 listings are multifamily homes (35.0%).
• Condominiums (37.9%) and one-and-one half story (25.3%) listings are the two most com-
mon housing types in St. Louis Park, accounting for a combined 63.2% of all of listings. In
contrast, throughout Hennepin County, two story (24.7%) and condo miniums (21.3%) list-
ings are the two most common property types accounting for a combined 46.0% of all ac-
tive listings.
• One-and one half story homes, the most common housing type in St. Louis Park, average
$420,029, equating to $225 per square foot.
Development Pipeline
• Of pending and recently completed projects, only two were active adult (age -restricted)
projects while the remaining 22 are rental projects. The most recent projects to open in St.
Louis Park include Via Sol, Parkway Place, Parkway Flats, and Volo at Texa Tonka. Via Sol is a
mixed income project of 65 market rate units and 152 affordable units. Volo at Texa Tonka
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 18
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 10
is an additional mixed income project with 89 market rate units and 23 affordable units.
Parkway Place (95 units) is a market rate projects while Parkway Flats is a 6 unit affordable
townhome development. Parkway Place and Parkway Flats are both a part of the Parkway
Residences project which is constructing market rate and affordable units along Minnesota
State Highway 7 near the City’s border with Minneap olis. The area serves as a gateway to
Minneapolis’ three popular lakes (Bde Maka Ska, Lake Harriet, and Lake of the Isles), and
the Uptown District of Minneapolis.
Housing Needs Analysis (New Construction units)
• Based on our calculations (detailed in the demand section of the report), demand exists in
St. Louis Park for the following general occupancy product types between 2023 and 2030:
o Market Rate Rental 1,555 units
o Affordable Rental 633units
o Subsidized Rental 607 units
o For-Sale Single-Family 138 units
o For-Sale Multifamily 1,013 units
• In addition, we find demand for multiple senior housing pr oduct types (detailed in the de-
mand section of the report). By 2030, demand in St. Louis Park for senior housing is fore-
cast for the following:
o Active Adult Ownership 231 units
o Active Adult Market Rate Rental 304 units
o Active Adult Affordable 268 units
o Active Adult Subsidized 30 units
o Independent Living 129 units
o Assisted Living 226 unit
o Memory Care 214 units
• On the following page are recommended product types for the city.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 19
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 11
Purchase Price/Development
Monthly Rent Range¹Timing
Owner-Occupied Homes
Single Family 2
Move-up $450,000 - $649,999 50 -100 Ongoing
Executive $650,000+50 -100 Ongoing
Total 100 -200
Townhomes/Twinhomes 2
Move-up $250,000 - $350,000 100 -200 2025+
Executive $400,000+100 -200 2025+
Total 200 -400
Condominums
Entry-level <$200,000 100 -200 2026+
Move-up $250,000 - $350,000 100 -200 2027+
Executive $375,000+100 -200 2027+
Total 300 -600
Total Owner-Occupied 600 -1,200
General Occupancy Rental Housing
Market Rate Rental Housing
Apartment-style (moderate)$1,500/1BR - $2,200/3BR 100 -125 2026+
Apartment-style (luxury)$1,800/1BR - $2,700/3BR 200 -300 2028+
Townhomes $1,500/2BR - $2,000/3BR 100 -125 2024+
Total 400 -550
Affordable Rental Housing
Apartment-style Moderate Income3 100 -135 2025+
Townhomes Moderate Income3 100 -135 2025+
Subsidized 30% of Income4 250 -350 2025+
Total 450 -620
Total Renter-Occupied 850 -1,170
Senior Housing (i.e. Age Restricted)
Active Adult Market Rate Rental 5 $1,425/1BR - $1,800/2BR 300 -400 2025+
Active Adult Affordable Rental 5 Moderate Income3 70 -75 2025+
Assisted Living $3,000/EFF - $4,500/2BR 200 -250 2027+
Memory Care $5,000/EFF - $6,000/2BR 150 -200 2027+
Subsidized Senior 30% of Income4 70 -90 2026+
Total 790 -1015
Total - All Units 2,240 -3,385
RECOMMENDED HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
ST. LOUIS PARK
2023 to 2030
No. of
Units
Source: Maxfield Research and Consulting, LLC.
¹ Pricing in 2023 dollars. Pricing can be adjusted to account for inflation.
2 Replacement need, infill, and redevelopment. Development of single-family homes and townhomes/twinhomes
will hinge on land availability. Due to St. Louis Park's location, there is pent-up demand that exceeds
replacement need.
3 Affordablity subject to income guidelines per Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (MHFA). See Table R-6 for
Hennepin County Income limits.
4 Subsized housing will be difficult to develop financially
5 Alternative development concept is to combine active adult affordable and market rate active adult into mixed-
income senior community
Note - Recommended development does not coincide with total demand. St. Louis Park may not be able to accommodate all
recommended housing types based on land availability and development constraints.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 20
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 12
Introduction
This section of the report examines factors related to the current and future demand for both
owner and renter-occupied housing in St. Louis Park, Minnesota. It includes an analysis of pop-
ulation and household growth trends and projections, projected age distribution, household in-
come, household types and household tenure. Comparisons, where appropriate, are provided
to Hennepin County, the Twin Cities Seven County Metro (Anoka County, Carver County, Da-
kota County, Hennepin County, Ramsey County, Scott County, and Washington County), and
the State of Minnesota. A review of these characteristics will provide insight into the demand
for various types of housing needed in the City.
St. Louis Park PMA
For purposes of the housing analysis, the Primary Market Area (PMA) encompasses all of the
City of St. Louis Park. Therefore, going forward in the report the PMA will be solely referred to
as either St. Louis Park of the City of St. Louis Park.
St. Louis Park is classified as an Urban Center community by the Metropolitan Council’s Thrive
MSP 2040 document. Urban Center communities are characterized by their excellent transpor-
tation networks, high degree of walkability, access to a variety of recreational opportunities,
and are largely built out (infill development important).1
In some cases, additional demand for housing will come from individuals moving from just out-
side the City, those who return from other locations (particu larly young households returning
after pursuing their degrees or elderly returning from retirement locations), and seniors who
move to be near their adult children living in St. Louis Park. Demand generated from within and
outside of St. Louis Park considered in the demand calculations are presented later in this anal-
ysis. The maps on the following pages highlight the Metropolitan Council’s 2040 Community
Designations St. Louis Parks’ city and regional boundaries, all 35 neighborhoods within St. Louis
Park, the zoning districts within St. Louis Park, and future stops on the currently under construc-
tion Southwest Light Rail Transit (LRT) Metro Green Line in and near St. Louis Park.
1 “Urban Center: Growing vitality in the region’s core.” Metropolitan Council: Thrive MSP 2040. Pgs. 96-97.
https://metrocouncil.org/Planning/Publications-And-Resources/Thrive-MSP-2040-Plan-(1)/ThriveMSP2040.aspx.
Accessed 5 Oct. 2022.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 21
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC 13
Metropolitan Council’s Thrive 2040 Community Designations
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 22
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC 14
City of St. Louis Park and Seven County Metro
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 23
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC 15
St. Louis Park City Boundaries
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 24
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC 16
City of St. Louis Park Neighborhoods
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 25
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC 17
City of St. Louis Park Zoning Districts
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 26
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC 18
Future Stops on the Southwest Light Rail Transit (LRT) Metro Green Line In and Near St. Louis Park
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 27
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 19
Future Southwest Light Rail Transit (LRT) Metro Green Line
Future Beltline Station Platform
Future Track Near Beltline Station
Historical Population
In 1886, the Village of St. Louis Park was officially incorporated. Soon after, a group of Minne-
apolis industrialists started developing the village for industrial, commercial, and residential use
and by 1890, the village had more than 600 industrial jobs and a population of 499. While nota-
ble growth occurred after World War I and during the Great Depression, the population of St.
Louis Park really took off after World War II. In 1940, only 7,737 people lived in St. Louis Park,
but by 1950 the population had jumped to 22,644. Most St. Louis Park homes were built in this
single construction boom from the late 1940s to early 1950s. In 1954, the village gained the
status of a city. The population continued rapidly increasing until the 1970s, when it leveled
out. Between the 1970s and 2010, the City’s population has fluctuated, reaching 45,250 by
2010. However, more recently, between 2010 and 2020 St. Louis Park again experienced dou-
ble digit population growth, increasing by 10.5% to 50,010 people. Over the last three years
(2020 to 2023) St. Louis Park’s population has increased 3.0% to 51,500 people. One reason for
the high growth over the last decade has been the high number of market rate rental develop-
ments constructed since 2010. This includes new apartments in the West End Shopping Dis-
trict, at the Excelsior and Grand Shopping District, and along West 36th Street.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 28
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 20
St. Louis Park: Old and New
Walker Building The Shops at West End
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 29
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 21
Population and Household Growth from 2000 to 2040
Table D-1 presents the population and household growth, respectively, of the St. Louis Park
community for 2000, 2010, and 2020, as well as estimates and projections through 2040. Esti-
mates and projections will be addressed in our Population and Household Estimates and Projec-
tions section. The historical data is from the U.S. Census.
Population
• St. Louis Park’s population base grew from 44,126 people to 50,010 people between the
years of 2000 and 2020 (5,884 people, +13.3%). Growth mostly occurred over the last dec-
ade when St. Louis Park increased 10.5% from 45,250 in 2010 to 50,010 in 2020. Hennepin
County and the Metro Area experienced a similar growth rate during the last decade in-
creasing by 11.2% and 11.0%, respectively.
Households
• Household growth trends are typically a more accurate indicator of housing needs than
population growth since a household is, by definition, an occupied housing unit. However,
additional demand can result from changing demographics of the population base, which
results in demand for different housing products.
• St. Louis Park added 2,087 households during the 2010s (+9.6%), increasing its household
base to 23,830 households as of 2020. Households in Hennepin County increased by 11.1%
and the Metro Area increased 10.9% over the same time period.
• Household growth rates over the past two decades (2000 to 2020) outpaced population
growth in St. Louis Park. St. Louis Park’s population increased 13.3% compared to a 14.7%
increase in households between 2000 and 2020. This is the result of fewer persons in each
household, caused by demographic and social trends such as couples delaying marriage, an
increasing senior base, and couples’ decisions to have fewer children or no children at all.
As a result, the majority of new apartment construction has targeted smaller household
sizes in the project’s unit mix.
Population and Household Estimates and Projections
Table D-1, on the following page, presents population and household growth trends and projec-
tions for St. Louis Park to 2040. Data for 2000, 2010, and 2020 is from the U.S. Census. Esti-
mates for 2023 and projections through 2040 are based on information from ESRI (a national
demographics service provider), the Metropolitan Council, with adjustments by Maxfield Re-
search & Consulting.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 30
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC 22
2000 2010 2020 2023 2028 2030 2035 2040 No. Pct. No. Pct. No. Pct. No. Pct.
St. Louis Park 44,126 45,250 50,010 51,500 54,000 55,000 56,250 57,000 1,124 2.5% 4,760 10.5% 4,990 10.0% 2,000 3.6%
Hennepin County 1,116,200 1,152,425 1,281,565 1,314,301 1,347,113 1,376,120 1,419,765 1,463,410 36,225 3.2% 129,140 11.2% 94,555 7.4% 87,290 6.3%
Metro Area 2,642,056 2,849,567 3,163,104 3,239,384 3,341,292 3,451,000 3,552,000 3,653,000 207,511 7.9% 313,537 11.0% 287,896 9.1% 202,000 5.9%
St. Louis Park 20,782 21,743 23,830 24,856 26,387 27,000 28,000 28,500 961 4.6% 2,087 9.6% 3,170 13.3% 1,500 5.6%
Hennepin County 456,129 475,913 528,547 541,929 559,929 581,340 600,675 620,010 19,784 4.3% 52,634 11.1% 52,793 10.0% 38,670 6.7%
Metro Area 1,021,454 1,117,749 1,239,526 1,269,392 1,308,552 1,351,000 1,399,000 1,447,000 96,295 9.4% 121,777 10.9% 111,474 9.0% 96,000 7.1%
St. Louis Park 2.12 2.08 2.10 2.07 2.05 2.04 2.01 2.00 -0.04 -2.0% 0.02 0.8% -0.06 -2.9% -0.04 -1.8%
Hennepin County 2.45 2.42 2.42 2.43 2.41 2.37 2.36 2.36 -0.03 -1.0% 0.00 0.1% -0.06 -2.4% -0.01 -0.3%
Metro Area 2.59 2.55 2.55 2.55 2.55 2.55 2.54 2.52 -0.04 -1.4% 0.00 0.1% 0.00 0.1% -0.03 -1.2%
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau; ESRI; Metropolitan Council; & Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC.
Forecast
Change
2030 to 2040U.S. Census
PERSONS PER HOUSEHOLD
TABLE D-1
POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLD GROWTH TRENDS AND PROJECTIONS
ST. LOUIS PARK MARKET AREA
2000 to 2040
HOUSEHOLDS
POPULATION
2000 to 2010 2010 to 2020 2020 to 2030Estimate
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 31
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 23
• As of 2023, the City of St. Louis Park is estimated to have 51,500 persons. The city has con-
tinued to experience growth over the last decade (2010 to 2020 – 10.5%), but at a faster
rate than in the 2000s (2000 to 2010 – 2.5%). We project that St. Louis Park will grow by
4,990 persons (10.0%) and by 3,170 households (13.3%) between 2020 and 2030. Maxfield
Research is projecting higher growth than the Met Council which if forecasting 5.4% growth
through 2030.
• Since households are occupied housing units, a growth of an estimated 3,170 households in
St. Louis Park this decade would require an equal number of available units to accommo-
date the new household growth.
• Between 2030 and 2040, St. Louis Park’s population is forecast to experience an increase of
2,000 people (3.6%) from 55,000 people in 2030 to 57,000 people in 2040 while its house-
holds are projected to increase by 1,500 (5.6%) from 27,000 households in 2030 to 28,500
households in 2040. This growth will likely be a result of infill development.
• Hennepin County is forecast to increase by 94,555 people (7.4%) and 52,793 people (10.0%)
over the current decade (2020 to 2030). Between 2030 and 2040 Hennepin County is pro-
jected to gain 87,290 people (6.3%) and 38,670 households (6.7%).
• The Metro Area is forecast to grow by 287,896 persons (7.4%) and 111,474 households
(9.0%) between 2020 and 2030. Between 2030 and 2040 the Metro
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 32
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 24
City Water Tower
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 33
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 25
Age Distribution Trends
Age distribution affects demand for different types of housing since needs and desires change
at different stages of the life cycle. Table D-2 shows the distribution of persons within nine age
cohorts for the City of St. Louis Park in 2000 and 2010 with estimates for 2024 and projections
for 2028. The 2000 and 2010 age distribution numbers are from the U.S. Census Bureau while
2023 and 2028 data was obtained from ESRI with adjustments by Maxfield Research & Consult-
ing, LLC. The following are key points from the table.
• The 25 to 34 age cohort was the largest cohort in St. Louis Park comprising 18.9% as of
2023. This age cohort comprised a significantly higher proportion in St. Louis Park than
Hennepin County (14.8%) and the Metro Area (14.7%).
• St. Louis Park’s population of 18 to 34-year-olds, which consists primarily of renters and
first-time homebuyers, increased by only 0.5% between 2010 and 2023. However, the
same age cohort is projected to increase by 6.0% over the next five years; increasing the de-
mand for rental units and starter homes.
• Between 2010 and 2023, the largest percentage growth in St. Louis Park occurred in the 65
to 74 (70.3%) and 75 to 84 (34.8%) age groups. The third largest growth age cohort was in
the 35 to 44 (30.7%) age group. Only two age groups declined, the 25 to 34 age cohort de-
clined 5.0% and the 45 to 54 age cohort declined by 0.3%.
• Mirroring trends observed across the Nation, the aging baby boomer generation is substan-
tially impacting the composition of St. Louis Park’s population. Born between 1946 and
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 34
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 26
1964, in 2022 these individuals comprise mainly the 55 to 64 and 65 to 74 age groups. As of
2023, the 55 to 64 and 65 to 74 age groups accounted for a combined 20.1% of St. Louis
Park’s population.
• The 75 to 84 age cohort is projected to have the greatest percent growth from 2023 to
2028, increasing by 27.9% (719 people). Growth in this age cohort can be primarily at-
tributed to the baby boom generation aging into their senior years.
Estimate Projection
2000 2010 2023 2028
Age No. No. No. No. No. Pct. No. Pct.
St. Louis Park
Under 18 8,279 8,370 9,013 9,234 643 7.7%222 2.5%
18 to 24 3,829 3,632 4,223 4,536 591 16.3%313 7.4%
25 to 34 9,369 10,249 9,734 10,260 -516 -5.0%527 5.4%
35 to 44 7,273 6,146 8,034 8,208 1,888 30.7%174 2.2%
45 to 54 5,654 5,887 5,871 6,102 -16 -0.3%231 3.9%
55 to 64 3,244 4,969 5,923 5,778 954 19.2% -145 -2.4%
65 to 74 2,699 2,560 4,429 4,752 1,869 73.0%323 7.3%
75 to 84 2,633 1,910 2,575 3,294 665 34.8%719 27.9%
85 and over 1,146 1,406 1,700 1,836 294 20.9%137 8.0%
Total 44,126 45,129 51,500 54,000 6,371 14.1% 2,500 4.9%
Hennepin County
Under 18 267,502 261,346 273,375 269,423 12,029 4.6% -3,952 -1.4%
18 to 24 108,767 113,551 128,801 134,711 15,250 13.4% 5,910 4.6%
25 to 34 183,860 187,525 194,517 196,678 6,992 3.7% 2,162 1.1%
35 to 44 191,872 154,304 181,374 185,902 27,070 17.5% 4,528 2.5%
45 to 54 156,068 171,130 155,088 157,612 -16,042 -9.4% 2,525 1.6%
55 to 64 85,773 133,758 165,602 153,571 31,844 23.8% -12,031 -7.3%
65 to 74 59,737 66,516 123,544 137,406 57,028 85.7% 13,861 11.2%
75 to 84 44,942 42,476 61,772 79,480 19,296 45.4% 17,708 28.7%
85 and over 17,679 21,822 30,229 32,331 8,407 38.5% 2,102 7.0%
Total 1,116,200 1,152,428 1,314,301 1,347,113 161,873 14.0%32,812 2.5%
Metro Area
Under 18 697,534 774,287 811,750 721,719 37,463 4.8% -90,031 -11.1%
18 to 24 244,226 190,135 305,639 294,034 115,504 60.7% -11,605 -3.8%
25 to 34 411,155 420,311 483,106 464,440 62,795 14.9% -18,667 -3.9%
35 to 44 469,324 391,324 450,242 474,463 58,918 15.1% 24,221 5.4%
45 to 54 363,592 440,753 506,111 397,614 65,358 14.8% -108,498 -21.4%
55 to 64 200,980 326,007 374,654 390,931 48,647 14.9% 16,277 4.3%
65 to 74 130,615 163,425 190,613 340,812 27,188 16.6% 150,198 78.8%
75 to 84 90,292 97,442 111,739 187,112 14,297 14.7% 75,373 67.5%
85 and over 34,338 45,883 52,583 70,167 6,700 14.6% 17,584 33.4%
Total 2,642,056 2,849,567 3,286,438 3,341,292 436,871 15.3%54,854 1.7%
Change
2010-2023 2023-2028
Census
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau; ESRI; Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC.
TABLE D-2
POPULATION AGE DISTRIBUTION
ST. LOUIS PARK MARKET AREA
2000 to 2028
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 35
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 27
• The next three age cohorts with the largest projected growth are those 85 and over (8.0%),
18 to 24 (7.4%), and 65 to 74 (7.3%) age groups.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 36
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 28
• The social changes that occurred with the aging of the baby boom generation, such as
higher divorce rates, higher levels of education, and lower birth rates has led to a greater
variety of lifestyles than existed in the past – not only among the baby boomers, but also
among their parents and children. The increased variety of lifestyles has fuel ed demand for
alternative housing products to the single-family homes. Seniors and middle-aged persons
tend to do more traveling and participate in more activities than previous generations, and
they increasingly prefer maintenance-free housing that enables them to spend more time
on activities outside the home.
• It is projected that all age groups 65 and over will experience growth over the next 5 years
and beyond. As mentioned previously in this section, the 65 to 74 age cohort is projected to
increase by 7.3% and the 85 and over age group is projected to increase by 8.0%. The 75 to
84 age group is projected to grow by an even greater 27.9% over the next five years.
Race and Ethnicity
Tables D-3 and D-4 present the race and ethnicity of the population in St. Louis Park in 2010
and 2023. It should be noted that one must select their race as well as whether one is of His-
panic/Latino origin. Since people self-identify their racial classification, there may be confusion
on the part of some people about what category most accurately describes their race. Some
people may choose to self-identify using their ethnicity as their race. The increase in diversity
of the United States will likely result in some confusion over race/ethnicity figures for some
time until additional racial classifications are formulated and assigned to population subsets.
The terms “Whites” in this report refers to Non-Hispanic Whites or White, Not Hispanic or La-
tino.
• “Whites” comprised the largest proportion (81.1% in 2023) of the population in the City of
St. Louis Park. While this category has always remained the largest, it has been steadily de-
creasing over the past thirteen years from 83.3% in 2010 to 81.1% in 2023. Compared to
Hennepin County (69.9%) and the Metro Area (73.7%), St. Louis Park had a higher percent-
age of those considered “White” in 2023.
• “Black or African American” comprised the second largest proportion (6.2% in 2023), down
slightly from 7.5% in 2010.
• “Two or More Races” experienced the largest growth based on percentage, increasing b y
1,343 people (96.1%) between 2010 and 2023. The next greatest population increase based
on percentage was in the “Asian” group which added 784 people (45.1%).
• Compared to Hennepin County and the Metro Area, St. Louis Park is slightly less diverse.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 37
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 29
• Although Hispanics/Latinos comprised just under 5% (4.9%) of the population in 2023, the
population has increased from 2010 when comprising 4.3% of the population.
No. Pct No. Pct.No. Pct.
St. Louis Park
White 37,686 83.3%41,766 81.1%4,080 10.8%
Black or African American 3,372 7.5%3,194 6.2%-178 -5.3%
American Indian and
Alaska Native 205 0.5%215 0.4%10 4.9%
Asian 1,737 3.8%2,521 4.9%784 45.1%
Native Hawaiian and
Other Pacific Islander 41 0.1%18 0.0%-23 -56.1%
Some Other Race 811 1.8%1,045 2.0%234 28.9%
Two or More Races 1,398 3.1%2,741 5.3%1,343 96.1%
Total 45,250 100.0%51,500 100.0%6,250 13.8%
Hennepin County
White 856,834 74.4%918,799 69.9%61,965 7.2%
Black or African American 136,262 11.8%174,345 13.3%38,083 27.9%
American Indian and
Alaska Native 10,591 0.9%8,566 0.7%-2,025 -19.1%
Asian 71,905 6.2%95,022 7.2%23,117 32.1%
Native Hawaiian and
Other Pacific Islander 506 0.0%360 0.0%-146 -28.9%
Some Other Race 38,878 3.4%42,800 3.3%3,922 10.1%
Two or More Races 37,449 3.2%74,408 5.7%36,959 98.7%
Total 1,152,425 100.0%1,314,300 100.0%161,875 14.0%
Metro Area
White 2,246,356 78.8%2,387,866 73.7%141,510 6.3%
Black or African American 238,723 8.4%323,589 10.0%84,866 35.5%
American Indian and
Alaska Native 20,906 0.7%16,763 0.5%-4,143 -19.8%
Asian 183,421 6.4%251,928 7.8%68,507 37.3%
Native Hawaiian and
Other Pacific Islander 1,262 0.0%958 0.0% -304 -24.1%
Some Other Race 74,516 2.6% 85,249 2.6% 10,733 14.4%
Two or More Races 84,383 3.0% 173,031 5.3% 88,648 105.1%
Total 2,849,567 100.0% 3,239,384 100.0% 389,817 13.7%
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau & Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC.
Change
2010-20232023
TABLE D-3
RACE
ST. LOUIS PARK MARKET AREA
2010 and 2023
2010
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 38
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 30
No. Pct No. Pct. No. Pct.
St. Louis Park
Hispanic or Latino 1,941 4.3% 2,515 4.9%574 29.6%
Not Hispanic or Latino 43,309 95.7% 48,985 95.1% 5,676 13.1%
Total 45,250 100.0% 51,500 100.0% 6,250 13.8%
Hennepin County
Hispanic or Latino 77,676 6.7% 92,406 7.0% 14,730 19.0%
Not Hispanic or Latino 1,074,749 93.3% 1,221,895 93.0% 147,146 13.7%
Total 1,152,425 100.0% 1,314,301 100.0% 161,876 14.0%
Metro Area
Hispanic or Latino 167,558 5.9% 206,457 6.6% 38,899 23.2%
Not Hispanic or Latino 2,682,009 94.1% 2,929,919 93.4% 247,910 9.2%
Total 2,849,567 100.0% 3,136,376 100.0% 286,809 10.1%
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau & Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC.
2010-202320232010
TABLE D-4
Change
ETHNICITY
ST. LOUIS PARK MARKET AREA
2010 and 2023
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 39
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 31
Household Income by Age of Householder
The estimated distribution of household incomes in the City of St. Louis Park for 20 23 and 2028
are shown in Table D-5. The data was estimated by Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC based
on income trends provided by ESRI. The data helps ascertain the demand for different housing
products based on the size of the market at specific cost levels.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development defines affordable housing costs as 30% of
a household’s adjusted gross income. For example, a household with an income of $50,000 per
year would be able to afford a monthly housing cost of about $1,250. Maxfield Research &
Consulting, LLC utilizes a figure of 25% to 30% for younger households and 40% or more for
seniors, since seniors generally have lower living expenses and can often sell their homes and
use the proceeds toward rent payments.
A generally accepted standard for affordable owner-occupied housing is that a typical house-
hold can afford to pay 3.0 to 3.5 times their annual income on a single-family home. Thus, a
$50,000 income would translate to an affordable single-family home of $150,000 to $175,000.
The higher end of this range assumes that the person has adequate funds for down payment
and closing costs, but also does not include savings or equity in an existing home which would
allow them to purchase a higher priced home.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 40
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 32
• St. Louis Park had an estimated median household income of $94,491 in 2023. It is pro-
jected to increase over the next 5 years to $110,233 in 2027 (16.7%, or 3.3% annually).
• With a household income of $102,636; a younger household (the median household income
under age 65) could afford a monthly housing cost of about $2,566; based on an allocation
of 30% of income toward housing. A senior household with an income of $66,417 (the me-
dian household income of seniors in St. Louis Park) could afford a monthly housing cost of
$1,660; based on an allocation of 40% of income toward housing.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 41
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 33
Total Under 25 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65 -74 75+
Less than $15,000 1,259 166 217 145 100 194 155 282
$15,000 to $24,999 990 110 158 80 82 137 135 288
$25,000 to $34,999 1,283 159 266 120 108 141 155 335
$35,000 to $49,999 2,230 188 543 260 190 224 293 532
$50,000 to $74,999 3,588 249 799 555 453 483 594 455
$75,000 to $99,999 4,269 241 1,114 830 602 684 510 288
$100,000 to $149,999 5,439 155 1,293 1,381 951 897 507 255
$150,000 to $199,999 2,908 54 614 770 569 498 236 167
$200,000+2,889 24 429 860 661 543 231 140
Total 24,856 1,346 5,435 5,002 3,716 3,799 2,815 2,742
Median Income $94,491 $55,646 $92,299 $115,640 $115,147 $104,715 $81,326 $51,110
Less than $15,000 885 142 144 102 67 101 98 231
$15,000 to $24,999 696 88 121 51 51 71 86 228
$25,000 to $34,999 893 132 178 81 71 75 98 258
$35,000 to $49,999 1,836 181 437 198 130 138 208 543
$50,000 to $74,999 3,376 272 731 437 367 397 579 593
$75,000 to $99,999 4,130 272 1,059 722 564 614 524 375
$100,000 to $149,999 6,482 222 1,548 1,494 1,088 988 696 446
$150,000 to $199,999 4,323 101 950 976 797 707 411 382
$200,000+3,765 38 587 1,021 808 651 365 295
Total 26,387 1,448 5,755 5,082 3,944 3,742 3,066 3,351
Median Income $110,233 $66,415 $107,083 $128,545 $130,753 $121,683 $99,820 $69,162
Less than $15,000 -375 -24 -74 -43 -33 -93 -57 -51
$15,000 to $24,999 -294 -22 -37 -29 -30 -66 -49 -60
$25,000 to $34,999 -390 -27 -88 -39 -37 -66 -57 -77
$35,000 to $49,999 -394 -7 -106 -62 -59 -86 -84 11
$50,000 to $74,999 -212 23 -68 -118 -87 -86 -15 138
$75,000 to $99,999 -139 31 -55 -109 -38 -70 15 87
$100,000 to $149,999 1,043 67 255 113 137 91 189 191
$150,000 to $199,999 1,415 48 335 205 228 210 174 215
$200,000+876 13 158 161 147 108 134 155
Total 1,531 102 320 79 228 -57 250 609
Median Income $15,742 $10,769 $14,784 $12,905 $15,606 $16,968 $18,494 $18,052
Sources: ESRI; Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC.
Change - 2023 to 2028
TABLE D-5
HOUSEHOLD INCOME BY AGE OF HOUSEHOLDER
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
(Number of Households)
2023
2028
2023 & 2028
Age of Householder
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 42
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 34
Non-Senior Households
• In 2023, 4.3% of the non-senior (under age 65) households in St. Louis Park had incomes un-
der $15,000 (822 households). These households would be eligible for subsidized rental
housing. Another 2.9% of St. Louis Park’s non-senior households had incomes between
$15,000 and $25,000 (567 households). Many of these households would qualify for subsi-
dized housing, but many could also afford “affordable” or older market rate rentals. If
housing costs absorb 30% of income, households with incomes of $15,000 to $25,000 could
afford to pay $375 to $625 per month. Note that few naturally occurring (NOAH) units in St.
Louis Park have rents in this range.
• In most geographic areas, household median incomes peak in the 45 to 54 age group, when
householders are considered in their peak earning years. However, in St. Louis Park, as of
2023, household median incomes peak slightly earlier in the 35 to 44 age cohort at
$115,640. By 2028, the median income for the 35 to 44 age group is projected to increase
to $128,545; a 11.2% increase. In 2028, the 45 to 54 age group will overtake the 35 to 44
age group with a median income of $130,753.
• The median resale price of homes in St. Louis Park was $359,900 through 2022 (see Table
FS-1). The income required to afford a home at this price would be about $102,829 to
$119,967; based on the standard of 3.0 to 3.5 times the median income (and assuming
these households do not have a high level of debt).
• Incomes are expected to increase by 16.7% between 2023 and 2028 in St. Louis Park for a
median income of $130,753 for non-senior households, equating to a 2.2% annual increase.
St. Louis Park’s non-senior household income growth is slightly less than the Metro Area’s
non-senior household income growth which is projected to increase by 3.0% annually.
Senior Households
• The oldest householders are likely to have lower incomes in 2023. In the City of St. Louis
Park, 5.5% of households ages 65 to 74 had incomes below $15,000, compared to 10.3% of
households ages 75 and over. Many of these low-income older senior households rely
solely on social security benefits. Typically, younger seniors have higher incomes due to the
fact they are still able to work or are married couples with two pensions or higher social se-
curity benefits. The 2023 median income for St. Louis Park householders in the 65 to 74 age
cohort and 75+ age cohort are $81,326 and $51,110; respectively.
• Generally, senior households with incomes greater than $35,000 can afford market rate
senior housing (often with the sale of their home proceeds). Based on a 40% allocation of
income for housing, this translates to monthly rents of at least $1,000. An estimated 4,208
senior households in St. Louis Park had incomes above $35,000 in 2022. A one-bedroom
market rate unit at $1,400 is affordable at $42,000 based on a 40% allocation.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 43
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 35
• Seniors who are able and willing to pay 80% or more of their income on assisted living hous-
ing would need an annual income of $35,940 to afford monthly rents of $2,396; which is
about the beginning monthly rent for assisted living projects in St. Louis Park. There is an
estimated 1,804 older senior (ages 75 and over) households with incomes greater than
$35,940 (65.8% of households 75 and over) in 2023. Seniors 75 and older are the primary
market for assisted living housing.
• The median income for seniors age 65+ in St. Louis Park is $66,417 in 2023. It is projected
to increase by $17,393 (26.2%) to $83,810 by 2028.
A map on the following page, created with ESRI data, displays 2022 median household incomes
by block group across St. Louis Park and neighboring communities. Income categories are as
follows: under $50,000; $50,000 to $74,999; $75,000 to $99,999; $100,000 to $124,999; and
$125,000 and over. Median incomes in St. Louis Park are highest in the northeastern portion of
the city in the Lake Forest and Fern Hill neighborhoods; in the southeastern portion of the city
in the Minikahda Vista, Browndale, Brookside, and Creekside neighborhoods; and in the north-
western portion of the city in the Westwood Hills neighborhood (see page 11 for St. Louis Park
neighborhood map).
Single Family Homes in the Minikahda Vista
Neighborhood
Single Family Homes in the Minikahda Vista
Neighborhood
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 44
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH & CONSULTING, LLC 36
St. Louis Park Median Household Income by Block Group, 2022
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 45
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH & CONSULTING, LLC 37
Tenure by Age of Householder
Table D-6 shows the number of owner and renter households in St. Louis Park by age group in
2010 and 2023. This data is useful in determining demand for certain types of housing since
housing preferences change throughout an individual’s life cycle. The following are key findings
from Table D-6.
• In 2010, 60.7% of all households in St. Louis Park owned their housing. By 2023, that per-
centage decreased to 58.1%. This is primarily due to the large number of new rental build-
ings recently completed or under construction in the city. However, the homeownership
rate has been declining for the last decade.
• Declines in homeownership are apparent in the surrounding areas. From 2010 to 2023,
Hennepin County decreased in homeownership from 64.3% to 63.1% and the Metro Area
experienced a decrease from 70.0% to 69.1%.
• As households progress through their life cycle, housing needs change. Typically, the pro-
portion of renter households decreases as households age out of their young -adult years.
However, in St. Louis Park, the 75+ age cohort is 28.0% renter households. For seniors,
rental housing often becomes a more viable option than homeownership, reducing the re-
sponsibility of maintenance and a financial commitment.
• In 2022, 92.5% of St. Louis Park’s households between the ages of 15 and 24 rented their
housing, compared to 63.8% of households between the ages of 25 and 34. St. Louis Park’s
households between 65 and 74 were overwhelmingly homeowners, resulting in 78.7%
homeownership rate. Also, note that in the recent 2020 Census 54.7% of white house-
holds owned versus only 27.6% of non-white households.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 46
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH & CONSULTING, LLC 38
Age No.Pct.No.Pct.No.Pct.No.Pct.No.Pct.No.Pct.
15-24 Own 110 9.0%95 7.5%2,790 10.9%2,034 9.2%7,947 16.0%7,132 16.1%
Rent 1,113 91.0%1,168 92.5%22,734 89.1%20,165 90.8%41,789 84.0%37,087 83.9%
Total 1,223 100.0%1,263 100.0%25,524 100.0%22,199 100.0%49,736 100.0%44,218 100.0%
25-34 Own 2,513 42.8%2,593 36.2%39,850 42.3%42,185 39.0%102,236 50.6%102,553 46.5%
Rent 3,365 57.2%4,562 63.8%54,312 57.7%66,049 61.0%99,716 49.4%117,892 53.5%
Total 5,878 100.0%7,156 100.0%94,162 100.0%108,234 100.0%201,952 100.0%220,445 100.0%
35-44 Own 2,484 65.0%2,831 65.0%57,684 66.6%66,046 64.6%154,678 72.3%168,280 70.1%
Rent 1,338 35.0%1,527 35.0%28,946 33.4%36,186 35.4%59,303 27.7%71,642 29.9%
Total 3,822 100.0%4,358 100.0%86,630 100.0%102,231 100.0%213,981 100.0%239,923 100.0%
45-54 Own 2,762 73.8%2,142 72.7%75,651 75.4%66,321 73.7%202,404 79.8%178,254 78.3%
Rent 979 26.2%805 27.3%24,688 24.6%23,708 26.3%51,379 20.2%49,263 21.7%
Total 3,741 100.0%2,947 100.0%100,339 100.0%90,029 100.0%253,783 100.0%227,517 100.0%
55-64 Own 2,509 77.6%2,591 72.5%65,466 79.5%75,783 76.4%162,595 82.6%198,846 80.5%
Rent 723 22.4%985 27.5%16,891 20.5%23,362 23.6%34,355 17.4%48,093 19.5%
Total 3,232 100.0%3,576 100.0%82,357 100.0%99,145 100.0%196,950 100.0%246,940 100.0%
65-74 Own 1,338 83.5%2,256 78.7%34,028 80.0%56,554 79.1%85,347 82.6%141,416 81.9%
Rent 265 16.5%611 21.3%8,502 20.0%14,937 20.9%17,998 17.4%31,211 18.1%
Total 1,603 100.0%2,867 100.0%42,530 100.0%71,491 100.0%103,345 100.0%172,627 100.0%
75-84 Own 1,003 78.4%1,215 78.6%21,975 75.6%23,681 73.9%50,083 75.6%60,815 75.7%
Rent 277 21.6%331 21.4%7,108 24.4%8,385 26.1%16,185 24.4%19,518 24.3%
Total 1,280 100.0%1,546 100.0%29,083 100.0%32,066 100.0%66,268 100.0%80,333 100.0%
85+Own 472 49.0%720 63.0%8,677 56.8%9,290 56.2%17,185 54.2%20,243 54.1%
Rent 492 51.0%423 37.0%6,611 43.2%7,243 43.8%14,549 45.8%17,146 45.9%
Total 964 100.0%1,143 100.0%15,288 100.0%16,533 100.0%31,734 100.0%37,389 100.0%
TOTAL Own 13,191 60.7%14,444 58.1%306,121 64.3%341,895 63.1%782,475 70.0%877,541 69.1%
Rent 8,552 39.3%10,412 41.9%169,792 35.7%200,034 36.9%335,274 30.0%391,851 30.9%
Total 21,743 100.0% 24,856 100.0% 475,913 100.0% 541,929 100.0% 1,117,749 100.0% 1,269,392 100.0%
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau; Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC.
TABLE D-6
TENURE BY AGE OF HOUSEHOLDER
ST. LOUIS PARK MARKET AREA
2010 & 2023
202320102023
City of St. Louis Park
2010
Metro AreaHennepin County
20232010
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 47
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH & CONSULTING, LLC 39
Tenure by Household Income
Table D-7 shows household tenure by age of householder for St. Louis Park, Hennepin County,
and the Metro Area in 2023. Data is an estimate from the American Community Survey.
Household tenure information is important to assess the propensity for owner-occupied or
renter-occupied housing options based on household affordability. As stated earlier, the De-
partment of Housing and Urban Development determines affordable housing as not exceeding
30% of the household’s income. It is important to note that the higher the income, the lower
percentage a household typically allocates to housing. Many lower income households, as well
as many young and senior households, spend more than 30% of their income, while middle -
aged households in their prime earning years typically allocate 20% to 25% of their income.
• Typically, as income increases, so does the rate of homeownership. Th is can be seen in St.
Louis Park, where the homeownership rate steadily increases from 27.9% of households
with incomes below $15,000 to 83.5% of households with incomes above $150,000.
• A portion of renter households that are referred to as lifestyle rent ers, or those who are fi-
nancially able to own but choose to rent, have household incomes above $60,000 ($1,500
rent | 53.8% of St. Louis Park’s renters in 2023). In addition, 25.5% of St. Louis Park renters
earn $100,000 or more. Some renters choose to be cost burdened (i.e. pay more than 30%
of income to housing) and pay higher rental costs for amenities and proximity to transit
while giving up their vehicles.
• Households with incomes below $15,000 are typically a market for deep subsidy rental
housing (9.7% of St. Louis Park renters in 2023). About 2.8% of St. Louis Park’s rental gen-
eral-occupancy inventory (252) are deep subsidy units.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 48
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH & CONSULTING, LLC 40
No. Pct. No. Pct. No. Pct. No. Pct. No. Pct. No. Pct.
Less than $15,000 404 29.7%959 70.3% 11,008 27.8% 28,607 72.2% 24,255 30.8% 54,560 69.2%
$15,000 to $24,999 546 48.0%591 52.0% 9,877 33.2% 19,839 66.8% 24,462 37.1% 41,522 62.9%
$25,000 to $34,999 664 51.1%635 48.9% 13,090 39.0% 20,500 61.0% 34,991 45.0% 42,740 55.0%
$35,000 to $49,999 965 39.7% 1,465 60.3% 24,388 46.7% 27,880 53.3% 63,290 51.3% 59,964 48.7%
$50,000 to $74,999 1,917 45.4% 2,304 54.6% 46,843 55.2% 37,949 44.8% 124,779 62.0% 76,589 38.0%
$75,000 to $99,999 2,191 60.8% 1,413 39.2% 43,806 63.6% 25,033 36.4% 120,808 70.8% 49,840 29.2%
$100,000 to $149,999 2,957 66.8% 1,468 33.2% 74,379 75.3% 24,434 24.7% 203,553 82.3% 43,907 17.7%
$150,000 +5,323 83.5% 1,056 16.5% 119,507 89.0% 14,789 11.0% 279,005 91.7% 25,126 8.3%
Total 14,966 60.2% 9,890 39.8% 342,898 63.3% 199,031 36.7% 875,143 68.9% 394,249 31.1%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey; Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC.
Own Rent
Hennepin County
Own Rent Own Rent
St. Louis Park
TABLE D-7
TENURE BY HOUSEHOLD INCOME
ST. LOUIS PARK MARKET AREA
2023
Metro Area
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 49
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH & CONSULTING, LLC 41
Tenure by Household Size
Table D-8 shows the distribution of households by size and tenure in St. Louis Park in 2023. This
data is useful in that it sheds insight into the number of units by unit type that may be most
needed in St. Louis Park.
• Household size for renters tends to be smaller than for owners. This trend is a result of the
typical market segments for rental housing, including households that are younger and are
less likely to be married with children as well as older adults and seniors who choose to
downsize from their single-family homes. In 2021, the average St. Louis Park renter house-
hold consisted of 1.78 persons compared to the average owner household of 2.20 persons.
• An estimated 51.5% of renter households in the City of St. Louis Park in 2022 have one per-
son while an additional 31.7% of renter households have two people. The one-person
households would primarily seek one-bedroom units and two-person households that are
couple would primarily seek one-bedroom units. Two-person households that consist of a
parent and child or roommate would primarily seek two-bedroom units. Larger households
would seek units with multiple bedrooms.
• The following chart illustrates declining household sizes in St. Louis Park compared to
Hennepin County and the Metro. Over the past 40 years, St. Lou is Park household sizes
have decreased at a faster rate than both Hennepin County and the Metro Area. This is due
to many young professionals deciding to live in St Louis Park combined with the move of
young families to further out suburbs for more space.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 50
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH & CONSULTING, LLC 42
Household Size Owners Pct. Renters Pct. Owners Pct. Renters Pct. Owners Pct. Renters Pct.
1PP Household 4,827 47.4% 5,359 52.6% 83,814 47.2% 93,792 52.8% 198,375 52.1% 182,072 47.9%
2PP Household 5,505 62.5% 3,297 37.5% 125,500 68.5% 57,692 31.5% 332,605 74.6% 112,976 25.4%
3PP Household 1,836 62.1% 1,121 37.9% 52,131 70.3% 22,076 29.7% 144,728 75.1% 47,963 24.9%
4PP Household 1,665 82.2%360 17.8% 50,287 77.5% 14,581 22.5% 142,056 81.3% 32,707 18.7%
5PP Household 473 68.5%217 31.5% 19,479 75.4% 6,356 24.6% 58,478 78.1% 16,398 21.9%
6PP Household 95 62.2%58 37.8% 6,303 66.7% 3,142 33.3% 19,143 71.0% 7,815 29.0%
7PP+ Household 43 100.0% 0 0.0% 4,380 64.6% 2,396 35.4% 13,202 69.5% 5,783 30.5%
Total 14,444 58.1% 10,412 41.9% 341,895 63.1% 200,034 36.9% 908,587 69.1% 405,714 30.9%
Sources: U.S. Census & Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC.
TABLE D-8
HOUSEHOLD SIZE
ST. LOUIS PARK MARKET AREA
2023
St. Louis Park Hennepin County Metro Area
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 51
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH & CONSULTING, LLC 43
Household Type
Table D-9 shows a breakdown of the type of households present in the City of St. Louis Park in
2010 and 2023. The data is useful in assessing housing demand since the household composi-
tion often dictates the type of housing needed and preferred.
• Between 2010 and 2023, St. Louis Park experienced an increase in all types of households
except other family households (-16.8%). “Other families” include single-parents and un-
married couples with children. Households with Roommates experienced the largest in-
crease as a percentage (41.0%).
• Compared to Hennepin County and the Metro Area, St. Louis Park had a lower proportion of
Married without Children households. In 2023, 21.1% of St. Louis Park households were in
the Married without Children compared to 25.4% in Hennepin County and 27.9% in the
Metro area.
• Persons Living Alone grew significantly adding 1,470 households (16.9%) between 2010 and
2023. As of 2023, Persons Living Alone comprised the largest percentage (41.0%) of all
households consisting of an estimated 10,186 households. This household type is signifi-
cantly larger in St. Louis Park compared to Hennepin County (32.8%) and the Metro Area
(28.9%). This could indicate an aging senior population or millennials moving to the area.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 52
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH & CONSULTING, LLC 44
• As the frailty level of seniors increases, they typically move out of their homes in pursuit of
housing with services. Millennials are more likely to choose to live alone due to the genera-
tions’ delayed marriage and home purchase rates and preference to live in smaller quarters
in urban areas.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 53
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH & CONSULTING, LLC 45
2010 2023 2010 2023 2010 2023 2010 2023 2010 2023 2010 2023
Number of Households
St. Louis Park 21,743 24,856 4,647 5,256 3,084 3,520 2,728 2,271 8,716 10,186 2,568 3,622
Hennepin County 475,913 541,929 116,099 137,406 89,084 100,613 67,702 70,864 155,807 177,606 47,221 55,440
Metro Area 1,117,749 1,269,392 298,723 354,260 244,687 264,031 164,086 178,000 319,030 367,447 91,223 105,654
Percent Total
St. Louis Park 100.0% 100.0% 21.4% 21.1% 14.2% 14.2% 12.5% 9.1% 40.1% 41.0% 11.8% 14.6%
Hennepin County 100.0% 100.0% 24.4% 25.4% 18.7% 18.6% 14.2% 13.1% 32.7% 32.8% 9.9% 10.2%
Metro Area 100.0% 100.0% 26.7% 27.9% 21.9% 20.8% 14.7% 14.0% 28.5% 28.9% 8.2% 8.3%
No. Pct. No. Pct. No. Pct. No. Pct. No. Pct. No. Pct.
St. Louis Park 3,113 14.3%609 13.1%436 14.1% -457 -16.8% 1,470 16.9% 1,054 41.0%
Hennepin County 66,016 13.9% 21,307 18.4% 11,529 12.9% 3,162 4.7% 21,799 14.0% 8,219 17.4%
Metro Area 151,643 13.6% 55,537 18.6% 19,344 7.9% 13,914 8.5% 48,417 15.2% 14,431 15.8%
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau; Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC
TABLE D-9
HOUSEHOLD TYPE
ST. LOUIS PARK MARKET AREA
2010 & 2023
Family Households Non-Family Households
* Single-parent families, unmarried couples with children.
Change
Total HH's Married w/o Child Married w/ Child Other *Living Alone Roommates
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 54
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH & CONSULTING, LLC 46
Net Worth
Table D-10 shows household net worth by age of householder in St. Louis Park in 2023 as well
as the 2022 average and median net worth by age cohort for 2022. Simply stated, net worth is
the difference between assets and liabilities, or the total value of assets after the debt is sub-
tracted. The data was compiled and estimated by ESRI b ased on the Survey of Consumer Fi-
nances and Federal Reserve Board data with adjustments by Maxfield Research.
According to data released by the National Association of Realtors in February 2022, the aver-
age American homeowner has a net worth about 40 times greater than that of a renter which
equates to an average net worth of $300,000 for homeowners and $8,000 for renters.2
St. Louis Park had an average net worth of $882,911 in 2022, 32.9% lower than the average net
worth of a Hennepin County householder ($1,336,214) and 32.3% lower than the average net
worth of a Metro Area householder ($1,304,543). St. Louis Park had a 2022 median net worth
of $110,945, 18.6% lower than the median net worth in Hennepin County ($204,345) and 30.4%
less than the median net worth in the Metro Area ($239,052). Median net worth is generally a
better indicator of the net worth as it is not heavily impacted by uncommonly high - or low-in-
come households. Median net worth peaked in the 65 to 74 age cohort at $461,447 while aver-
age net worth peaked slightly earlier in the City’s 55 to 64 age group at $1,662,442.
2 “2022 Snapshot of Race and Home Buying in America.” National Association of Realtors Research® Group, pp. 5,
Feb. 2022. https://www.nar.realtor/research-and-statistics/research-reports/a-snapshot-of-race-and-home-buying-in-
america. Accessed 7 Oct. 2022.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 55
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH & CONSULTING, LLC 47
Total Under 25 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65 -74 75+
Less than $15,000 4,996 750 2,105 780 309 445 322 286
$15,000 to $34,999 1,544 274 654 302 102 88 90 34
$35,000 to $49,999 671 33 281 146 60 70 55 26
$50,000 to $99,999 2,855 152 859 717 404 336 150 236
$100,000 to $149,999 1,755 67 414 344 366 293 119 153
$150,000 to $249,999 2,729 43 535 668 460 410 225 387
$250,000 to $499,999 3,577 18 413 809 696 546 498 597
$500,000 to $999,999 3,244 9 136 802 640 608 639 412
$1,000,000 or more 3,486 0 38 434 678 1,005 719 612
Subtotal 24,856 1,346 5,435 5,002 3,716 3,799 2,815 2,742
Median Net Worth (2022) $166,410 $13,463 $32,985 $173,739 $285,139 $338,566 $461,447 $321,718
Average Net Worth (2022) $882,911 $41,499 $105,588 $593,850 $1,266,604 $1,662,442 $1,471,892 $1,159,148
Less than $15,000 112,989 16,628 39,116 19,703 9,719 11,651 10,509 5,662
$15,000 to $34,999 28,133 4,386 9,549 6,399 2,526 2,092 2,452 729
$35,000 to $49,999 11,832 623 3,988 2,489 1,373 1,564 1,242 553
$50,000 to $99,999 50,579 2,960 14,228 11,041 7,347 6,969 3,473 4,561
$100,000 to $149,999 32,771 1,375 7,371 6,116 6,494 5,549 2,536 3,329
$150,000 to $249,999 55,121 915 8,699 13,535 10,167 8,775 5,304 7,727
$250,000 to $499,999 73,434 373 7,505 14,390 14,764 13,276 11,780 11,346
$500,000 to $999,999 70,987 186 3,417 15,715 14,190 13,627 15,254 8,599
$1,000,000 or more 106,083 0 1,118 10,768 21,292 33,671 23,329 15,906
Subtotal 541,929 27,446 94,990 100,155 87,872 97,174 75,881 58,411
Median Net Worth (2022) $204,345 $12,379 $31,268 $173,948 $326,627 $463,705 $511,715 $363,178
Average Net Worth (2022) $1,336,214 $39,907 $121,500 $765,727 $1,718,111 $2,399,866 $2,103,521 $1,558,113
Less than $15,000 222,902 27,240 76,442 39,870 20,262 25,203 21,893 11,990
$15,000 to $34,999 57,786 8,195 18,298 13,491 5,496 4,830 5,817 1,659
$35,000 to $49,999 25,784 1,376 8,179 5,108 3,041 3,824 2,964 1,293
$50,000 to $99,999 118,759 6,707 34,222 25,049 16,352 16,849 8,497 11,084
$100,000 to $149,999 80,450 3,462 18,920 14,893 15,747 13,404 6,211 7,812
$150,000 to $249,999 140,200 2,262 23,521 33,888 26,872 22,885 12,934 17,839
$250,000 to $499,999 195,625 835 20,392 40,281 39,738 35,863 31,262 27,256
$500,000 to $999,999 186,172 454 8,954 38,883 40,773 38,950 38,773 19,385
$1,000,000 or more 241,713 0 3,006 26,772 50,281 77,494 52,596 31,564
Total 1,269,392 50,531 211,934 238,233 218,562 239,302 180,947 129,882
Median Net Worth (2022) $239,052 $13,912 $52,817 $201,464 $352,612 $466,130 $506,221 $337,681
Average Net Worth (2022) $1,304,543 $49,332 $142,094 $847,459 $1,672,594 $2,218,455 $1,906,275 $1,386,599
Sources: ESRI & Maxfield Research& Consulting, LLC.
TABLE D-10
NET WORTH BY AGE OF HOUSEHOLDER
ST. LOUIS PARK MARKET AREA
Metro Area
2023
Age of Householder
St. Louis Park
Hennepin County
Note: Median and Average Net Worth data is as of 2022 as no data is yet available for 2023.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 56
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH & CONSULTING, LLC 48
Median Net Worth by Census Block in and Near St. Louis Park
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 57
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH & CONSULTING, LLC 49
• The following chart depicts median net worth by race and ethnicity nationwide between
1989 and 2019. The data is sourced to the Federal Reserve Survey of Consumer Finances.
As of 2019 housing net worth by category were as follows: White (Non-Hispanic), $189,100;
Black (Non-Hispanic), $24,100; Hispanic, $36,050; and Other $74,500. Between 1989 and
2019 net worth by category increased the following percentages: White (Non-Hispanic),
31.7%; Black (Non-Hispanic), 181.9%; Hispanic, 262.7%; and Other 3.5%.
Demographic Summary
Table D-11 provides a demographic summary that compares St. Louis Park to Hennepin County
and the Metro Area. Data in D-11 is as of 2023.
• St. Louis Park had a higher proportion of those age 25 to 34 and age 75+ than Hennepin
County and the Metro Area. As of 2023, 18.9% of St. Louis Park’s population was between
the ages of 25 and 34 compared to 14.8% in Hennepin County and 14.9% in the Metro Area.
An estimated 8.3% of St. Louis Park’s population was age 75+ compared to 7.0% in Henne-
pin County and 5.1% in the Metro Area.
• St. Louis Park’s median household income ($94,491) was an estimated $1,238 more than
Hennepin County but $246 less than the Metro Area.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 58
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH & CONSULTING, LLC 50
• St. Louis Park had a higher percentage of renters at 41.9% of its households compared to
36.9% of households in Hennepin County and 30.9% of households in the Metro Area.
• St. Louis Park had a low percentage of households that were married with children (14.2%).
As a comparison, Hennepin County had 18.6% of households married with children and the
Metro Area had 20.8% of households married with children. Conversely, St. Louis Park had
a higher proportion of households living alone (41.0%); significantly higher than Hennepin
County (32.8%) and the Metro Area (28.9%).
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 59
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH & CONSULTING, LLC 51
Summary
Num Pct. Num Pct. Num Pct.
Demographics
Population 51,500 100.0% 1,314,301 100.0% 3,239,384 100.0%
Households 24,856 100.0% 541,929 100.0% 1,269,392 100.0%
Age Distribution
Under 18 9,013 17.5% 273,375 20.8% 811,750 25.1%
18-24 4,223 8.2% 128,801 9.8% 305,639 9.4%
25-34 9,734 18.9% 194,517 14.8% 483,106 14.9%
35-44 8,034 15.6% 181,374 13.8% 450,242 13.9%
45-54 5,871 11.4% 155,088 11.8% 506,111 15.6%
55-64 5,923 11.5% 165,602 12.6% 374,654 11.6%
65-74 4,429 8.6% 123,544 9.4% 190,613 5.9%
75-84 2,575 5.0% 61,772 4.7% 111,739 3.4%
85+1,700 3.3% 30,229 2.3% 52,583 1.6%
Household Income
Average Household Income
Median Household Income
Net Worth
Average Net Worth (2022)
Median Net Worth (2022)
Household Tenure
Own 14,444 58.1% 341,895 63.1% 877,541 69.1%
Rent 10,412 41.9% 200,034 36.9% 391,851 30.9%
Household Type
Married with Children 3,520 14.2% 100,613 18.6% 264,031 20.8%
Married without Children 5,256 21.1% 137,406 25.4% 354,260 27.9%
Other 2,271 9.1% 70,864 13.1% 178,000 14.0%
Living Alone 10,186 41.0% 177,606 32.8% 367,447 28.9%
Roommates 3,622 14.6% 55,440 10.2% 105,654 8.3%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau; ESRI; & Maxfield Research & Consulting,LLC.
$125,598
$94,491
$132,643
$93,254
$128,733
$94,738
$882,911
$166,410
$1,336,214
$204,345
$1,304,543
$239,052
TABLE D-11
DEMOGRAPHIC SUMMARY
ST. LOUIS PARK MARKET AREA
2023
St. Louis Park Hennepin Metro Area
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 60
HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 52
Introduction
The variety and condition of the housing stock in a community provides the basis for an attrac-
tive living environment. Housing functions as a building block for neighborhoods and goods
and services. We examined the housing market in St. Louis Park by reviewing data on the age
of the existing housing supply; examining residential building trends since 20 10; and reviewing
housing data from the American Community Survey. Data is also provided for Hennepin County
and the Seven County Metro Area for comparison purposes.
Residential Construction Trends
Building Permits
Maxfield Research obtained data on the number of new construction housing units from 20 10
through 2022. Note that data for 2022 is preliminary. Data was obtained from the US Depart-
ment of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) State of the City Data Systems (SOCDS). Ta-
ble HC-1 on the following page displays the number of building permits issued for new con-
struction of residential units by city in St. Louis Park, Hennepin County, and the Seven County
Metro Area.
Detached single-family is defined as fully detached housing units. Multifamily housing includes
for-sale and rental projects includes duplex, triplex, and four-plex structures, in addition to
buildings with five or more units. A multifamily structure is generally defined as a residential
building containing units built one on top of another and those built side -by-side which do not
have a ground-to-roof wall and/or have common facilities. Townhomes include attached sin-
gle-family units, semi-attached units, side-by-side units, and rowhouses. Table HC-1 breaks
down permit activity by single-family and low- and higher-density multifamily.
• Development activity has been high in the City of St. Louis Park with an average of 253 units
built per year since 2010. A total of 3,286 residential housing units were permitted in St.
Louis Park from 2010 through 2022.
• Of the 3,286 new residential units permitted in St. Louis Park, over 96% (96.5%) of those
permits were issued for multi-family units while 3.5% were issued for single-family units. In
comparison, single-family permits accounted for about 27.9% of units in Hennepin County
and 30.9% of units in the Seven-County Metro Area.
• St. Louis Park accounted for 4.3% of the permitted units between 2010 and 2022 in Henne-
pin County and 1.9% of all units in the Seven-County Metro.
• Nearly all of St. Louis Park’s 2022 multifamily units (99.5% - all but five units) permitted are
in projects containing 5 or more units.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 61
HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 53
• All of St. Louis Park’s multifamily units, with the exception of three units in 2014, are multi-
family units with five or more units.
SF MF MF Total SF MF MF Total SF MF MF Total
Year Units 2-4 units 5+ units Units Units 2-4 units 5+ units Units Units 2-4 units 5+ units Units
2010 6 0 0 6 846 24 1,045 1,915 3,253 105 1,674 5,032
2011 5 0 0 5 900 6 709 1,615 3,292 20 1,278 4,590
2012 29 0 469 498 1,346 14 4,145 5,505 4,823 74 5,612 10,509
2013 10 0 51 61 1,747 24 4,208 5,979 5,811 59 4,675 10,545
2014 11 3 314 328 1,655 24 2,986 4,665 5,200 104 4,478 9,782
2015 29 0 360 389 1,617 16 2,743 4,376 5,140 48 4,699 9,887
2016 6 0 0 6 1,641 23 3,700 5,364 5,825 110 6,003 11,938
2017 1 0 111 112 1,930 44 3,370 5,344 6,371 133 6,077 12,581
2018 1 0 0 1 1,955 82 5,020 7,057 6,372 154 8,807 15,333
2019 0 0 442 442 1,984 66 7,145 9,195 6,966 165 12,177 19,308
2020 6 0 174 180 1,942 79 5,673 7,694 7,163 190 11,093 18,446
2021 7 0 325 332 2,091 85 5,729 7,905 8,321 283 13,233 21,837
2022 5 0 921 926 1,656 116 7,637 9,409 6,643 234 13,370 20,247
Total 116 3 3,167 3,286 21,310 603 54,110 76,023 75,180 1,679 93,176 170,035
HC-1
RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK, HENNEPIN COUNTY, & SEVEN COUNTY METRO
2010 to 2022
Units Permitted
City of St Louis Park Hennepin County
Units Permitted
Seven County Metro
Units Permitted
Sources: HUD's State of the City Data Systems (SOCDS); & Maxfield Research and Consulting LLC.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 62
HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 54
American Community Survey
The American Community Survey (“ACS”) is an ongoing statistical survey administered by the
U.S. Census Bureau that is sent to approximately 3 million addresses annually. The survey gath-
ers data previously contained only in the long form of the decennial census. As a result, the
survey provides a more “up-to-date” portrait of demographic, economic, social, and household
characteristics every year, not just every ten years. The most recent ACS highlights data col-
lected between 2016 and 2020. It should be noted that all ACS surveys are subject to sampling
error and uncertainty. The ACS reports margins of errors (MOEs) with estimates for most
standard census geographies. The MOE is shown by reliability from low, medium to high. Due
to the MOE, 2020 ACS data may have inconsistencies with previous 2010 Census data and cur-
rent available 2020 Census data.
Tables HC-2 through HC-10 show key data from the American Community Survey for the City of
St. Louis Park, PMA, and PMA Remainder.
Occupied Housing Units by Tenure
Tenure is a key variable that analyzes the propensity for householders to rent or own their
housing unit. Tenure is an integral statistic used by numerous governmental agencies and pri-
vate sector industries to assess neighborhood stability. Table HC-2 shows the tenure by occu-
pied housing units in 2021.
• Housing in St. Louis Park is predominantly owner occupied. In 2021, 58.1% of housing units
were owner occupied in the City. However, in comparison to Hennepin County (63.1%
owner-occupied) and the Seven County Metro (69.1% owner-occupied), the proportion of
owner occupied units in St. Louis Park (58.1%) is less than in the other two geographies.
• The proportion of renter occupied units was higher within the City of St. Louis Park than in
either Hennepin County or the Seven County Metro. In St. Louis Park, 41.9% of households
were renter occupied in 2021 compared to 36.9% in Hennepin County and 30.9% in the
Seven County Metro.
Year/Occupancy Pct. Pct. No. Pct. No. Pct.
Owner Occupied 14,025 58.1% 330,286 63.1% 848,779 69.1%
Renter Occupied 10,110 41.9% 193,242 36.9% 379,008 30.9%
Total 24,135 100.0%523,528 100.0%1,227,787 100.0%
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau-American Community Survey & Maxfield Research and Consulting, LLC.
2021
Hennepin County Seven-County Metro
TABLE HC-2
OCCUPIED HOUSING UNITS BY TENURE
ST LOUIS PARK MARKET AREA
St Louis Park
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 63
HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 55
Age of Housing Stock
The following graph shows the age distribution of the housing stock based on data from the
U.S. Census Bureau and the American Community Survey (5-Year estimates). Table HC-3 in-
cludes the number of housing units built in the City of St. Louis Park, Hennepin County, and the
Seven County Metro, prior to 1940 and during each decade since.
• In St. Louis Park, the highest proportion of homes were built in the 1950s (25.2%). In con-
trast, in Hennepin County, the highest proportion of homes were built prior to the 1940s
(18.3%) while in the Seven County Metro Area most homes were built in the 1980s (14.7%).
• The second highest decade for which housing was built in St. Louis Park was the 1940s
(12.7%). By comparison, the second highest decade in both Hennepin County and the
Seven-County Metro was the 1970s (14.2% and 14.3%, respectively).
• Since the 2010s, 6.1% of St. Louis Park’s housing stock has been built compared to 6.8% in
Hennepin County and 6.9% in the Metro Area. With over 47% of homes in St. Louis Park
built in the 1950s or earlier and being built-out, there are few property’s available for hous-
ing development. As such, new housing development will be driven by infill and redevelop-
ment.
• Charts on the following page illustrate the breakdown by decade of the housing stock in St.
Louis Park as well as in the City compared to Hennepin County.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 64
HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 56
• Owner occupied units in St. Louis Park have an older median age (1954) than in Hennepin
County (1968) or the Seven County Metro (1976). In contrast, renter occupied units in St.
Louis Park have a newer median age (1977) than in Hennepin County (1974). The Seven
County Metro had the same median age of its renter occupied units as (1977).
• St. Louis Park’s median age of owner occupied homes (1954) was 23 years less than its
renter occupied homes (1977). In comparison, the difference between owner and renter
occupied homes was six years in Hennepin County and only one year in the Metro Area.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 65
HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 57
Total Med. Yr.
Units Built No.Pct.No.Pct.No.Pct.No.Pct.No.Pct.No.Pct.No.Pct.No.Pct.No.Pct.No.Pct.
Owner-Occupied 14,025 1954 2,076 14.8% 2,824 20.1% 4,630 33.0%844 6.0% 1,037 7.4% 1,080 7.7%418 3.0%818 5.8%298 2.1% 0 0.0%
Renter-Occupied 10,110 1977 239 2.4%234 2.3% 1,445 14.3% 1,815 18.0% 1,650 16.3% 1,717 17.0%713 7.1% 1,132 11.2% 1,159 11.5% 6 0.1%
Total 24,135 1962 2,315 9.6% 3,058 12.7% 6,075 25.2% 2,659 11.0% 2,687 11.1% 2,797 11.6% 1,131 4.7% 1,950 8.1% 1,457 6.0% 6 0.0%
Owner-Occupied 330,286 1968 63,761 19.3% 21,645 6.6% 53,271 16.1% 32,099 9.7% 40,641 12.3% 43,900 13.3% 31,713 9.6% 27,907 8.4% 14,568 4.4%781 0.2%
Renter-Occupied 193,242 1974 32,138 16.6% 6,777 3.5% 15,315 7.9% 27,425 14.2% 33,660 17.4% 26,891 13.9% 16,382 8.5% 14,397 7.5% 20,127 10.4%130 0.1%
Total 523,528 1971 95,899 18.3% 28,422 5.4% 68,586 13.1% 59,524 11.4% 74,301 14.2% 70,791 13.5% 48,095 9.2% 42,304 8.1% 34,695 6.6%911 0.2%
Owner-Occupied 848,779 1976 117,305 13.8% 37,144 4.4% 99,585 11.7% 78,661 9.3% 107,261 12.6% 124,497 14.7% 126,734 14.9% 108,544 12.8% 47,050 5.5% 1,998 0.2%
Renter-Occupied 379,008 1977 53,441 14.1% 11,893 3.1% 28,025 7.4% 49,647 13.1% 68,907 18.2% 55,544 14.7% 39,505 10.4% 35,818 9.5% 35,999 9.5%229 0.1%
Total 1,227,787 1977 170,746 13.9% 49,037 4.0% 127,610 10.4% 128,308 10.5% 176,168 14.3% 180,041 14.7% 166,239 13.5% 144,362 11.8% 83,049 6.8% 2,227 0.2%
2020s
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau - American Community Survey & Maxfield Research and Consulting LLC.
TABLE HC-3
AGE OF HOUSING STOCK
ST LOUIS PARK MARKET AREA
2021
Year Unit Built
City of St Louis Park
Hennepin County
Seven County Metro
1950s 1960s 2000s1970s 2010s1980s<1940 1940s 1990s
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 66
HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 58
Housing Units by Structure and Tenure
Table HC-4 shows the housing stock in St. Louis Park, Hennepin County, and Minnesota by type
of structure and tenure based on 2021 Five-year ACS estimates (2017-2021).
• Single-family detached units are the dominate housing type for owner-occupied units in the
City of St. Louis Park (78.8%), Hennepin County (79.9%), and Minnesota (85.3%).
• Nearly 12% of St. Louis Park rentals are either single family or condo/townhome rentals.
• Structures with 50 or more units made of up the largest share of renter-occupied units in
the City of St. Louis Park (41.6%), Hennepin County (35.8%), and the State of Minnesota
(24.2%).
• Single-family units account for about 49% of all unit types in St. Louis Park, 54.0% of all unit
types in Hennepin County, and 66.7% of all unit types in Minnesota. However, St. Louis Park
has a relatively low amount of single-family rental units at 7.3% compared to the State of
Minnesota at 19.2%. Single-family rental housing demand is on the rise as home prices con-
tinue to increase, due largely to rising home values and higher mortgage rates of the past
year. Other Twin Cities ex-urban communities are now building purpose-built single-family
rental housing.
• Rental properties with 50 or more units accounted for 41.6% of rental units and buildings in
the City, 20.0% of rental units with 20 to 49 units in the City, and 17.6% of rental units with
10 to 19 units in the City.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 67
HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 59
Owner-Occupied Housing Units by Mortgage Status
Table HC-5 shows mortgage status from the American Community Survey for 20 21 (5-Year esti-
mates). Mortgage status provides information on the cost of homeownership when analyzed in
conjunction with mortgage payment data. A mortgage refers to all forms of debt where the
property is pledged as security for repayment of debt. A first mortgage has priority claim over
any other mortgage or if it is the only mortgage. A second (and sometimes third) mortgage is
called a “junior mortgage,” a home equity line of credit (HELOC) would also fall into this cate-
gory. Finally, a housing unit without a mortgage is owned free and clear and is debt free.
• In St. Louis Park, 68.1% of homes have a mortgage while 31.9% own their homes without a
mortgage. Thus, the percentage of housing units in St. Louis Park owned without a mort-
gage is less than the State of Minnesota (34.0% but higher than the Metro Area (29.7%).
• Of homes with a mortgage in St. Louis Park, 8.7% had an additional second mortgage, home
equity loan, or both. In comparison, 9.8% of homes throughout the State of Minnesota had
a second mortgage, home equity loan, or both.
• Housing units with a mortgage reported a higher median value than those without a mort-
gage. The median value of housing units with a mortgage was $312,900 in St. Louis Park
compared to $299,000 for homes without a mortgage. Compared to St. Louis Park, homes
with mortgages had a median value of $315,400 in Hennepin County, $302,988 in the Metro
Area, and $260,500 in Minnesota. Homes without a mortgage had a median value of
$315,400 in Hennepin County, $302,988 in the Metro, and $260,500 in Minnesota.
Owner- Renter- Owner- Renter- Owner- Renter-
Units in Structure Occupied Pct. Occupied Pct. Occupied Pct. Occupied Pct. Occupied Pct. Occupied Pct.
1, detached 11,057 78.8%737 7.3% 256,853 79.9% 20,721 10.8% 1,354,781 85.3% 118,680 19.2%
1, attached 971 6.9%429 4.2% 32,007 10.0% 13,412 7.0% 123,436 7.8% 51,192 8.3%
2 62 0.4%225 2.2% 4,917 1.5% 12,409 6.4% 10,569 0.7% 35,210 5.7%
3 to 4 50 0.4%155 1.5% 2,683 0.8% 8,765 4.6% 8,157 0.5% 37,269 6.0%
5 to 9 387 2.8%520 5.1% 2,937 0.9% 10,257 5.3% 7,180 0.5% 41,203 6.7%
10 to 19 127 0.9% 1,778 17.6% 2,654 0.8% 23,444 12.2% 4,489 0.3% 71,193 11.5%
20 to 49 423 3.0% 2,019 20.0% 5,182 1.6% 33,979 17.6% 10,184 0.6% 105,093 17.0%
50 or more 948 6.8% 4,203 41.6% 12,884 4.0% 68,997 35.8% 20,998 1.3% 149,772 24.2%
Mobile home 0 0.0%37 0.4% 1,143 0.4%485 0.3% 48,404 3.0% 9,357 1.5%
Boat, RV, van, etc. 0 0.0% 7 0.1%54 0.0%109 0.1%413 0.0%408 0.1%
Total 14,025 100%10,110 100%321,314 100%192,578 100%1,588,611 100%619,377 100%
MinnesotaHennepin County
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau - American Community Survey & Maxfield Research and Consulting LLC.
TABLE HC-4
HOUSING UNITS BY STRUCTURE & TENURE
ST LOUIS PARK MARKET AREA
2021
St Louis Park
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 68
HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 60
State of MN
Mortgage Status No.Pct.No.Pct.No.Pct.Pct.
Housing units without a mortgage 4,473 31.9%97,647 29.6%252,031 29.7%34.0%
Housing units with a mortgage/debt 9,552 68.1%232,639 70.4%596,748 70.3%66.0%
Second mortgage only 262 1.9%7,569 2.3%20,610 2.4%2.3%
Home equity loan only 908 6.5%26,168 7.9%67,304 7.9%7.2%
Both second mortgage and equity loan 49 0.3%938 0.3%2,322 0.3% 0.3%
No second mortgage or equity loan 8,256 58.9%195,501 59.2%500,683 59.0%55.8%
Total 14,025 100.0% 330,286 100.0% 848,779 100.0% 99.7%
Median Value by Mortgage Status
Housing units with a mortgage $260,500
Housing units without a mortgage $230,400
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau - American Community Survey & Maxfield Research and Consulting LLC.
TABLE HC-5
OWNER-OCCUPIED HOUSING UNITS BY MORTGAGE STATUS
ST LOUIS PARK MARKET AREA
2021
$299,000 $295,700 $278,622
St Louis Park Hennepin County Seven County Metro
$312,900 $315,400 $302,988
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 69
HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 61
Owner-Occupied Housing Units by Value
Table HC-6 presents data on housing values summarized by nine price ranges. Housing value
refers to the estimated price point the property would sell if the property were for sale. For
single-family and townhome properties, value includes both the land and the structure. For
condominium units, value refers to only the unit.
• The median owner-occupied home value in St. Louis Park ($308,800) was slightly lower
(0.1%) than the median home value in Hennepin County ($309,200) in 2021. However, in
comparison, the median owner-occupied home value in St. Louis Park was 3.9% higher than
in the Metro Area and 23.4% greater than the State of Minnesota.
• In St. Louis Park, homes valued between $300,000 and $399,999 made up the largest pro-
portion of homes, accounting for 27.5% of owner-occupied units. Another 17.2% of owner-
occupied units were valued between $200,000 and $249,999.
• The largest proportion of owner-occupied homes in Hennepin County were priced between
$300,000 and $399,999 (21.4%) followed by greater than $500,000 (18.6%). The Metro
Area’s two largest categories of owner-occupied homes were between $300,000 and
$399,999 (22.1%) followed by $200,000 to $249,999 (16.2%) while the two largest propor-
tions in Minnesota were also between $300,000 and $399,999 (22.1%) and greater than
$500,000 (13.8%).
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 70
HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 62
Renter-Occupied Units by Contract Rent
Table HC-7 presents information on the monthly housing costs for renters called contract rent
(also known as asking rent) as sourced from the U.S. Census ACS. Contract rent is the monthly
rent agreed to regardless of any utilities, furnishings, fees, or services t hat may be included.
• St. Louis Park residents were most likely to pay between $1,000 and $2,499 in monthly rent,
with an estimated 71.4% of renter occupied units reporting rents in this range. Reflecting
the high rents in the City another 4.0% of renter occupied units paid $2,500 in monthly rent
or more. Therefore, over three-quarters (75.4%) of renter occupied units paid $1,000 or
more in monthly rent. In comparison, owner households in St Louis Park had a median
monthly housing cost of $1,876 ($1,935 in Hennepin County).
• Compared to St. Louis Park, residents in Hennepin County, the Metro Area, and Minnesota
were less likely than St. Louis Park to pay $1,000 or more in monthly rent. The percentages
of those paying $1,000 or more were the following: 62.3% in Hennepin County, 60.4% in the
Metro Area, and 45.4% in the State of Minnesota.
• The median rent in St. Louis Park was estimated at $1,271 in 2021, 3.8% higher than in
Hennepin County ($1,225), 7.6% higher than in the Metro Area, and 25.7% higher than in
Minnesota.
State of MN
Home Value No. Pct. No. Pct. No. Pct.Pct.
Less than $50,000 123 0.9% 5,243 1.6% 21,773 2.6% 4.9%
$50,000-$99,999 148 1.1% 5,662 1.7% 14,112 1.7% 4.7%
$100,000-$149,999 637 4.5% 14,936 4.5% 37,967 4.5% 7.1%
$150,000-$199,999 1,300 9.3% 33,579 10.2% 97,413 11.5% 10.5%
$200,000-$249,999 2,055 14.7% 50,205 15.2% 137,491 16.2% 13.2%
$250,000-$299,999 2,411 17.2% 49,035 14.8% 133,114 15.7% 13.7%
$300,000-$399,999 3,855 27.5% 70,722 21.4% 187,957 22.1% 20.6%
$400,000-$499,999 1,493 10.6% 39,437 11.9% 98,777 11.6% 11.6%
Greater than $500,000 2,003 14.3% 61,467 18.6% 120,175 14.2% 13.8%
Total 14,025 100.0% 330,286 100.0% 848,779 100.0% 100.0%
Median Home Value $250,200
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau - American Community Survey & Maxfield Research and Consulting LLC.
$309,200
Seven County Metro Hennepin County St Louis Park
$308,800 $297,239
TABLE HC-6
OWNER-OCCUPIED UNITS BY VALUE
ST LOUIS PARK MARKET AREA
2021
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 71
HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 63
• Housing units without payment of rent (“no cash rent”) make up 1.9% of St. Louis Park
renters. The proportion was the same in Hennepin County (1.9%) but less than that in the
Metro Area (2.3%), and Minnesota (4.1%). Typically, units may be owned by a relative or
friend who lives elsewhere whom allow occupancy without charge. Other sources may in-
clude caretakers or ministers who may occupy a residence without charge.
State of MN
Contract Rent No. Pct. No. Pct. No. Pct.Pct.
No Cash Rent 189 1.9% 3,750 1.9% 8,799 2.3% 4.1%
Cash Rent 9,921 98.1% 189,492 98.1% 370,209 97.7% 95.9%
$0 to $249 380 3.8%6,556 3.4%12,344 3.3%4.4%
$250-$499 255 2.5%11,216 5.8%21,481 5.7%9.7%
$500-$749 156 1.5%11,608 6.0%25,129 6.6%14.7%
$750-$999 1,501 14.8%39,700 20.5%82,157 21.7%21.8%
$1,000-$2,499 7,222 71.4%114,279 59.1%219,285 57.9%43.4%
$2,500+407 4.0%6,133 3.2%9,813 2.6%2.0%
Total 10,110 100.0% 193,242 100.0% 379,008 100.0% 100.0%
Median Contract Rent $1,011
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau - American Community Survey & Maxfield Research and Consulting LLC.
$1,271 $1,182$1,224
TABLE HC-7
RENTER-OCCUPIED UNITS BY CONTRACT RENT
ST LOUIS PARK MARKET AREA
2021
Seven County MetroHennepin County St Louis Park
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 72
HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 64
Tenure by Household Income
Table HC-8 presents information on tenure by household incomes in the PMA. Data was ob-
tained through the American Community Survey for years 2017-2021.
• Larger communities attract development of rental properties due to the services offered
and employment opportunities. St. Louis Park and its proximity to Minneapolis, St Paul,
Bloomington, Interstate 394, U.S. Highway 169, and Minnesota State Highway 100 make the
City a desirable location for renters. The City is estimated to have 41.9% renter-occupied
households and 58.1% owner-occupied. By comparison Hennepin County is estimated to
have 36.9% renter-occupied households and 63.1% owner-occupied households while the
Metro Area is estimated to have 30.9% renter households and 69.1% owner households.
• Lower income householders are more likely to be renters. This is evident in St. Louis Park as
an estimated 72.1% of households earning less than $15,000 and 54.1% households earning
between $15,000 to $24,999 live in renter-occupied units in 2021.
• As incomes rise, the proportion of owner-occupied units increases. In St. Louis Park, when
incomes reached between $75,000 to $99,999, more owner households were reported
(58.7%) than renter households (41.3%) in 2021.
• A portion of renter households are referred to as lifestyle renters, those who are financially
able to own a home but choose to rent. Lifestyle renters typically have household incomes
above $60,000 ($1,500 in monthly housing expenses). An estimated 53.8% of renter-occu-
pied household have incomes of $60,000 or greater in St. Louis Park.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 73
HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 65
• The median income of renter households was 41.5% less than the median income owner
households in St. Louis Park. In 2021, owner-occupied households in St. Louis Park reported
a median income of $111,272 compared to $65,118 among renter-occupied households.
Mobility in the Past Year
Table HC-9 shows the mobility patterns of PMA residents. The information reflects the propor-
tion of residents that reported a move within the last year at the time the ACS survey was con-
ducted. The table presents the estimates of mobility within the last year based on five years of
data collection, 2017-2021.
• The majority of St. Louis Park residents (81.2%) did not move during the last year. In
Hennepin County (83.6%) of its residents did not move in the last year while 85.9% of Metro
Area residents did not move.
• Among St. Louis Park residents that moved, they were most likely to move within their
same county (11.7%) followed by a move from a different county within Minnesota (3.2%).
Those moving from a different state represented 3.6% while those moving from abroad rep-
resented 0.3%.
• The age group most likely to move were between the ages of 25 and 34 as an estimated
59.2% moved within the past year followed by those ages of 18 to 24 at 31.1%. Those 25 to
34 may consider moving to further out suburbs as they begin families.
• Mobility experiences a slight uptick in each geography among those over age 75. This likely
reflects a need, or desire to, downsize homes among retirees. This cohort may move to
smaller homes, a senior living facility or to another community to be closer to family.
Owner-Renter-Owner-Renter-Owner-Renter-
Income Occupied Pct. Occupied Pct. Occupied Pct. Occupied Pct. Occupied Pct. Occupied Pct.
Less than $15,000 379 27.9%980 72.1% 10,603 27.6% 27,775 72.4% 23,533 31.0% 52,452 69.0%
$15,000 to $24,999 512 45.9%604 54.1% 9,514 33.1% 19,262 66.9% 23,728 37.3% 39,917 62.7%
$25,000 to $34,999 622 48.9%649 51.1% 12,609 38.8% 19,904 61.2% 33,942 45.2% 41,090 54.8%
$35,000 to $49,999 904 37.6% 1,498 62.4% 23,491 46.5% 27,069 53.5% 61,394 51.6% 57,647 48.4%
$50,000 to $74,999 1,796 43.3% 2,355 56.7% 45,120 55.0% 36,845 45.0% 121,033 62.2% 73,630 37.8%
$75,000 to $99,999 2,053 58.7% 1,444 41.3% 42,195 63.5% 24,305 36.5% 117,189 71.0% 47,913 29.0%
$100,000 to $149,999 2,771 64.9% 1,501 35.1% 71,643 75.1% 23,723 24.9% 197,450 82.4% 42,211 17.6%
$150,000+4,988 82.2% 1,079 17.8% 115,111 88.9% 14,359 11.1% 270,616 91.8% 24,155 8.2%
Total 14,025 58.1% 10,110 41.9% 330,286 63.1% 193,242 36.9% 848,885 69.1% 379,015 30.9%
Median Household Income $113,159 $51,517 $110,016 $49,830
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau - American Community Survey; Maxfield Research and Consulting LLC.
$111,272 $65,118
TABLE HC-8
TENURE BY HOUSEHOLD INCOME
ST LOUIS PARK MARKET AREA
2021
City of St Louis Park Hennepin County Seven County Metro
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 74
HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 66
Age No.Pct.No.Pct.No.Pct.No.Pct.No.Pct.
St Louis Park
Under 18 6,994 87.9%664 8.3%124 1.6%157 2.0%18 0.2%
18 to 24 1,317 40.8%852 26.4%565 17.5%430 13.3%63 2.0%
25 to 34 8,530 68.9%2,529 20.4%618 5.0%691 5.6%18 0.1%
35 to 44 6,122 90.4%342 5.1%99 1.5%198 2.9%8 0.1%
45 to 54 4,228 88.1%382 8.0%19 0.4%108 2.3%60 1.3%
55 to 64 5,118 91.8%328 5.9%65 1.2%64 1.1%0 0.0%
65 to 74 4,062 92.1%297 6.7%20 0.5%32 0.7%0 0.0%
75+3,328 88.0%324 8.6%69 1.8%60 1.6%0 0.0%
Total 39,699 81.2%5,718 11.7%1,579 3.2%1,740 3.6%167 0.3%
Hennepin County
Under 18 231,180 87.3%21,731 8.2%6,489 2.5%4,420 1.7%932 0.4%
18 to 24 60,331 56.7%22,884 21.5%12,999 12.2%8,361 7.9%1,916 1.8%
25 to 34 149,051 70.7%37,670 17.9%12,164 5.8%9,869 4.7%1,986 0.9%
35 to 44 153,651 86.0%15,873 8.9%4,104 2.3%4,068 2.3%988 0.6%
45 to 54 138,909 90.5%9,025 5.9%3,102 2.0%1,858 1.2%534 0.3%
55 to 64 148,325 92.2%7,909 4.9%2,660 1.7%1,496 0.9%506 0.3%
65 to 74 103,440 94.7%4,051 3.7%742 0.7%782 0.7%179 0.2%
75+64,482 91.2%4,313 6.1%721 1.0%721 1.0%452 0.6%
Total 1,049,369 83.6%123,456 9.8%42,981 3.4%31,575 2.5%7,493 0.6%
Seven County Metro
Under 18 616,668 88.2%46,942 6.7%23,241 3.3%9,414 1.3%2,657 0.4%
18 to 24 176,674 67.5%36,762 14.0%30,028 11.5%15,236 5.8%3,079 1.2%
25 to 34 340,411 73.6%60,323 13.0%40,477 8.7%18,107 3.9%3,503 0.8%
35 to 44 375,406 86.8%30,820 7.1%16,834 3.9%7,908 1.8%1,594 0.4%
45 to 54 359,613 91.5%18,121 4.6%10,484 2.7%3,731 0.9%1,130 0.3%
55 to 64 380,380 93.3%14,574 3.6%8,506 2.1%3,107 0.8%911 0.2%
65 to 74 256,779 94.9%7,632 2.8%3,995 1.5%1,725 0.6%527 0.2%
75+157,669 91.7%8,113 4.7%3,851 2.2%1,524 0.9%699 0.4%
Total 2,663,600 85.9%223,287 7.2%137,416 4.4%60,752 2.0%14,100 0.5%
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau - American Community Survey; Maxfield Research and Consulting, LLC.
TABLE HC-9
MOBILITY IN THE PAST YEAR BY AGE FOR CURRENT RESIDENCE
ST LOUIS PARK MARKET AREA
2021
Not Moved Moved
Same House Within Same County Different County Different State Abroad
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 75
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 67
Introduction
Employment characteristics are important components in assessing housing needs in any given
Market Area. These trends are important to consider since employment growth often fuels
household growth. Typically, households prefer to live near work for convenience, which is a
primary factor in choosing a housing location. This preference is particularly true among
renters. Young adults entering the workforce, a primary target market for rental housing, often
place excellent value on living near employment, education, shopping, and entertainment.
Many households commute greater distances to work provided their housing is affordable
enough to offset the additional transportation costs.
Although employment growth often parallels population growth, it is tied more strongly to
transportation access. Cities with interstate access and intra- and inter-metro transportation
connections attract more businesses and post higher employment gains.
Employment Growth and Projections
Table E-1 on the following page shows employment growth trends and projections from 2000
to 2030 based on the latest information available from the Minnesota Department of Employ-
ment and Economic Development (MN DEED). Data for 2000, 2005, 2010, 2015, 2020 and 2021
represents the annual average employment for that year. Data for 2025 and 2030 was based
off historic and projected population from MN DEED with adjustments by Maxfield Research.
• Between 2000 and 2010, St. Louis Park and Hennepin County experienced employment de-
clines of 18.0% and 8.1%, respectively. This was largely a product of the Great Recession.
By comparison, the Seven County Metro and State of Minnesota also saw a decline in em-
ployment. The Metro declined by 4.0% while Minnesota declined by 1.7%.
• St. Louis Park accounted for 5.7% of the jobs in Hennepin County and 3.1% of jobs in the
Seven County Metro in 2000 decreasing to 5.1% of the jobs in Hennepin County and 2.7% of
the jobs in the Metro by 2010. In 2020, St. Louis Park’s percentage of jobs in Hennepin
County and the Metro decreased to 4.2% and 2.2%, respectively. By 2030 St. Louis Park is
projected to make up 3.6% of jobs in Hennepin County and 2.0% of jobs in the Metro.
• Between 2010 and 2020, St. Louis Park lost 4,232 jobs (10.4%) while Hennepin County
gained 59,194 jobs (7.4%). During those ten years the number of jobs also increased in the
Metro (107,013 jobs, 12.0%) and the State of Minnesota (140,806, 5.5%). Note, the effects
of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the workforce, in 2020, should keep one from reading too
much into long term trends observed in this data.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 76
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 68
• Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, between 2019 and 2020, St. Louis Park experienced a sig-
nificant decline in jobs, losing 3,197 jobs (8.0%) while Hennepin County lost 74,841 jobs
(8.0%). The Metro Area and the State of Minnesota also experienced declines of 131,485
jobs (7.4%) and 197,435 jobs (6.8%) respectively.
• Recovery of jobs from the pandemic shut down occurred from 2020 to 2022 as St. Louis
Park employment grew by 1,680 jobs (4.6%) while Hennepin County grew by 38,129 jobs
(4.4%). The Seven County Metro grew by 78,687 jobs (4.8%) and the State of Minnesota
grew by 131,557 jobs (4.9%).
• As the pandemic has subsided into an endemic, jobs in St. Louis Park increased by 1,161 be-
tween 2021 and 2022. While jobs are expected to decline slightly between 2022 and 2030
(307 jobs), employment is expected to remain relative stable. In contrast, growth is ex-
pected in the other three geographies. Hennepin County is projected to increase by
130,088, the Seven County Metro is projected to increase by 142,739, and the State of Min-
nesota is projected to increase by 358,701 jobs. Please note that these numbers do not ac-
count for the potential recession that is currently threatening the country at the time of this
survey.
Annual
Employment
S
c
2000
2005
2010
2015
2020
2021
2022
2025 Forecast
2030 Forecast
Change No. Pct. No. Pct. No. Pct. No. Pct.
2000 - 2010 -8,955 -18.0% -71,149 -8.1% -63,700 -4.0% -45,453 -1.7%
2010 - 2020 -4,232 -10.4% 59,194 7.4% 107,013 7.0% 140,806 5.5%
2020 - 2030 1,373 3.6% 168,217 18.7% 221,426 12.9% 490,258 17.3%
38,227 901,056 2,835,7541,722,741
37,066 879,028 1,676,409 2,759,918
37,920 1,031,144 3,194,455
38,112 949,839 2,970,2671,776,268
1,865,480
49,734 874,882
39,386 833,720
2,608,8441,600,741
City of St Louis
Park Hennepin County Minnesota
TABLE E-1
EMPLOYMENT GROWTH TRENDS AND PROJECTIONS
ST LOUIS PARK, HENNEPIN COUNTY, SEVEN COUNTY METRO, & MINNESOTA
2000 to 2030
Seven County
Metro
Sources: MN DEED; & Maxfield Research and Consulting, LLC.
40,779 803,733
2,637,323
2,563,391
2,704,197
41,441 883,511 2,774,426
36,547 862,927
1,593,962
1,537,041
1,675,292
1,644,054
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 77
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 69
Resident Labor Force
Table E-2, on the following page, presents resident employment data for the City of St. Louis
Park from 2010 through 2022. Resident employment data is calculated as an annual average
and reveals the work force and number of employed persons living in the County . It is important
to note that not all of these individuals necessarily work in St. Louis Park. The data is obtained
from the Minnesota Department of Economic Development (MN DEED). Data is also provided
for 2010, 2015, 2020, 2021, and 2022 for Hennepin County, the Seven County Metro, Minne-
sota, and the US.
• In 2022, St. Louis Park had a labor force of 30,269 with 29,615 employed residents, which
equates to a 2.2% unemployment rate. By comparison, 2022 unemployment rates were
2.5% in Hennepin County, 2.5% in the Seven County Metro, 2.7% in the State of Minnesota,
and 3.6% in Nationally.
• St. Louis Park’s unemployment rate has been lower than in Hennepin County, the Seven
County Metro, Minnesota, and the US every year between 2010 and 2022 . The City’s aver-
age unemployment rate during that time frame has been 3.6%.
• The chart below illustrates how unemployment in St. Louis Park has mirrored national
trends but has remained well below the national rate throughout the past twelve years.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 78
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 70
• St. Louis Park began the 2010s with a high unemployment rate of 6%, reached a low of 2.4%
in 2018, before peaking again at 5.7% in 2020. It is important to note that the steep rise in
unemployment in 2020 was a result the COVID-19 pandemic and its related shutdowns and
layoffs. The unemployment rate has since decreased rapidly down to 2.2% through 2022.
Labor
Year Force Employed Unemployed Rate
2010 28,345 26,636 1,709 6.0%
2011 28,543 27,041 1,502 5.3%
2012 28,725 27,446 1,279 4.5%
2013 29,324 28,190 1,134 3.9%
2014 29,269 28,321 948 3.2%
2015 29,554 28,683 871 2.9%
2016 29,879 28,989 890 3.0%
2017 30,690 29,869 821 2.7%
2018 30,726 30,001 725 2.4%
2019 30,761 29,948 813 2.6%
2020 30,558 28,812 1,746 5.7%
2021 29,744 28,904 840 2.8%
2022 30,269 29,615 654 2.2%
Change 2010-2022
Number 1,924 2,979 -1,055 --
Percent 6.8%11.2%-61.7%--
2010 650,891 605,294 45,597 7.0%
2015 676,722 654,583 22,139 3.3%
2020 715,240 667,542 47,698 6.7%
2021 693,393 669,687 23,706 3.4%
2022 703,573 686,159 17,414 2.5%
2010 1,593,385 1,479,385 114,000 7.2%
2015 1,649,759 1,594,798 54,961 3.3%
2020 1,742,842 1,629,444 113,398 6.5%
2021 1,690,504 1,633,867 56,637 3.4%
2022 1,717,199 1,674,601 42,598 2.5%
2010 2,940,816 2,723,025 217,791 7.4%
2015 3,005,413 2,891,672 113,740 3.8%
2020 3,122,980 2,925,514 197,465 6.3%
2021 3,021,360 2,918,393 102,967 3.4%
2022 3,077,500 2,994,919 82,580 2.7%
2010 153,888,583 139,063,916 14,824,750 9.6%
2015 157,129,916 148,833,416 8,296,333 5.3%
2020 160,742,333 147,794,750 12,947,583 8.1%
2021 161,203,916 152,580,666 8,623,250 5.3%
2022 164,287,166 158,291,083 5,996,000 3.6%
Minnesota
US
Sources: MN DEED, Maxfield Research and Consulting LLC.
Note data is not seasonally adjusted.
TABLE E-2
ANNUAL AVERAGE RESIDENT EMPLOYMENT
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK, HENNEPIN COUNTY, SEVEN COUNTY METRO AREA, MN, & US
2010 to 2022
Seven County Metro Area
Hennepin County
City of St Louis Park
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 79
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC 71
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 80
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 72
• The chart on the following page provides a month by month unemployment rate compari-
son for St. Louis Park, Hennepin County, the Seven County Metro, the State of Minnesota,
and the US from January 2020 before the pandemic hit the US through December 2022.
• The chart shows that after the initial shut down due to the emerging pandemic, the result-
ing high unemployment rates throughout the country declined after the Spring and early
Summer of 2020.
• Another uptick in unemployment occurred in between November and December of 2020
when the unemployment in St. Louis Park jumped from 3.3% to 3.8%. Since December
2020, the unemployment rate has fluctuated but has declined overall to 2.3% as of Decem-
ber 2022
Covered Employment by Industry
Table E-3 presents covered employment workforce numbers for St. Louis Park, Hennepin
County, and the Seven County Metro for 2000, 2005, 2010, 2015, 2020, and 2022. Covered em-
ployment data is calculated as an annual average and reveals the number of jobs in the desig-
nated area, which are covered by unemployment insurance. Many temporary workforce posi-
tions, agricultural, self-employed persons, and some other types of jobs are not covered by un-
employment insurance and are not included in the table. The data is sourced from the Minne-
sota Department of Employment and Economic Development. The following are key trends de-
rived from the employment data:
• The Education and Health Services industry accounted for the largest share of employment
in St. Louis Park, with 12,705 employees accounting for over a third of employment (33.2%)
in 2022. The Education and Health Services industry is followed by the Professional and
Business Services sector with 6,531 employees (17.1% of 2022 employment) and the Trade,
Transportation, and Utilities sector with 5,819 employees (15.2% of 2022 employment)
• Between 2010 and 2022 the Education and Health Services industry experienced the largest
numeric growth in St. Louis Park adding 720 employees, a 6.0% increase.
• The Public Information sector experienced the largest percentage increase in St. Louis Park
between 2010 and 2022, growing 20.3% (70 employees).
• Between 2010 and 2022 St. Louis Park’s Professional and Business Services industry re-
ported the largest numeric decline in employment, decreasing by 2,871 employees
(-30.5%). During the same 12 years the Other Services industry experienced the largest per-
centage decrease in St. Louis Park (-39.4% | - 597 jobs).
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 81
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC 73
Industry 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2022 No.Pct.2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2022
Natural Resources & Mining NA NA NA NA NA NA -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Construction NA 2,150 NA NA 1,909 NA -- -- --5.5%-- --5.2%--
Manufacturing 3,470 3,455 2,449 2,729 NA NA -- --8.5% 8.8% 6.0% 6.6%-- --
Trade, Transportation, and Utilities 8,531 6,386 6,841 5,783 6,083 5,819 -1,022 -14.9% 20.9% 16.2% 16.8% 14.0% 16.6% 15.2%
Information 963 NA NA 661 676 628 -- --2.4%-- --1.6% 1.8% 1.6%
Financial Activities 4,182 4,404 3,963 4,355 4,186 4,373 410 10.3% 10.3% 11.2% 9.7% 10.5% 11.5% 11.4%
Professional and Business Services 8,697 7,904 9,402 9,721 5,585 6,531 -2,871 -30.5% 21.4% 20.1% 23.1% 23.5% 15.3% 17.1%
Education and Health Services 8,558 10,525 11,985 11,577 12,712 12,705 720 6.0% 21.0% 26.7% 29.4% 27.9% 34.8% 33.2%
Leisure and Hospitality 2,864 2,808 2,833 3,210 2,495 3,304 471 16.6% 7.0% 7.1% 6.9% 7.7% 6.8% 8.6%
Other Services 1,105 935 1,514 1,558 910 917 -597 -39.4% 2.7% 2.4% 3.7% 3.8% 2.5% 2.4%
Public Administration 348 340 344 358 350 414 70 20.3% 0.9% 0.9% 0.8% 0.9% 1.0% 1.1%
Totals 40,734 39,386 40,779 41,441 36,547 38,227 -2,552 -6.3%
Industry 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2022 No.Pct.2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2022
Natural Resources & Mining 731 714 815 942 984 1,103 -- --0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1%
Construction 34,201 31,871 20,619 26,891 31,480 32,672 -- --3.9% 3.8% 2.6% 3.0% 3.6% 3.6%
Manufacturing 104,217 86,623 70,978 74,506 72,344 76,245 5,267 7.4% 11.9% 10.4% 8.8% 8.4% 8.4% 8.5%
Trade, Transportation, and Utilities 190,600 173,107 151,837 159,950 143,939 151,137 -700 -0.5% 21.8% 20.8% 18.9% 18.1% 16.7% 16.8%
Information 31,980 NA 21,396 20,783 19,469 18,827 -2,569 -12.0% 3.7%--2.7% 2.4% 2.3% 2.1%
Financial Activities 85,299 88,963 85,456 91,970 94,577 90,225 4,769 5.6% 9.7% 10.7% 10.6% 10.4% 11.0% 10.0%
Professional and Business Services 171,622 153,403 160,468 182,569 190,924 199,642 39,174 24.4% 19.6% 18.4% 20.0% 20.7% 22.1% 22.2%
Education and Health Services 135,734 151,626 170,862 192,141 202,647 206,525 35,663 20.9% 15.5% 18.2% 21.3% 21.7% 23.5% 22.9%
Leisure and Hospitality 69,133 72,448 71,851 81,021 58,256 74,627 2,776 3.9% 7.9% 8.7% 8.9% 9.2% 6.8% 8.3%
Other Services 28,269 27,223 25,163 27,355 22,351 24,178 -985 -3.9% 3.2% 3.3% 3.1% 3.1% 2.6% 2.7%
Public Administration 23,095 23,689 24,267 25,380 25,953 25,871 1,604 6.6% 2.6% 2.8% 3.0% 2.9% 3.0% 2.9%
Totals 874,882 833,720 803,733 883,511 862,927 901,056 97,323 12.1%
Industry 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2022 No.Pct.2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2022
Natural Resources & Mining 3,220 3,568 1,537,041 3,427 3,668 4,097 -- --0.4% 0.4% 191.2% 0.4% 0.4% 0.5%
Construction 75,163 78,475 3,444 66,709 73,128 78,209 -- --8.6% 9.4% 0.4% 7.6% 8.5% 8.7%
Manufacturing 217,161 186,238 49,972 168,480 166,172 174,159 124,187 248.5% 24.8% 22.3% 6.2% 19.1% 19.3% 19.3%
Trade, Transportation, and Utilities 341,177 327,767 156,570 313,380 302,009 314,884 158,314 101.1% 39.0% 39.3% 19.5% 35.5% 35.0% 34.9%
Information 126,979 NA 294,894 38,798 NA 31,301 -263,593 -89.4% 14.5%--36.7% 4.4%--3.5%
Financial Activities NA 137,347 41,010 137,046 140,939 133,073 92,063 224.5%--16.5% 5.1% 15.5% 16.3% 14.8%
Professional and Business Services 263,779 244,025 130,997 277,443 283,689 295,917 164,920 125.9% 30.2% 29.3% 16.3% 31.4% 32.9% 32.8%
Education and Health Services 263,963 302,256 250,111 380,336 398,486 409,878 159,767 63.9% 30.2% 36.3% 31.1% 43.0% 46.2% 45.5%
Leisure and Hospitality 138,716 150,712 341,678 164,825 124,780 156,756 -184,922 -54.1% 15.9% 18.1% 42.5% 18.7% 14.5% 17.4%
Other Services 55,632 55,269 148,531 56,000 48,170 53,379 -95,152 -64.1% 6.4% 6.6% 18.5% 6.3% 5.6% 5.9%
Public Administration NA 63,754 52,359 68,847 70,798 71,086 18,727 35.8%--7.6% 6.5% 7.8% 8.2% 7.9%
Totals 1,600,741 1,593,962 1,537,041 1,675,292 1,644,054 1,722,741 185,700 12.1%
Sources: MN DEED & Maxfield Research and Consulting LLC.
2010 - 2022
2010 - 2022
Percentage Of Total Employment2010 - 2022
ChangeSeven County Metro
Percentage Of Total Employment
Change
TABLE E-3
COVERED EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK, HENNEPIN COUNTY, & SEVEN COUNTY METRO
2000, 2005, 2010, 2015, 2020, 2022
Percentage Of Total Employment
City of St Louis Park
Hennepin County Change
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 82
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 74
• In both Hennepin County and the Seven County Metro, similar to St. Louis Park, the Educa-
tion and Health Services Industry represented the largest percentage of employment in
2022 at 22.9% of employees and 45.5% of employees, respectively.
• In Hennepin county, the Professional and Business Services sector represented the second
highest percentage of 2022 employment at 22.2%, followed by the Trade, Transportation,
and Utilities sector at 16.8% of employment.
• Similar to St. Louis Park, in the Seven County Metro, the Trade, Transportation, and Utilities
sector represented the second highest percentage of 2022 employment at 34.9%, followed
by the Professional and Business Services sector at 32.8% of employment.
Employment and Wages
Table E-4 displays information on employment and wages in the City of St. Louis Park, Hennepin
County, and the Seven County Metro Area. Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages
(QCEW) data is sourced from Minnesota DEED for the fourth quarter of 2021 and 2022. All es-
tablishments covered under the Unemployment Insurance (UI) Program are required to report
wage and employment statistics quarterly to DEED. Federal government establishments are
also covered by the QCEW program.
It should be noted that certain industries in the table may not display any information which
means that there is either no reported economic activity for that industry or the data has been
suppressed to protect the confidentiality of cooperating employers. This generally occurs when
there are too few employers, or one employer comprises too much of the employment in that
geography.
• In St. Louis Park, the Information industry reported the highest weekly wage, $2,165; or ap-
proximately $86,600 annually in the fourth quarter of 2022. Following not far behind is the
Financial Services sector with an average weekly wage of $2,109 ($84,360 annually).
• The Education and Health Services industry accounts for 33.1% of the employment in the
City of St. Louis Park. Other large industries in the City include the Professional and Busi-
ness Services sector (17.1% of employment in St. Louis Park) and the Trade, Transportation,
and Utilities sector (15.3% of St. Louis Park employment).
• Similar to St. Louis Park, the largest industries in both Hennepin County and the Seven
County Metro were in the Education and Health Services, Professional and Business Ser-
vices, and Trade, Transportation, and Utilities sectors.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 83
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 75
• The Public Administration industry experienced the highest percentage of employment
growth in St. Louis Park between the fourth quarters of 2021 and 2022, increasing by 10.1%
(37 jobs). The industry with the largest percentage growth in both Hennepin County and
the Seven County Metro Area was the Other Services Sector at 8.5% and 8.3%, respectively.
• Despite having the largest numeric decline in employment between 2010 and 2022, the
Professional and Business Services industry actually experienced the highest numeric em-
ployment growth in St. Louis Park between the fourth quarters of 2021, increasing by 477
jobs as the recovery from COVID continued. The industry with the largest numeric growth
in both Hennepin County and the Seven County Metro Area was also the Other Services sec-
tor at 445 jobs and 878, respectively.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 84
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 76
• In St. Louis Park, the Information industry reported the largest numeric growth in wages be-
tween the fourth quarters of 2021 and 2022. Wages increased by $89 in this sector. In con-
trast, in both Hennepin County and the Metro Area, the Other Services industry experi-
enced the largest wage increase of any sector, increasing by $41 and $24, respectively, be-
tween the fourth quarters of 2021 and 2022.
Industry Establish-
ments
Employ-
ment
Weekly
Wage
Establish-
ments
Employ-
ment
Weekly
Wage
Total, All Industries 2,078 37,836 $1,587 2,122 38,486 $1,592 650 1.7%$5 0.3%
Natural Resources & Mining NA NA NA NA NA NA --------
Construction 107 1,829 1,740 NA NA NA --------
Manufacturing NA NA NA 69 1,828 $1,385 --------
Trade, Transportation, Utilities 350 5,943 $1,234 348 5,903 $1,176 -40 -0.7%($58)-4.7%
Information 54 619 $2,076 58 592 $2,165 -27 -4.4%$89 4.3%
Financial Activities 309 4,261 $2,108 308 4,469 $2,109 208 4.9%$1 0.0%
Professional & Business Services 498 6,102 $1,897 520 6,579 1,889 477 7.8%($8)-0.4%
Education & Health Services 294 12,884 $1,685 299 12,745 $1,722 -139 -1.1%$37 2.2%
Leisure & Hospitality 140 3,154 $649 135 3,328 $644 174 5.5%($5)-0.8%
Other Services 250 899 $895 269 900 $934 1 0.1%$39 4.4%
Public Administration 3 366 $1,656 3 403 $1,552 37 10.1%-$104 -6.3%
Total, All Industries 43,060 899,592 $1,676 44,480 907,115 $1,631 1,420 3.3%-$45 -2.7%
Natural Resources & Mining 95 972 $1,467 103 1,076 $1,276 8 8.4%-$191 -13.0%
Construction 2,473 32,714 $1,860 2,551 32,777 $1,844 78 3.2%-$16 -0.9%
Manufacturing 1,789 74,543 $1,761 1,790 76,839 $1,696 1 0.1%-$65 -3.7%
Trade, Transportation, Utilities 7,201 150,851 $1,432 7,302 152,970 $1,451 101 1.4%$19 1.3%
Information 1,141 19,162 $2,244 1,220 18,490 $2,094 79 6.9%-$150 -6.7%
Financial Activities 4,966 93,861 $2,519 5,063 89,172 $2,322 97 2.0%-$197 -7.8%
Professional & Business Services 9,516 198,989 $2,143 9,922 201,425 $2,097 406 4.3%-$46 -2.1%
Education & Health Services 6,528 209,376 $1,347 6,767 209,454 $1,347 239 3.7%$0 0.0%
Leisure & Hospitality 3,899 70,172 $674 3,867 74,726 $687 -32 -0.8%$13 1.9%
Other Services 5,237 23,660 $961 5,682 24,284 $1,002 445 8.5%$41 4.3%
Public Administration 215 25,288 $1,587 213 25,898 $1,526 -2 -0.9%-$61 -3.8%
Total, All Industries 90,411 1,711,848 $1,515 93,651 1,737,171 $1,478 3,240 3.6%-$37 -2.4%
Natural Resources & Mining 337 3,820 $1,136 349 4,017 $1,076 12 3.6%-$60 -5.3%
Construction 6,950 77,931 $1,789 7,261 78,328 $1,784 311 4.5%-$5 -0.3%
Manufacturing 4,059 170,705 $1,722 4,117 175,192 $1,660 58 1.4%-$62 -3.6%
Trade, Transportation, Utilities 15,725 314,935 $1,274 15,973 318,967 $1,280 248 1.6%$6 0.5%
Information 1,904 30,733 $2,161 2,052 30,860 $2,059 148 7.8%-$102 -4.7%
Financial Activities 9,411 137,502 $2,286 9,600 131,872 $2,118 189 2.0%-$168 -7.3%
Professional & Business Services 17,148 294,829 $2,025 17,922 298,133 $1,983 774 4.5%-$42 -2.1%
Education & Health Services 15,211 413,783 $1,266 15,837 418,792 $1,257 626 4.1%-$9 -0.7%
Leisure & Hospitality 8,295 146,997 $654 8,296 156,065 $664 1 0.0%$10 1.5%
Other Services 10,562 51,751 $933 11,440 53,807 $957 878 8.3%$24 2.6%
Public Administration 809 68,859 $1,580 804 71,133 $1,537 -5 -0.6%-$43 -2.7%
NA: Not Applicable
TABLE E-4
QUARTERLY CENSUS OF EMPLOYMENT AND WAGES
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK, HENNEPIN COUNTY, & SEVEN COUNTY METRO
Employment
# %
Wage
# %
Change 2021 Q4 - 2022 Q42022 Q42021 Q4
Seven County Metro
Sources: MN DEED & Maxfield Research and Consulting LLC.
Hennepin County
City of St Louis Park
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 85
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 77
• Percentage wise, the Other Services industry reported the highest percentage growth in
wages between the first quarters of 2021 and 2022 in St. Louis Park. Wages in both Henne-
pin County and the Metro Area also experienced the largest percentage incre ase in the
Other Services category, increasing by 4.3% and 2.6%, respectively.
Commuting Patterns
Proximity to employment is often a primary consideration when choosing where to live, since
transportation costs often account for a considerable proportion of households’ budgets. Ta-
bles E-5 highlights the commuting patterns of workers in the City of St. Louis Park in 2020 and
Hennepin County in 2020 (the most recent data available), based on Employer-Household Dy-
namics data from the U.S. Census Bureau. Home destination is defined as where workers live
who are employed in the selection area. Work destin ation is defined as where workers are em-
ployed who live in the selection area. Please note: Data is unavailable post 2020, hence these
numbers do not reflect the shift in commuting patterns post pandemic and the work from
home/hybrid shift in employment.
• As Table E-5 illustrates, Minneapolis was the largest work destination for St. Louis Park resi-
dents (27.2%) and the largest home destination for St. Louis Park workers (12.9%).
• St. Louis Park was the second largest work destination for St. Louis Park residents (10.6%)
and the second largest home destination for St. Louis Park workers (7.1%).
• In Hennepin County, Minneapolis was the largest work destination for PMA residents
(27.6%) and the largest home destination for Hennepin County workers (15.4%).
• Bloomington was the second largest work destination for Hennepin County residents (6.0%)
while St Paul was the second largest home destination for PMA workers (5.5%).
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 86
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 78
Place of Residence Count Share Place of Employment Count Share
Minneapolis city, MN 5,193 12.9%Minneapolis city, MN 7,259 27.2%
St. Louis Park city, MN 2,839 7.1%St. Louis Park city, MN 2,839 10.6%
St. Paul city, MN 1,773 4.4%Eden Prairie city, MN 1,552 5.8%
Plymouth city, MN 1,496 3.7%Bloomington city, MN 1,448 5.4%
Minnetonka city, MN 1,357 3.4%Minnetonka city, MN 1,360 5.1%
Brooklyn Park city, MN 1,312 3.3%St. Paul city, MN 1,229 4.6%
Bloomington city, MN 1,179 2.9%Edina city, MN 1,115 4.2%
Maple Grove city, MN 1,074 2.7%Plymouth city, MN 1,048 3.9%
Eden Prairie city, MN 982 2.4%Golden Valley city, MN 1,036 3.9%
Edina city, MN 907 2.3%Hopkins city, MN 506 1.9%
All Other Locations 22,064 54.9%All Other Locations 7,273 27.3%
Total All Jobs 40,176 Total All Jobs 26,665
Home Destination = Where workers live who are employed in the City of St Louis Park
Work Destination = Where workers are employed who live in the City of St Louis Park
Sources: US Census Bureau On the Map; Maxfield Research and Consulting LLC.
TABLE E-5
COMMUTING PATTERNS
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
2020
Home Destination Work Destination
Place of Residence Count Share Place of Employment Count Share
Minneapolis city, MN 140,711 15.4%Minneapolis city, MN 169,120 27.6%
St. Paul city, MN 50,430 5.5%St. Paul city, MN 36,503 6.0%
Plymouth city, MN 30,353 3.3%Bloomington city, MN 35,263 5.7%
Brooklyn Park city, MN 30,085 3.3%Eden Prairie city, MN 29,545 4.8%
Bloomington city, MN 29,656 3.2%Plymouth city, MN 27,984 4.6%
Maple Grove city, MN 27,319 3.0%Minnetonka city, MN 23,907 3.9%
Eden Prairie city, MN 23,094 2.5%St. Louis Park city, MN 21,644 3.5%
St. Louis Park city, MN 20,691 2.3%Edina city, MN 20,741 3.4%
Minnetonka city, MN 19,776 2.2%Golden Valley city, MN 18,626 3.0%
Edina city, MN 17,354 1.9%Maple Grove city, MN 17,933 2.9%
All Other Locations 526,805 57.5%All Other Locations 212,019 34.6%
Total All Jobs 916,274 Total All Jobs 613,285
Home Destination = Where workers live who are employed in Hennepin County
Work Destination = Where workers are employed who live in Hennepin County
Sources: US Census Bureau On the Map; Maxfield Research and Consulting LLC.
TABLE E-6
COMMUTING PATTERNS
HENNEPIN COUNTY
2020
Home Destination Work Destination
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 87
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 79
Inflow/Outflow
Table E-7 provides a summary of the inflow and outflow of workers in St. Louis Park. Outflow
reflects the number of workers living in the City but employed outside of t he City while inflow
measures the number of workers that are employed in the City but live outside. Data is
sourced to “On the Map” and subject to specified categories as identified by the U.S Census
ACS.
• St. Louis Park is a net importer of workers, with 37,337 workers commuting into the city
compared to 23,826 workers leaving the city for work. In addition, 2,839 workers live and
work in the city.
• Inflow workers and interior flow workers were most like to work in the “All Other Services”
industry, followed by the “Trade, Transportation, and Utilities” industry.
City Total 23,826 100.0% 37,337 100.0% 2,839 100.0%
By Age
Workers Aged 29 or younger 6,599 27.7% 7,676 20.6%651 22.9%
Workers Aged 30 to 54 12,588 52.8% 20,799 55.7% 1,480 52.1%
Workers Aged 55 or older 4,639 19.5% 8,862 23.7%708 24.9%
By Monthly Wage
Workers Earning $1,250 per month or less 4,202 17.6% 7,669 20.5%749 26.4%
Workers Earning $1,251 to $3,333 per month 3,997 16.8% 8,707 23.3%745 26.2%
Workers Earning More than $3,333 per month 15,627 65.6% 20,961 56.1% 1,345 47.4%
By Industry
"Goods Producing"2,498 10.5% 4,040 10.8%162 5.7%
"Trade, Transportation, and Utilities"3,623 15.2% 5,660 15.2%519 18.3%
"All Other Services"17,705 74.3% 27,637 74.0% 2,158 76.0%
Sources: US Census Bureau Local Employment Dynamics; Maxfield Research and Consulting, LLC.
TABLE E-7
COMMUTING INFLOW/OUTFLOW CHARACTERISTICS
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
2020
Outflow Inflow Interior Flow
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 88
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 80
St. Louis Park 2020 Employment Inflow/Outflow
Table E-8 provides a summary of the inflow and outflow of workers in Hennepin County. Out-
flow reflects the number of workers living in the PMA but employed outside of the PMA while
inflow measures the number of workers that are employed in the PMA but live outside.
Total 166,825 100.0% 469,814 100.0% 446,460 100.0%
By Age
Workers Aged 29 or younger 41,984 25.2% 99,330 21.1% 102,409 22.9%
Workers Aged 30 to 54 88,612 53.1% 266,963 56.8% 243,731 54.6%
Workers Aged 55 or older 36,229 21.7% 103,521 22.0% 100,320 22.5%
By Monthly Wage
Workers Earning $1,250 per month or less 37,219 22.3% 90,106 19.2% 95,265 21.3%
Workers Earning $1,251 to $3,333 per month 36,781 22.0% 92,342 19.7% 91,700 20.5%
Workers Earning More than $3,333 per month 92,825 55.6% 287,366 61.2% 259,495 58.1%
By Industry
"Goods Producing"31,274 18.7% 60,923 13.0% 45,040 10.1%
"Trade, Transportation, and Utilities"30,386 18.2% 76,526 16.3% 65,827 14.7%
"All Other Services"105,165 63.0% 332,365 70.7% 335,593 75.2%
Sources: US Census Bureau Local Employment Dynamics; Maxfield Research and Consulting, LLC.
TABLE E-8
COMMUTING INFLOW/OUTFLOW CHARACTERISTICS
HENNEPIN COUNTY
2020
Outflow Inflow Interior Flow
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 89
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 81
Hennepin County 2020 Employment Inflow/Outflow
• Similar to St. Louis Park, Hennepin County is a net importer of workers, with 469,814 work-
ers commuting into the city compared to 166,825 workers leaving the County for work. In
addition, 446,460 workers live and work in the PMA.
• A little under 57% (56.8%) of workers coming into (Inflow) Hennepin County and 53.1% of
workers leaving Hennepin County were between 30 to 54. In addition, 55.6% of outflow
workers and 58.1% of interior flow and earned more than $3,333. Inflow workers were also
most likely to earn more than $3,333 per month, but at a higher proportion (61.2%) than
outflow and interior flow workers.
Resident Profile
Table E-9 compares characteristics of employed residents living in St. Louis Park, Hennepin
County, the Seven County Metro, and State of Minnesota in 2020. Information on monthly
earnings, age, race and ethnicity, educational attainment and job classification is provided.
Both primary and private jobs are included.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 90
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 82
• St. Louis Park residents earning more than $3,333 per month (monthly earning figures used
by the U.S. Census) account for 63.6% of workers. This is above the proportion of residents
earning more than $3,333 per month in Hennepin County (57.4%), the Seven County Metro
Area (56.5%) and Minnesota (52.8%).
• Workers between the ages of 30 and 54 account for 54.2% of workers in St. Louis Park. This
is below the proportion of residents 30 to 54 in Hennepin County (54.2%), the Seven County
Metro Area (54.4%) and Minnesota (53.1%).
• The proportion of workers who live in St. Louis Park with a high school diploma (16.1%) was
below that of Hennepin County (17.5%), Seven County Metro Area (18.1%), and Minnesota
(19.8%).
• The proportion of those with a bachelor’s degree or higher in St. Louis Park (27.8%) was the
same as in Hennepin County (27.8%) but more than that in either the Seven County Metro
Area (27.3%) or Minnesota (24.0%).
MN
No.Pct.No.Pct.No.Pct.Pct.
Total All Jobs 26,665 100.0%613,285 100.0%1,528,718 100.0%100.0%
$1,250 per month or less 4,951 18.6%132,484 21.6%335,553 21.9%23.2%
$1,251 to $3,333 per month 4,742 17.8%128,481 20.9%329,992 21.6%24.0%
More than $3,333 per month 16,972 63.6%352,320 57.4%863,173 56.5%52.8%0
Age 29 or younger 7,250 27.2% 144,393 23.5% 348,226 22.8% 23.1%
Age 30 to 54 14,068 52.8% 332,343 54.2% 831,937 54.4% 53.1%
Age 55 or older 5,347 20.1% 136,549 22.3% 348,555 22.8% 23.8%
White Alone 22,487 84.3% 471,522 76.9% 1,215,424 79.5% 85.3%
Black or African American Alone 2,131 8.0% 75,511 12.3% 147,767 9.7% 6.6%
American Indian or Alaska Native Alone 162 0.6% 3,931 0.6% 9,210 0.6% 0.9%
Asian Alone 1,365 5.1% 48,418 7.9% 124,253 8.1% 5.4%
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander Alone 29 0.1%523 0.1% 1,255 0.1% 0.1%
Two or More Race Groups 491 1.8% 13,380 2.2% 30,809 2.0% 1.7%
Not Hispanic or Latino 25,583 95.9% 580,273 94.6% 1,449,041 94.8% 95.2%
Hispanic or Latino 1,082 4.1% 33,012 5.4% 79,677 5.2% 4.8%
Less than high school 1,585 5.9% 43,135 7.0% 105,826 6.9% 6.7%
High school or equivalent, no college 4,284 16.1% 107,097 17.5% 276,519 18.1% 19.8%
Some college or Associate degree 6,143 23.0% 148,068 24.1% 380,772 24.9% 26.4%
Bachelor's degree or advanced degree 7,403 27.8% 170,592 27.8% 417,375 27.3% 24.0%
7,250 27.2% 144,393 23.5% 348,226 22.8% 23.1%
Seven County Metro
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, Maxfield Research and Consulting, LLC.
TABLE E-9
RESIDENT PROFILE
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK, HENNEPIN COUNTY, SEVEN-COUNTY METRO, & MN
2020
Total Jobs
Monthly Earnings
Worker Ages
Worker Race and Ethnicity
Ethnicity
Worker Educational Attainment
City of St Louis Park Hennepin County
Educational attainment not available (workers
aged 29 or younger)
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 91
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 83
Major Employers
A portion of the employment growth in St. Louis Park will be generated by the largest employ-
ers in the City. Table E-10 lists the top employers in the PMA along with a description of their
primary industry and number of employees based on data from the City of St. Louis Park.
The following are key points from the major employers table.
• Health Partners, at 3800 Park Nicollet Boulevard, and in the Health Services industry, is the
largest employment location in St. Louis Park with 6,708 employees. The city’s next largest
employer, at 600 Highway 169 South, is Wells Fargo Home Mortgage with 1,450 employees.
• Among the largest employers in St. Louis Park many were in the technology, business, medi-
cal, and retail related fields.
• Approximately two-thirds of St. Louis Park’s largest employers have between 200 and 700
employees.
• In terms of location, the majority of St. Louis Park’s largest employers can be found in the
55416 Zip Code.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 92
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC 84
Employer Address Zip Code Industry/Product/Service Employee Size
Health Partners Park Nicollet Health Services 3800 Park Nicollet Blvd 55416 Health Services 6,708
Wells Fargo Home Mortgage 600 Hwy 169 S 55426 Financial Services 1,450
Nvent 1665 Utica Ave S #700 55416 Electrical Products Manugacturing 1,393 (MN)
Coherent Solutions 1600 Utica Ave S #120 55416 Info Technology Consulting & Software Development 1,300 (MN)
St Louis Park Public Schools 6425 W 33rd St 55426 Public Elementary & Secondary School 1,100
Magenic 1600 Utica Ave S #200 55416 Info Technology Consulting & Software Development 675
Japs-Olson Co 7500 Excelsior Blvd 55426 Other Comm. Printing 645
Loffler Companies 3745 Louisiana Ave 55426 Business to Business Office Technology & Services 500
Northland Aluminium Products (NordicWare)Hwy 7 & 100 55416 Household Cookware Manufacturing 500
Shalom Home SLP Multiple Locations --Senior Housing 500
MoneyGram International 1550 Utica Ave S 55416 Financial Transaction Processing 442
Health Partners 5100 Gamble Dr #100 55416 Health Services 400
Center for Diagnostic Imaging 5775 Wayzata Blvd #190 55416 Medical Laboratories 400
Knutson Construction 7515 Wayzata Blvd 55426 General Contracting. Construction Management 392
Lunds & Byerlys 3777 Park Center Blvd 55416 Grocery 300
City of St Louis Park 5005 Minnetonka Blvd 55416 Executive Offices 440
Horizontal Inc 1660 Hwy 100 S #200 55416 Digital Consultants and Talent Solutions 250
Magenic Technologies 1600 Utica Ave S #800 55416 Info Technology Consulting & Software Development 250
Electric Wire Products 3965 Meadowbrook Rd 55426 Electrical 250
Sabes Jewish Community Center 4330 Cedar Lake Rd 55416 Individual & Family Services 313
Total Expert 1600 Utica Ave S 55416 Financial Services Software 220
AAA Minneapolis 5400 Auto Club Way 55416 Travel Arrangement Reservation Services 205
Target (SLP)3601 Hwy 100 S 55416 Retail Store 200
The Excelsior Group 1660 Hwy 100 S #400 55416 Real Estate Firm 194
Target (Knollwood)8900 Hwy 7 55426 Retail Store 177
Q Consulting 600 Hwy 169 S #730 55426 IT & Management Consultant 110
Magnet 360 (Mintree parent Co)1665 Utica Ave S 55416 Tech Salesforce Specialist 100
TABLE E-10
MAJOR EMPLOYERS
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Sources: City of St Louis Park & Maxfield Research & Consulting.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 93
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC 85
City of St. Louis Park: Major Employers
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 94
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 86
Major Employers & Office Buildings
Lunds & Byerly’s
10 West End (New Office Building)
600 Highway 169 South Office Building St. Louis Park City Hall
Northland Aluminum Products (Nordicware) Sabes Jewish Community Center
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 95
RENTAL MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 87
Introduction
Maxfield Research and Consulting identified and surveyed larger rental properties of eight or
more units in the City of St. Louis Park. In addition, interviews were conducted with real estate
agents, developers, rental housing management firms, and others in the community familiar
with St. Louis Park’s rental housing stock.
For purposes of our analysis, we have classified rental projects into two groups, general occu-
pancy and senior (age restricted). All senior projects are included in the Senior Rental Analysis
section of this report. The general occupancy rental projects are divided into three groups,
market rate (those without income restrictions), affordable (those with income restrictions),
and subsidized (those with income restrictions based on 30% allocation of income to housing ).
Rental Market Overview
Table R-1 shows average monthly rents and vacancy from 2nd Quarter 2021 and 2nd Quarter
2022 by unit type in St. Louis Park and its neighboring communities. Data is from Marquette
Advisors, Inc., which compiles apartment trends quarterly, with 2nd Quarter 2022 being the
most recent information available.
While St. Louis Park has its own employment base that drives housing demand, much of its
housing growth is tied to the health of the Twin Cities Metro Area as a whole. Table R-1 pro-
vides average monthly rents and vacancy as a comparison.
• Average monthly rent as of the 2nd Quarter of 2022 in the City of St. Louis Park were $1,382
for studio units, $1,309 for one-bedroom units, $1,545 for one-bedroom plus den units,
$1,550 for two-bedroom units, $1,942 for two-bedroom plus den units, and $2,461 for
three-bedroom units. Overall, the average monthly rent was $1,465; which was a $61
(+4.3%) increase from the previous year.
• The properties included in the survey are both newer and older. Since the Apartment Trend
Report does not segment newer properties in each submarket, average rents shown in Ta-
ble R-1 are less than what is currently being achieved by the newest properties that have
come on-line.
• The overall vacancy rate in St. Louis Park was 3.7%. Vacancy rates below 5% indicate that
pent-up demand exists for additional rental units in the market. The overall Metro Area va-
cancy rate throughout the Metro Area was similar to St. Louis Park at 4.0%.
• St. Louis Park’s 2nd Quarter 2022 overall rent was 4.8% (+$68) higher than the overall Metro
Area ($1,397). In addition, the Cities 2nd Quarter rent was also higher than its neighboring
communities of Plymouth ($1,369) and Hopkins ($1,328) but less than rents in the other
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 96
RENTAL MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 88
neighboring communities of Edina ($1,888), Golden Valley ($1,818), Minnetonka ($1,549),
and Southwest Minneapolis ($1,486).
1 BR 2 BR 3 BR/D Average
Total Studio 1 BR w/ Den 2 BR w/ Den 3 BR or 4BR PH Increase
Units 6,755 342 2,982 281 2,893 57 200 -- -- --
No. Vacant 250 8 108 10 113 5 6 -- -- --
Avg. Rent $1,465 $1,382 $1,309 $1,545 $1,550 $1,942 $2,461 -- --4.3%
Vacancy 3.7%2.3% 3.6% 3.6% 3.9% 8.8% 3.0%-- ---0.6%
Units 6,480 342 2,911 281 2,689 57 200 -- -- --
No. Vacant 278 10 116 9 129 6 8 -- -- --
Avg. Rent $1,404 $1,375 $1,221 $1,549 $1,499 $1,936 $2,449 -- --1.3%
Vacancy 4.3%2.9% 4.0% 3.2% 4.8% 10.5% 4.0%-- ---1.8%
Units 3,332 212 1,541 13 1,333 11 222 -- -- --
No. Vacant 72 9 28 0 28 0 7 -- -- --
Avg. Rent $1,328 $1,067 $1,148 $1,400 $1,480 $1,601 $1,897 -- --2.5%
Vacancy 2.2%4.2% 1.8% 0.0% 2.1% 0.0% 3.2%-- ---0.3%
Units 3,332 212 1,541 13 1,333 11 222 -- -- --
No. Vacant 83 8 33 0 37 0 5 -- -- --
Avg. Rent $1,296 $998 $1,146 $1,384 $1,422 $1,611 $1,850 -- ---0.4%
Vacancy 2.5%3.8% 2.1% 0.0% 2.8% 0.0% 2.3%-- --0.8%
Units 2,137 141 1,120 21 736 16 103 -- -- --
No. Vacant 74 2 34 2 34 1 1 -- -- --
Avg. Rent $1,818 $1,428 $1,589 $1,876 $2,118 $2,351 $2,699 -- --10.9%
Vacancy 3.5%1.4% 3.0% 9.5% 4.6% 6.3% 1.0%-- ---0.1%
Units 1,759 141 828 21 650 16 103 -- -- --
No. Vacant 63 3 31 2 25 0 2 -- -- --
Avg. Rent $1,639 $1,435 $1,392 $1,876 $1,810 $2,349 $2,669 -- ---0.8%
Vacancy 3.6%2.1% 3.7% 9.5% 3.8% 0.0% 1.9%-- ---2.0%
Units 4,392 216 1,869 142 1,786 93 259 9 18 --
No. Vacant 249 22 89 9 110 4 12 1 2 --
Avg. Rent $1,888 $1,325 $1,563 $1,835 $2,044 $2,712 $2,964 $3,420 $5,171 12.1%
Vacancy 5.7%10.2% 4.8% 6.3% 6.2% 4.3% 4.6% 11.1% 11.1% 0.8%
Units 4,027 171 1,768 147 1,595 98 239 9 18 --
No. Vacant 196 6 73 10 92 4 11 0 1 --
Avg. Rent $1,678 $1,207 $1,416 $1,813 $1,735 $2,709 $2,160 $3,421 $3,421 0.0%
Vacancy 4.9%3.5% 4.1% 6.8% 5.8% 4.1% 4.6% 0.0% 5.6% 1.7%
CONTINUEDQ2/2022TABLE R-1
AVERAGE RENTS/VACANCIES TRENDS
ST LOUIS PARK AND NEIGHBORING COMMUNITIES
SECOND QUARTER 2021 & SECOND QUARTER 2022
St Louis Park
Q2/2022Q2/2021Hopkins
Q2/2022Q2/2021Golden Valley
Q2/2021Edina
Q2/2022Q2/2021Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 97
RENTAL MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 89
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 98
RENTAL MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 90
General-Occupancy Rental Projects
Our research of St. Louis Park’s general occupancy rental market included a survey of 101 mar-
ket rate apartment properties, 11 affordable communities and four subsidized units as of Feb-
ruary 2023. Table R-2, on the following page, displays those properties along with information
displaying their total units, vacancies/vacancy rate, unit mix, square footage by unit mix, and
rent by unit mix. Following Table R-2 is Table R-3, a summary of the rental properties by their
affordability (market rate, affordable, and subsidized.
These projects represent a combined total of 9,002 units, including 8,316 market rate units
(92.4%) of all units, 434 affordable units (4.8% of all units) and 252 subsidized units (2.8% of all
units).
At the time of our survey, including newly constructed units, which have not yet reached stabi-
lized occupancy, there were 427 vacant market rate units and 131 vacant affordable units.
There were no subsidized units vacant. As a result, market rate general occupancy units had a
vacancy rate of 5.1%, affordable units had a vacancy rate of 30.2%, and subsidized units had no
vacancies. The overall vacancy rate in St. Louis Park for all property types was 6.2%. Vacancy
rates were based only on properties where unit mix and vacancies were obtained during the
survey. This is higher than the industry standard of 5% vacancy for a stabilized rental market,
which promotes competitive rates, ensures adequate choice, and allows for unit turnover.
Note that vacancies in the previous paragraph includes properties still in initial lease up. Exclud-
ing properties in initial lease up leaves an overall stabilized vacancy rate of 3.7% (322 vacan-
cies), below market equilibrium (5% vacancy rate). Market rate properties had a stabilized va-
cancy rate of 4.0% (322 vacancies) while affordable and subsidized units each had a vacancy
rate of 0% (no vacancies). As a result, all unit types have pent up demand.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 99
RENTAL MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 91
Year Total Vac.
Property Name Built Units Vac.Rate Min Max Min Max Min Max
Market Rate Rental
Parkway Commons 2023 34 0 0.0%NA -studio
4141 31st St W NA -1BR 620 -815 $1,399 -$2,200 $2.26 -$2.70
NA -1BR+D 860 -890 $2.07 -$2.14
NA -2BR $2,190 -$3,550 $1.83 -$2.96
VOLO at Texa Tonka 2022 89 37 41.6%23 -studio 443 -569 $1,153 -$1,506 $2.60 -$3.40
7920 Minnetonka Blvd Oct 47 -1BR 532 -787 $1,520 -$1,814 $2.30 -$2.86
6 -2BR 861 -1,067 $2,037 -$2,813 $2.37 -$2.64
2 2BR+D $2,753 -$2,853 $2.32 -$2.24
1 -1BR TH
10 -2BR TH 1,176 -1,470 $2,995 -$3,500 $2.38 -$2.55
Via Sol 2022 65 63 96.9%18 -studio 508 -641 $1,400 -$1,520 $2.76 -$2.99
5585 Highway 7 E Sept 19 -1BR 577 -767 $1,519 -$1,724 $2.25 -$2.63
(In Intial Lease Up)22 -2BR 886 -1,277 $2,105 -$2,509 $1.96 -$2.38
6 -3BR 1,333 -1,560 $2,539 -$2,753 $1.76 -$1.90
Parkway Place 2022 95 0 0.0%69 -1BR 585 -975 $1,399 -$2,200 $2.26 -$2.39
4040 W 31st St 2 -1BR+D
24 -2BR 900 -1,450 $2,190 -$3,550 $2.43 -$2.45
The Quentin 2021 71 5 7.0%11 -studio $1,550 -$1,785 $2.91 -$3.36
4900 Cedar Lake Rd S July 19 -1BR 780 -927 $1,824 -$2,087 $2.25 -$2.34
(In Intial Lease Up)27 -1BR+D 945 -1,067 $2,250 -$2,460 $2.31 -$2.38
12 -2BR 1,167 -1,440 $2,485 -$3,450 $2.13 -$2.40
1 -2BR+D
1 3BR
Elan West End Apartments 2020 164 14 8.5%7 -studio 606 -618 $1,730 -$1,785 $2.85 -$2.89
1325 Utica Ave S August 55 -1BR 694 -758 $1,824 -$2,100 $2.63 -$2.77
3 -1BR+D
70 -2BR 960 -1,159 $2,485 -$2,875 $2.48 -$2.59
24 -3BR 1,428 -1,455 $3,445 -$3,735 $2.41 -$2.57
Urban Park Apartments I & II 2020 (Phase II)151 0 0.0%28 -studio $1,263 -$1,425 $2.37 -$2.67
3601 Phillips Pkwy (Phase I)2003 (Phase I)59 -1BR 561 -802 $1,282 -$1,654 $2.06 -$2.29
3675 Phillips Pkwy (Phase II)50 -2BR 975 -1,147 $1,717 -$1,997 $1.74 -$1.76
14 -3BR
Parkway25 2018 112 0 0.0%65 -1BR 514 -1,019 $1,350 -$2,327 $2.28 -$2.63
4015 County Rd 25 Oct 12 -1BR+D 839 -986 $1,882 -$2,234 $2.24 -$2.27
45 -2BR 1,093 -1,417 $2,151 -$2,895 $1.97 -$2.04
4800 Excelsior Apartments 2018 164 9 5.5%9 -studio
4800 Excelsior Ave Jan 80 -1BR 746 -960 $1,775 -$2,298 $2.38 -$2.39
57 -2BR 995 -1,406 $2,357 -$3,445 $2.37 -$2.45
Central Park West 2018 193 9 4.7%29 -studio 546 -730 $1,680 -$2,365 $3.08 -$4.33
1511 Utica Ave S Jan 73 -1BR 728 -743 $1,850 -$1,970 $2.54 -$2.65
10 -1BR+D 849 -1,047 $2,280 -$2,340 $2.69 -$2.76
74 -2BR 1,029 -1,265 $2,495 -$2,745 $2.17 -$2.42
7 -3BR 1,395 -1,450 $3,260 -$3,530 $2.34 -$2.43
The Shoreham 2017 148 2 1.4%15 -studio 468 -581 $1,193 -$1,581 $2.55 -$2.72
3915 Highway 7 54 -1BR 677 -828 $1,559 -$2,123 $2.30 -$2.56
5 1BR+D $1,765 -$2,509 $2.05 -$2.91
74 -2BR 1,070 -1,323 $2,399 -$3,094 $2.24 -$2.34
Millenium West End 2015 158 10 6.3%20 -studio 540 -639 $1,541 -$1,635 $2.56 -$2.85
5245 Wayzata Blvd Oct 61 -1BR 691 -823 $1,800 -$2,046 $2.49 -$2.60
5 -1BR+D
66 -2BR 1,039 -1,188 $1,929 -$2,861 $1.86 -$2.41
6 -3BR
Siena Apartment Homes 2015 138 19 13.8%85 -1BR 668 -860 $1,565 -$1,885 $2.19 -$2.34
6800 Cedar Lake Rd S July 4 -1BR+D
43 -2BR 999 -1,190 $2,170 -$2,458 $2.07 -$2.17
6 -3BR 1,332 -1,503 $3,183 -$3,456 $2.30 -$2.39
The Curtis Apartments 2015 13 1 7.7%2 -1BR
4101 W 31st St 10 -2BR 825 -1,000 $1,602 -$1,939 $1.94 -$1.94
1 - 3BR
$1,840
$1,840
$2.16
NA NA550
1,200
850
Unit Mix
(In Intial Lease Up)
1,228
1,044 $2,100 $2.01
TABLE R-2
MARKET RATE GENERAL OCCUPANCY RENTAL PROJECTS
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
FEBRUARY 2023
Sq. Ft. Range Rent Range Price per Sq.Ft
945 $2,390 $2.53
533
1,307 $2,200 $1.68
532
1,176 $3,200 $2.72
1,328 $2,950 $2.22
901 $2,051 $2.28
1,414 $3,550 $2.51
557 $1,655 $2.97
862
1,029 $2,252 $2.19
675
1,170
$1,456
$2,620
$2.16
$2.24
CONTINUED
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 100
RENTAL MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 92
Year Total Vac.
Property Name Built Units Vac.Rate Min Max Min Max Min Max
Medley Row Townhomes - Hoigaard Village 2013 22 0 0.0%22 -2BR 2,259 -2,304 $2,937 -$3,037 $1.30 -$1.32
5690 W 36th St Late
E2 2013 58 0 0.0%13 -studio 449 -560 $1,340 -$1,383 $2.47 -$2.98
3924 Excelsior Blvd Sept 20 -1BR 699 -817 $1,537 -$1,540 $1.88 -$2.20
8 1BR+D 843 -1,106 $1,586 -$2,229 $1.88 -$2.02
14 2BR 1,027 -1,161 $1,920 -$2,207 $1.87 -$1.90
3 -2BR+D 1,161 -1,759 $2,192 -$3,541 $1.89 -$2.01
The Adagio - Hoigaard Village 2013 100 7 7.0%79 -1BR 728 -950 $1,570 -$1,776 $1.87 -$2.16
5690 W 36th St June 5 -1BR+D 794 -943 $1,716 -$1,724
16 -2BR 1,067 -1,337 $1,935 -$2,284 $1.71 $1.81
The Flats at West End 2013 119 8 6.7%11 -studio $0.00 -$2.75
5310 16th St W May 54 -1BR 697 -752 $1,750 -$2,095 $2.51 -$3.01
9 1BR+D 805 -1,051 $1,980 -$2,512 $2.46 -$3.12
35 -2BR 1,000 -1,175 $2,395 -$3,198 $2.40 -$3.20
10 2BR+D 1,189 -1,258 $2,763 -$3,045 $2.32 -$2.56
Verge Apartments 2013 184 9 4.9%46 -1BR 692 -802 $1,340 -$1,887 $1.94 -$2.73
3601 Park Center Blvd Mar 61 -1BR+D 822 -949 $1,726 -$2,025 $2.10 -$2.46
77 -2BR 1,047 -1,267 $1,685 -$2,449 $1.61 -$2.34
The Ellipse on Excelsior 2010 189 9 4.8%8 -studio 554 -607 $1,207 -$1,469 $2.18 -$2.42
3920 Excelsior Blvd 63 -1BR 705 -866 $1,305 -$1,687 $1.85 -$1.95
16 -1BR+D 893 -1,106 $2,067 -$2,229 $2.02 -$2.31
38 -2BR 1,027 -1,651 $1,955 -$2,189 $1.33 -$1.90
7 -2BR+D 1,251 -1,262 $2,569 -$2,569 $2.04 -$2.05
The Camerata - Hoigaard Village 2008 220 2 0.9%14 -studio $1,319 -$1,339 $2.56 -$2.60
5600 Camerata Way 111 -1BR 668 -910 $1.95 -$2.29
3 -1BR+D
88 -2BR 1,095 -1,280 $2,007 -$2,240 $1.75 -$1.83
4 -2BR+D
Harmony Vista - Hoigaard Village 2008 74 3 4.1%49 -1BR 721 -1,139 $1,784 -$2,120 $1.86 -$2.47
5650 36th St. W.24 2BR 968 -1,417 $1,888 -$2,228 $1.57 -$1.95
The Gables at Park Pointe 2006 49 2 4.1%1 -studio
1361 Hampshire Ave South 12 -1BR 792 -876 $1,667 -$1,752 $2.00 -$2.10
30 -2BR 1,053 -1,102 $1,884 -$2,242 $1.79 -$2.03
6 -3BR 1,227 -1,360 $2,480 -$2,540 $1.87 -$2.02
Arrive St Louis Park 2001 200 7 3.5%88 -1BR 742 -899 $1,655 -$1,830 $2.04 -$2.23
7201 Walker St.98 -2BR 1,041 -1,310 $1,755 -$2,515 $1.69 -$1.92
14 -3BR 1,368 -1,415 $2,460 -$2,610 $1.80 -$1.84
Inglewood Trails 1999 124 7 5.6%4 -studio $1,185 -$1,320 $1.81 -$2.02
3200 Inglewood 100 -1BR 760 -954 $1,250 -$2,160 $1.64 -$2.26
20 2BR 1,028 -1,378 $1,830 -$2,745 $1.78 -$1.99
3106 Inglewood Ave 1995 8 0 0 0.0%8 -2BR
3106 Inglewood Ave S
Excelsior & Grand 1995 338 2 0.6%9 - studio
3820 Grand Way 178 - 1BR 644 -1,129 $1,599 -$2,099 $1.86 -$2.48
151 - 2BR 1,148 -1,750 $2,099 -$2,699 $1.54 -$1.83
Cityscape Apartments 1990 156 7 4.5%36 -1BR
5707 Highway 7 39 1BR+D 925 -940 $1,469 -$1,601 $1.59 -$1.73
65 2BR 1,110 -1,188 $1,781 -$1,870 $1.60 -$1.68
16 -2BR+D
Arrive 4301 1988 108 5 4.6%2 -studio $1,215 -$1,275 $2.38 -$2.50
4301 Park Glen 70 -1BR 592 -777 $1,065 -$1,590 $1.80 -$2.05
36 -2BR 944 -1,092 $1,540 -$1,905 $1.63 -$1.74
Park Glen Apartments/TH Apts 1987 290 2 0.7%50 -studio 520 -602 $1,195 -$1,300 $2.30 -$2.50
4401 Park Glen 176 -1BR 734 -1,074 $1,400 -$1,785 $1.66 -$1.91
12 -1BR+D 870 -907 $1,615 -$1,750 $1.86 -$2.01
52 -2BR 1,041 -1,220 $1,750 -$2,100 $1.68 -$1.72
$2.16
539 $1,480
552 $1,400 $2.54
515
928 $1,732 $1.87
1,142 $2,076 $1.82
$1,528
860 $1,412 $1.64
1,270 $1,919 $1.51
653
1,200 N/A N/A
669 $1,499 $2.24
510
CONTINUED
Unit Mix
TABLE R-2 (continued)
MARKET RATE GENERAL OCCUPANCY RENTAL PROJECTS
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
FEBRUARY 2023
Sq. Ft. Range Rent Range Price per Sq.Ft
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 101
RENTAL MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 93
Year Total Vac.
Property Name Built Units Vac.Rate Min Max Min Max Min Max
Tamarind 1986 102 2 2.0%69 -1BR $1,199 -$1,249 $1.78 -$1.86
2300 Ridge Dr 33 -2BR $1,559 -$1,584 $1.69 -$1.72
Westwind Apartments 1986 186 9 4.8%72 -1BR 754 -814 $1,295 -$1,490 $1.72 -$1.83
255 Shelard Pkwy 114 -2BR 986 -1,046 $1,470 -$1,650 $1.49 -$1.58
Helix 1985 167 3 1.8%98 -1BR 630 -890 $1,276 -$1,649 $1.85 -$2.03
7450 Highway 7 65 -2BR 1,110 -1,250 $1,751 -$3,201 $1.58 -$2.56
4 -3BR 2,470 -2,783 $2,182 -$2,738 $0.71 -$0.98
Park Pointe Apts 1984 133 6 4.5%1 -studio
1425 & 1435 Hampshire Ave S 60 -1BR 768 -886 $1,300 -$1,425 $1.61 -$1.69
60 -2BR 1,010 -1,093 $1,453 -$1,770 $1.44 -$1.62
12 -3BR
Somerset Oaks 1984 100 5 5.0%20 -1BR $1,355 -$1,685 $1.67 -$2.08
7400 Oak Park Village Dr 40 -2BR $1,600 -$1,920 $1.53 -$1.83
20 -2BR TH $1,775 -$2,095 $1.59 -$1.87
20 -3BR TH $2,140 -$2,260 $1.41 -$1.49
Hampshire Cove 1980 9 0 0.0%9 -2BR
1436 Hampshire Ave
Lou Park Apartments 1977 76 3 3.9%2 -studio 500 -600 $1.61 -$1.93
1351 Hampshire 41 -1BR 740 -800 $1,275 -$1,305 $1.63 -$1.72
33 -2BR 1,050 -1,100 $1,500 -$1,585 $1.43 -$1.44
Park West Apartments 1972 60 2 3.3%36 -1BR 700 -750 $1.47 -$1.57
1425 Colorado Ave S 24 -2BR 850 -900 $1.50 -$1.59
ReNew PARKone Apartments 1971 186 4 2.2%6 -studio
301 Shelard Pkwy 60 -1BR
102 -2BR 1,125 -1,475 $1,546 -$1,940 $1.32 -$1.37
18 -3BR 1,350 -1,425 $2,070 -$2,095 $1.47 -$1.53
Shelard Village 1971 126 1 0.8%39 -1BR
400-420 Ford Rd 75 -2BR $1,535 -$1,580 $1.47 -$1.51
12 -3BR
Colorado Court 1969 48 0 0.0%30 -1BR
1410 Colorado 18 -2BR
Dakota Pointe 1969 20 0 0.0%19 -2BR
1421 Dakota Ave S 1 -3BR
Texas Terrace 1969 17 3 17.6%5 -1BR
8008 W 28th St 12 -2BR
West Lake Estates 1969 27 0 0.0%9 -1BR
5700 W Lake St 18 -2BR $1,450 -$1,551 $1.32 -$1.41
Baycliff Apartments 1969 24 0 0.0%17 -1BR 867 -876 $1,042 -$1,057 $1.20 -$1.21
1436 Colorado Ave S 6 -2BR 999 -1,250 $1,383 -$1,447 $1.16 -$1.38
Edge of Uptown 1968 144 7 4.9%4 -studio $960 -$980
4725 Minnetonka 75 -1BR 720 -971 $1,125 -$1,375 $1.42 -$1.56
65 -2BR 986 -1,191 $1,500 -$1,680 $1.41 -$1.52
1,270 $2,075 $1.63
672
920
N/A N/A N/A
MARKET RATE GENERAL OCCUPANCY RENTAL PROJECTS
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
FEBRUARY 2023
Sq. Ft. Range
TABLE R-2 (continued)
Rent Range Price per Sq.Ft
Unit Mix
N/A
$965
$1,099
$1,351
550 $1,241 $2.26
812
1,048
1,118
1,514
680 N/A
1,045
1,300 $1,985 $1.53
850 $1,012 $1.19
875 $1,583 $1.81
750 $1,300 $1.73
950 $1,289 $1.36
1,000 $1,383 $1.38
980 $1,350 $1.38
750 $1,040 $1.39
1,100 $1,440 $1.31
820 $949 $1.16
1,100
585 $1.64
CONTINUED
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 102
RENTAL MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 94
Year Total Vac.
Property Name Built Units Vac.Rate Min Max Min Max Min Max
Liv Apartments 1968 66 5 7.6%12 -studio $993 -$1,025
4505 W 36 1/2 36 -1BR $1,191 -$1,385 $1.70 -$1.98
18 -2BR
Rhode Island Chateau 1968 107 12 11.2%40 -1BR 750 -800 $1,149 -$1,199 $1.44 -$1.53
2700 -2727 Rhode Island S 67 -2BR 975 -1,200 $1,450 -$1,499 $1.49 -$1.54
Villa Capri 1968 12 0 0.0%12 -2BR $1,550 -$1,725 $1.29 -$1.44
3043 Inglewood
Westwood Chateau 1968 46 2 4.3%33 -1BR 650 -775 $1,020 -$1,040 $1.34 -$1.57
2242 Nevada South 13 -2BR 700 -800 $1,280 -$1,285 $1.60 -$1.83
Brittany Apartments 1967 39 3 7.7%1 -studio $850 -$913 $1.01 -$1.09
3127 Highway 100 26 -1BR
12 2BR $1,300 -$1,400 $0.76 -$0.82
The Park at One Hundred 1967 93 0 0.0%81 -1BR $1,145 -$1,195 $1.73 -$1.81
2480 South 100 Highway 12 -2BR $1,295 -$1,325 $1.52 -$1.56
Courtyard 1966 151 25 16.6%50 -1BR $1,125 -$1,215 $2.05 -$2.21
2524 Hwy. 100 101 -2BR 835 -949 $1,280 -$1,415 $1.53 -$1.69
Jersey Manor 1966 21 0 0.0%16 -1BR
1325 Jersey Ave 5 -2BR
Target Apartments 1966 33 0 0.0%1 -Studio
8800-8812-8814 W 36 St 32 -1BR
8 plex on Texas 1965 8 0 0.0%4 -1BR
3607 Texas Ave S 4 -2BR
Colonial Terrace 1965 54 3 5.6%3 -studio
5621-35 Minnetonka Blvd 18 -1BR 800 -900 $1,049 -$1,209 $1.31 -$1.34
33 -2BR 900 -1,000 $1,299 -$1,419 $1.42 -$1.44
Hampshire House (3 parcels)1965 36 6 16.7%3 -1BR
1360-1428 Hampshire Ave 33 -2BR 800 -950 $1,095 -$1,280 $1.35 -$1.37
The Hamilton 1965 8 0 0.0%N/A -1BR
6211 Hamilton St N/A -2BR
Virginia Terrace 1965 12 0 0.0%1 -studio
8201 W 30 1/2 11 -2BR
1328 Idaho Ave 1964 11 0 0.0%11 -1BR
1328 Idaho Ave
Anderson 34th 1964 11 0 0.0%5 -1BR
6227 W 34 St 5 -2BR
1 -3BR
Hampshire Apts (2 parcels)1964 16 0 0.0%2 -Studio
2401-2407 Hampshire 14 -2BR
Joppa Lane I & II 1964 144 5 3.5%84 -1BR $1,125 -$1,475 $1.50 -$1.97
2888 Joppa Ave.60 -2BR 1,050 -1,500 $1,335 -$1,775 $1.18 -$1.27
Knollwood Estates 1964 36 0 0.0%3 -1BR
3528 Aquila 33 -2BR 900 -1,000 $1.16 -$1.29
Aquila Park & Royal Park 1963 189 12 6.3%26 -studio 450 -457 $1,010 -$1,025
8224 W 30 1/2 St 49 -1BR $1,157 -$1,265
100 -2BR 1,100 -1,300 $1,325 -$1,625 $1.20 -$1.25
14 -3BR 1,300 -1,350
6224 Hamilton St 1963 8 0 0.0%2 -1BR
6224 Hamilton St 6 -2BR
Lynn Ave Apartments 1963 30 2 6.7%10 -1BR 560 -800 $900 -$1,195 $1.61 -$2.13
3016-3030 Lynn Ave 20 -2BR 987 -1,175 $1,495 -$1,625 $1.51 -$1.65
Minnetonka Blvd Apartments 1963 14 0 0.0%14 -2BR $1,280 -$1,316 $1.35 -$1.39
4411 Minnetonka Blvd
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
FEBRUARY 2023
Sq. Ft. Range Rent Range Price per Sq.Ft
Unit Mix
TABLE R-2 (continued)
MARKET RATE GENERAL OCCUPANCY RENTAL PROJECTS
1,200
840
1,200 $1,000 $0.83
1,700
500 $1.99
700
1,000 $1,450 $1.45
N/A N/A N/A
500 $629 $1.26
660
850
549
N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A
450 $1,029 $2.29
700 $851 $1.22
N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A
750 $995 $1.33
750 $1,225 $1.63
N/A N/A N/A
600 $807 $1.35
775 $1,142 $1.47
N/A $663 N/A
1,000 $860 $0.86
N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A
830 $1.39
N/A N/A
N/A $726 N/A
750
750 $979 $1.31
$1,160
$2.24
630 $950 $1.51
949
CONTINUED
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 103
RENTAL MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 95
Year Total Vac.
Property Name Built Units Vac.Rate Min Max Min Max Min Max
8200 W 31st St (2 parcels)1962 22 0 0.0%10 -1BR
8200 W 31st St 10 -2BR
2 -3BR
Boulevard 100 1962 62 2 3.2%2 -studio
3000 Highway 100 41 -1BR $995 -$1,110 $1.33 -$1.48
16 -2BR
3 -3BR 1,475 -1,880 $1.03 -$1.31
Park Embassy 1962 107 2 1.9%72 -1BR 700 -850 $1,155 -$1,220 $1.44 -$1.65
4400 - 4450 Minnetonka Blvd 35 -2BR 1,100 -1,200 $1,490 -$1,492 $1.24 -$1.35
Park Towers 1962 143 5 3.5%5 -studio 350 -600 $1,148 -$1,276 $3.28 -$3.65
4820 Hwy 7 67 -1BR 700 -884 $1,345 -$1,491 $1.92 -$2.13
65 -2BR $0.00 -$1.55
6 -3BR 1,200 -1,350 $1,975 -$1,976 $1.65 -$1.65
Park Villa 1962 21 0 0.0%18 -1BR
4320 W 36 1/2 3 -2BR
Pennslyvania Apartments 1962 17 0 0.0%2 -1BR
1357 Pennslyvania Ave S 15 -2BR
Virginia Court Apartments 1962 23 0 0.0%10 -1BR
3063 Virginia 13 -2BR
Westwood Gardens (3 parcels)1962 152 9 5.9%75 -1BR 690 -725 $1.59 -$1.67
7316 Cedar Lake Road 77 -2BR 925 -980 $1,350 -$1,450 $1.46 -$1.48
White Gate Manor 1962 36 0 0.0%13 -1BR $908 -$940 $1.23 -$1.28
8300 W 31 St 19 -2BR 787 -1,140 $1,048 -$1,198 $1.05 -$1.33
4 -3BR
4421 Minnetonka Blvd 1961 8 0 0.0%8 -2BR
4421 Minnetonka Blvd
4815 Cedar Lake Rd S 1961 25 0 0.0%25 -1BR
4815 Cedar Lake Rd S
6309 Excelsior Blvd 1961 12 0 0.0%12 -2BR
6309 Excelsior Blvd
Colonial Apartments 1961 11 0 0.0%10 -2BR
3117 Virginia Ave S 1 -3BR
Idaho Park East Apartments 1961 12 1 8.3%1 -studio $850 -$995
1345 Idaho Ave S 1 -1BR
10 -2BR
Virginia East Apartments 1961 11 0 0.0%10 - 2BR
3109 Virginia 1 -3BR
Idaho Park West Apartments 1960 14 2 14.3% 4 -studio
1346-1356 Idaho Ave 2 -1BR
8 -2BR
4040 36 St W 1960 14 1 7.1%14 -2BR
4040 36 St W
Highway 7 Apartments 1960 11 0 0.0% 7 - 1BR
4405 Highway 7 4 - 2BR
MARKET RATE GENERAL OCCUPANCY RENTAL PROJECTS
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
FEBRUARY 2023
Sq. Ft. Range Rent Range Price per Sq.Ft
TABLE R-2 (continued)
1,245 $1,195 $0.96
500 $937 $1.87
Unit Mix
689 $804 $1.17
963 $965 $1.00
550 $899 $1.63
820 $1,200 $1.46
750
950 $1,385 $1.46
$1,935
1,000 $1,545
750 $818 $1.09
900 $880 $0.98
750 N/A N/A
1,100 N/A N/A
1,000 $991 $0.99
700 N/A N/A
$1,150
737
N/A $2,069 N/A
N/A N/A N/A
410 $2.07
750 $1,225 $1.63
900 $1,300 $1.44
1,000 N/A N/A
730 $1,253 $1.72
900 $1,495 $1.66
787 $1,269 $1.61
1,100 1,150 $1.05
581 $942 $1.62
800 $1,195 $1.49
850 $1,495
CONTINUED
$1.76
1,075 $1,370 $1.27
440 $995 $2.26
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 104
RENTAL MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 96
Year Total Vac.
Property Name Built Units Vac.Rate Min Max Min Max Min Max
Aquila Court 1960 35 1 2.9%1 -1BR
8225 30 1/2 St.1 -2BR 800 -900 $1,095 -$1,295 $1.37 -$1.62
33 -3BR $1,269 -$1,350 $1.34 -$1.42
Park Trails 1960 120 0 0.0%12 -studio 400 -500 $1,019 -$1,039 $2.08 -$2.55
4531 W 36 1/2 53 -1BR 600 -700 $1,049 -$1,299 $1.75 -$1.86
55 -2BR 800 -850 $1,269 -$1,449 $1.59 -$1.70
Royal Terrace 1960 15 1 6.7%18 -2BR
8217 W 30 1/2
Lynn Plaza 1959 44 2 4.5%5 -studio 500 -600
3612-3624 Lynn 30 -1BR 750 -825
9 -2BR
Trailways Apartments 1958 38 0 0.0%21 -1BR
8340, 8400 Minnetonka Blvd 17 -2BR
Era on Excelsior 1955 556 18 3.2%36 -studios $1,015 -$1,375 $2.09 -$2.84
6860 Excelsior 360 -1BR $1,030 -$1,835 $1.87 -$3.34
160 -2BR $1,555 -$2,205 $1.35 -$1.92
Uptown West 1955 120 0 0.0%40 -studio 387 -455 $915 -$925 $2.03 -$2.36
3100 Raleigh 80 -1BR 612 -698 $1,004 -$1,026 $1.47 -$1.64
Huntington Ave Apartments 1951 20 0 0.0%18 -1BR 700 -750 $1,029 -$1,049 $1.40 -$1.50
3551 Huntington Ave 2 -2BR 825 -850 $1.59 -$1.64
5918 W 35th St 1950 22 0 0.0%22 -1BR
5918-5924 W 35th St
Minikahda Court 1950 125 19 15.2%39 -studio 425 -450 $1,024 -$1,240 $2.41 -$2.92
3504 Minikahda Ct 41 -1BR 600 -610 $1,285 -$1,380 $2.14 -$2.30
45 -2BR $1,395 -$1,570 $2.05 -$2.31
Park Place Apartments 1950 22 0 0.0%11 -1BR
6005, 6017 W 35 St 11 -2BR
6000 35 St W 1949 8 0 0.0%4 -studio
6000 35 St W 4 -1BR
Hansen Apartments 1949 11 0 0.0%6 -1BR
6114 Excelsior Blvd 5 -2BR
Park Point Apartments (5 parcels)1948 75 5 6.7%50 -1BR 630 -700 $1,075 -$1,095 $1.71 -$1.74
4301-4325 Minnetonka Blvd 25 -2BR 700 -800 $1,150 -$1,175 $1.64 -$1.68
FEBRUARY 2023
TABLE R-2 (continued)
MARKET RATE GENERAL OCCUPANCY RENTAL PROJECTS
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
950
900 $1,279 $1.42
650 $995 $1.53
Sq. Ft. Range Rent Range Price per Sq.Ft
600 $725 $1.21
700 $846 $1.21
$950 $1.90
$1,075 $1.43
895 N/A N/A
N/A
680
750 N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A
485
550
1,150
$1,350
N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A
580 $781 $1.35
642 $910 $1.42
N/A N/A N/A
CONTINUED
Unit Mix
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 105
RENTAL MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 97
Year Total Vac.
Property Name Built Units Vac.Rate Min Max Min Max Min Max
Affordable Rental
VOLO at Texa Tonka 2022 23 0 0.0%7 -studio 443 -569 $958 -$1,022 $2.16 -$2.31
7920 Minnetonka Blvd Oct 12 -1BR 780 -927
4 -2BR 861 -1,067 $1.15 -$1.42
Via Sol 2022 152 131 86.2%66 -studio 422 -577 $1,027 -$1,400 $2.43 -$3.32
5585 Highway 7 E Sept 52 -1BR
(In Intial Lease Up)17 -2BR 730 -1,132 $1,662 -$1,940 $1.47 -$2.28
15 -3BR 1,132 -1,319 $1,965 -$2,509 $1.74 -$1.90
Parkway Flats 2022 6 0 0.0%6 -2BR
3915 31st St W
Parkway Residences - Rehab 2022 24 0 0.0%1 -studio
3925, 4001, & 4009 31st St W 15 -1BR
8 -2BR
The Quentin 2021 8 0 0.0%3 -studio
4900 Cedar Lake Rd S July 4 -1BR 780 -927 N/A -N/A N/A -N/A
1 -2BR 1,167 -1,440 N/A -N/A N/A -N/A
Elan West End Apartments 2020 5 0 0.0%1 -studio
1325 Utica Ave S August 1 -1BR
2 -2BR
1 -3BR
Central Park West 2018 6 0 0.0%1 -studio
1511 Utica Ave S Jan 2 -1BR
2 -2BR
1 -3BR
4800 Excelsior Apartments 2018 18 0 0.0%1 -studio
4800 Excelsior Ave Jan 10 -1BR
7 -2BR 1,067 -1,120 N/A -N/A N/A -N/A
The Shoreham 2017 30 0 0.0%4 -studio 468 -472 $2.05 -$2.07
3915 Highway 7 13 -1BR 677 -784 $1.35 -$1.56
13 -2BR 1,082 -1,116 $1.12 -$1.16
Park Glen Townhomes 1996 34 0 0.0%34 -3BR $1,100 -$1,250 $0.78 -$0.89
4410 Park Glen Road
Louisiana Court (11 Parcels)1963 128 0 0.0%3 -studio
2711-2759 Louisiana 58 -1BR 628 -680 $1.25 -$1.35
55 -2BR 830 -860 $0.00 -$1.24
12 3BR 1,009 -1,360 $0.89 -$1.20
Subsidized Rental
Oak Park Village Apartments 1978 100 0 0.0%27 -1BR
7267 Oak Park Village Drive 45 -2BR
28 -3BR
Lou Park Apartments 1977 32 0 0.0%10 -1BR
1351 Hampshire 22 -2BR
Hamilton House*1976 108 0 0.0%108 -1BR
2400 Nevada Ave. S.
Louisiana Court 1963 12 0 0.0%12 -2BR
2730 Louisiana Court S
Market Rate Totals 8,316 427 5.1%
Stabilized Market Rate Totals 8,091 322 4.0%
Affordable Rental Totals 434 131 30.2%
Stabilized Affordable Totals 282 0 0.0%
Subsidized Rental Totals 252 0 0.0%
Stabilized Subsidized Totals 252 0 0.0%
Totals 9,002 558 6.2%
Stabilized Totals 8,625 322 3.7%
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
$1,470
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
$1.55
N/A
950
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
FEBRUARY 2023
Sq. Ft. Range Rent Range Price per Sq.Ft
Unit Mix
TABLE R-2 (continued)
AFFORDABLE/SUBSIDIZED RENTAL PROJECTS
577 $1,411 $2.45
$1.31
(In Intial Lease Up)
N/A N/A
532 $1,000 $1.88
N/A N/A N/A
N/A
N/A
511 30% AMI N/A
595 $772 $1.30
$849
$1,029
$1,209
1,200 30 %AMI N/A
N/A 30 %AMI N/A
N/A 30 %AMI
759 30 %AMI N/A
1,000 30 %AMI N/A
Stabilized Subsidized Vacancy
Market Rate Vacancies Market Rate Vacancy Rate
Stabilized Market Rate Stabilized Market Rate
Affordable Vacancies Affordable Vacancy Rate
N/A 30 %AMI
N/A: Not Assessed.
Sources: Apartment Listing & Property Management Sites; Local News Sources; City of St. Louis Park; Local Architecture/Engineering Firms; & Maxfield Research and Consulting, LLC.
All Vacancies Vacancy Rate
Stabilized Vacancies Stabilized Vacancy Rate
*Priority is given to elderly and disabled
Stabilized Affordable Stabilized Affordable Vacancy
Subsidized Vacancies Subsidized Vacancy Rate
Stabilized Subsidized
1,406
$1,022
$1,225
746 N/A N/A
$967
$1,056
$1,253
1,435 N/A N/A
557 N/A N/A
704 N/A
1,084
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 106
RENTAL MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 98
Table R-3, on the following page, summarizes information on St. Louis Park’s rental projects by
type (market rate, affordable, and subsidized).
Market Rate
• One-bedroom units accounted for the majority of market rate units in St. Louis Park
(46.8%). The unit breakout by unit type is summarized below. Note that properties with
limited information are excluded.
Total % of Avg. Avg. Avg. Rent/
Unit Type Units Total Size Low -High Rent Sq. Ft.
Studio 455 6.0%542 $781 -$2,365 $1,326 $2.47
1BR 3,580 46.8%748 $725 -$2,327 $1,503 $2.05
1BR+D 221 2.9%929 $1,469 -$2,512 $1,947 $2.09
2BR 3,116 40.8%944 $846 -$3,550 $1,626 $1.52
2BR+D 43 0.6%1,050 $1,919 -$3,541 $1,987 $1.59
3BR 176 2.3%1,307 $1,195 -$3,735 $2,201 $1.64
1BR TH 1 0.0%1,044 $2,100 -$2,100 $2,100 $2.01
2BR TH 30 0.4%1,186 $1,775 -$2,095 $2,373 $1.97
3BR TH 20 0.3%1,514 $2,140 -$2,260 $2,200 $1.45
Total:7,642 100%839 $725 -$3,735 $1,580 $1.85
Total % of Avg. Avg. Avg. Rent/
Unit Type Units Total Size Low -High Rent Sq. Ft.
Studio 80 21.4%502 $772 -$1,400 $1,165 $2.33
1BR 136 36.5%649 $849 -$1,411 $1,103 $1.75
2BR 95 25.5%907 $1,029 -$1,940 $1,234 $1.36
3BR 62 16.6%1,317 $1,100 -$2,509 $1,456 $1.13
Total:373 100%794 $772 -$2,509 $1,208 $1.67
Total % of Avg. Avg. Avg. Rent/
Unit Type Units Total Size Low -High Rent Sq. Ft.
Studio 27 13.0%759 N/A -N/A N/A N/A
1BR 153 73.6%655 N/A -N/A N/A N/A
2BR 28 13.5%1,200 N/A -N/A N/A N/A
Total:208 100%742 N/A -N/A N/A N/A
Note: Only includes properties with complete information.
Range
Monthly Rents
Affordable
TABLE R-3
RENT SUMMARY
GENERAL OCCUPANCY RENTAL DEVELOPMENTS
ST LOUIS PARK
FEBRUARY 2023
Monthly Rents
Range
Market Rate
Subsidized
Monthly Rents
Range
N/A: Not Applicable
Source: Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 107
RENTAL MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 99
o Studio units: 455 | 6.0%
o One-bedroom units: 3,580 | 46.8%
o One-bedroom + den units: 221 | 2.9%
o Two-bedroom units: 3,116| 40.8%
o Two-bedroom + den units: 43 | 0.6%
o Three-bedroom units: 176 | 2.3%
o One-bedroom townhome units: 1 | 0.0%
o Two-bedroom townhome units: 30| 0.4%
o Three-bedroom townhome units: 20 | 0.3%
• The following is the monthly rent ranges and average rent for each unit type:
o Studio units: $781 to $2,365 | Avg. $1,326
o One-bedroom units: $725 to $2,327 | Avg. $1,503
o One-bedroom + den units: $1,469 to $2,512 | Avg. $1,947
o Two-bedroom units: $846 to $3,550 | Avg. $1,626
o Two-bedroom + den units: $1,919 to $3,541 | Avg. $1,987
o Three-bedroom units: $1,195 to $3,735| Avg. $2,201
o One-bedroom townhome units: $2,100 | Avg. $2,100
o Two-bedroom townhome units: $1,775 to $2,095 | Avg. $2,373
o Three-bedroom townhome units: $2,140 to $2,260 | Avg. $2,200
• One-bedroom and two bedrooms units are the most common market rate unit types in St.
Louis Park. These units made up 46.8% and 40.8% of all units.
• Market rate rents per square foot by unit type are as follows: studio units, $2.47 per square
foot; one bedroom units, $2.05 per square foot; one bedroom plus den bedroom units,
$2.09 per square foot; two-bedroom units, $1.52 per square foot; two-bedroom plus den
units, $1.59 per square foot; three-bedroom units, $1.64, per square foot; one-bedroom
townhomes, $2.01 per square foot; two-bedroom townhome units, $1.97 per square foot;
and three-bedroom townhome units, $1.45 per square foot.
• Average sizes by unit type are as follows: studio units, 542 square feet; one bedroom units,
748 square feet; one bedroom plus den units 929 square feet; two bedroom units, 944
square feet; two-bedroom plus den units, 1,050 square feet; three-bedroom units, 1,307
square feet; one bedroom townhome units, 1,044 square feet; two-bedroom townhome
units 1,186 square feet; three-bedroom townhome units, 1,514 square feet.
• Of the market rate rental properties three were built in the 1940s (2.9%), eight were built in
the 1950s (7.8%), fifty were built in the 1960s (49.0%), four were built in the 1970s (3.9%),
eight were built in the 1980s (7.8%), four were built in the 1990s (3.9%), five were built in
the 2000s (4.9%), thirteen were built in the 2010s (12.7%), and seven were built in the
2020s (6.9%). Note 102 properties are listed here as Urban Park Apartments phase I (2003)
and phase II (2020) is separated into two entries not one as listed in the table.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 108
RENTAL MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 100
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 109
RENTAL MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 101
Affordable
• There are eleven affordable, income-restricted, projects in St. Louis Park. Their order in
terms of year built is as follows: Volo at Texa Tonka (2022 – October), 23 units; Via Sol (2022
– September), 152 units; Parkway Flats (2022), 6 units; Parkway Residences – Rehab, 24
units; The Quentin (2021 – July), 8 units; Elan West End Apartments (2020 – August), 5
units; Central Park West (2018 – January), 6 units; 4800 Excelsior Apartments (2018 – Janu-
ary), 18 units; The Shoreham (2017), 30 units; Park Glen Townhomes (1996), 34 units; and
Louisiana Court (1963), 128 units. Note that in the below summary calculations only prop-
erties with complete information were included (Volo at Texa Tonka, Via Sol, The Shoreham,
Louisiana Court, Parkway Flats, and Park Glen Townhomes).
• One-bedroom units constituted the largest share of units (35.8%). In addition, 24.7% of
units were two-bedroom units while 21.2% were studio units and 17.7% were three-bed-
room units. Four bedroom units only represented 0.6% of all units. Below is the break-
down of each of the three unit types by number of units and their percentage.
o Studio units: 80 | 21.8%
o One-bedroom units: 136 | 36.5%
o Two-bedroom units: 95 | 25.5%
o Three-bedroom units: 62 | 16.6%
• The following is the monthly rent ranges and average rent for each unit type:
o Studio units: $772 to $1,400 | Avg. $1,165
o One-bedroom units: $849 to $1,411 | Avg. $1,103
o Two-bedroom units: $1,029 to $1,940 | Avg. $1,234
o Three-bedroom units: $1,100 to $2,509 | Avg. $1,456
• One-bedroom units are the most common affordable unit type in St. Louis Park. These units
made up 36.5% of all units. Other unit types were as follows: two-bedroom units, 25.5%;
studio units, 21.4%; and three-bedroom units, 16.6%.
• Affordable rents per square foot by unit type are as follows: studio units, $2.33 per square
foot; one bedroom units, $1.75 per square foot; two-bedroom units, $1.36 per square foot;
and three-bedroom units, $1.13 per square foot.
• Average sizes by unit type are as follows: studio units, 502 square feet; one bedroom units,
649 square feet; two bedroom units, 907 square feet; and three-bedroom units, 1,317
square feet.
• Of the 11 affordable rental properties, four were built in the 2020s (50.0%), two were built
in the 2010s (25.0%), one was built in the 1990s (12.5%), and one was built in the 1960s
(12.5%).
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 110
RENTAL MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 102
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 111
RENTAL MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 103
Subsidized
• There are four subsidized projects in St. Louis Park. Combined these four projects provide
252 general occupancy subsidized units. The subsidized properties include Hamilton House
(108 units), Lou Park Apartments (32 units), Oak Park Village Apartments (100 units), and
Louisiana Court (12 units).
• One-bedroom units account for the largest share of subsidized units at nearly 74% (73.6%)
of all subsidized units. Studio units account for 13.5% of all subsidized units while two-bed-
room units account for 13.0% of all subsidized units.
• Average sizes by unit type are as follows: studio units, 502 square feet; one bedroom units
655 square feet; and two bedroom units, 1,200 square feet.
• Of the four subsidized rental properties three were built in the 1970s (75.0%) and one was
built in the 2010s (25.0%) and 1970s (25.0%).
• All subsidized properties were older and built forty-five or more years ago. The newest built
property was Oak Park Village Apartments, built in 1978. The other three properties in or-
der of year built were as follows: Lou Park Apartments, 1977; Hamilton House, 1976; and
Louisiana Court, 1963.
Rental Summary by Year
Table R-4 shows the breakdown and vacancies across all unit types in 2013, 2018, and 2023.
Number Vacant Vacant
Year of Units Units Units
2023 Market Rate 8,316 427 5.1%
Affordable*434 131 30.2%
Subsidized 252 0 0.0%
Total Units 9,002 558 6.2%
2018 Market Rate 7,826 360 4.6%
Affordable 288 3 1.0%
Subsidized 258 0 0.0%
Total Units 8,372 363 4.3%
2013 Market Rate 7,019 133 1.9%
Affordable 173 1 0.6%
Subsidized 258 0 0.0%
Total Units 7,450 134 1.8%
Note: Only includes properties with complete information.
* Includes vacant units still in initial lease up at Via Sol (131 units) .
Source: Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC.
Unit Type
TABLE R-4
RENTAL SUMMARY BY YEAR
GENERAL OCCUPANCY RENTAL DEVELOPMENTS
ST LOUIS PARK
MAY 2023
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 112
RENTAL MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 104
Natural Occurring Affordable Housing (i.e. Unsubsidized Affordable)
Although affordable housing is typically associated with income restrictions, there are other
housing units in communities that indirectly provide affordable housing. Housing units that
were not developed or designated with income guidelines (i.e. assisted) yet are more afforda-
ble than other units in a community are considered “naturally-occurring” or “unsubsidized af-
fordable” units. This rental supply is available through the private market, versus assisted hous-
ing programs through various government agencies. Property values on these units are lower
based on a combination of factors, such as: age of structure/housing stock, location, condition,
size, functionally obsolete, lack of contemporary amenities, etc.
According to the Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University, the privately unsubsi-
dized housing stock supplies three times as many low -cost affordable units than assisted pro-
jects nationwide. Unlike assisted rental developments, most unsubsidized affordable units are
scattered across small properties (one to four-unit structures) or in older multifamily structures.
Many of these older developments are vulnerable to redevelopment and upgrades due to their
age, modest rents, and deferred maintenance.
Because many of these properties have rents that are affordable, project-based, and private
housing markets cannot be easily separated. Some households may income -qualify for both
market rate and project-based affordable housing, although the gap is widening between mar-
ket rate and affordable properties as rents in the private market continue to rise. Therefore, it
is important to recognize the naturally occurring affordable housing stock to quantify the pro-
portion of units with rents that may be affordable to low and/or moderate-income renters. The
analysis does not identify the number of units that are rented to households with incomes at
those affordability levels as any tenant that financially qualifies may be able to rent at the prop-
erty.
Table R-5 illustrates monthly rents by unit type and household size as they relate to affordabil-
ity. Table R-6 presents a breakdown of all market rate general-occupancy rental properties by
household size and area median income (AMI). Table R-7 summarizes property data from Table
R-6 based on unit type and affordability. Note that not all properties are included due to rents
not being available for all properties. Furthermore, the NOAH tables feature market rate units
only and inclusionary units are excluded.
• Among the 8,101 market rate units inventoried by unit mix and monthly rents, 30.2% are
affordable to householders with incomes at 80% of AMI. An estimated 26.4% of units are
affordable to households with incomes at 50% AMI while 24.5% are affordable to house-
holds with incomes at 60% AMI. Less than 1% of units are affordable to households with
incomes at 30% AMI. Units at 100% of AMI and 120% of AMI are affordable to 14.2% of
households and 4.3% of households, respectively.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 113
RENTAL MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC 105
Unit Type1 Min Max Min. Max.Min. Max.Min. Max.Min. Max.Min. Max.Min. Max.
Studio 1 1 $617 -$617 $1,028 - $1,028 $1,233 - $1,233 $1,644 - $1,644 $2,055 - $2,055 $2,466 - $2,466
1BR 1 2 $617 -$704 $1,028 - $1,241 $1,233 - $1,409 $1,644 - $1,878 $2,055 - $2,348 $2,466 - $2,817
2BR 2 4 $704 -$880 $1,241 - $1,466 $1,409 - $1,760 $1,878 - $2,346 $2,348 - $2,933 $2,817 - $3,519
3BR 3 6 $792 - $1,021 $1,320 - $1,701 $1,584 - $2,042 $2,112 - $2,722 $2,640 - $3,403 $3,168 - $4,083
4BR 4 8 $880 - $1,162 $1,466 - $1,936 $1,760 - $2,324 $2,346 - $3,098 $2,933 - $3,873 $3,519 - $4,647
1 One-bedroom plus den and two-bedroom plus den units are classified as 1BR and 2BR units, respectively. To be classified as a bedroom, a den must have a
window and closet.
Note: Minneapolis-St Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI HUD FMR Area 4-person AMI = $118,200 (2022).
Sources: HUD, Novogradac, Maxfield Research and Consulting, LLC.
MINNEAPOLIS-ST PAUL-BLOOMINGTON, MN-WI HUD METRO FMR AREA - 2022 (Effective 04/18/22)
TABLE R-5
MAXIMUM RENT BASED ON HOUSEHOLD SIZE AND AREA MEDIAN INCOME
Maximum Rent Based on Household Size (@30% of Income)
HHD Size 30%50%60%80%100%120%
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 114
RENTAL MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 106
Total
Unit Type/Project Name Units Min Max 30%50%60%80%100%120%
Studio
Volo at Texa Tonka 23 $1,153 -$1,506 $46,120 -$60,240 ----11 12 ----
Via Sol 18 $1,400 -$1,520 $56,000 -$60,800 ------18 ----
The Quentin 11 $1,550 -$1,785 $62,000 -$71,400 ------5 6 --
Elan West End Apartments 7 $1,730 -$1,785 $69,200 -$71,400 --------7 --
Urban Park Apartments I & II 28 $1,263 -$1,425 $50,520 -$57,000 ------28 ----
4800 Excelsior Apartments 9 $1,655 -$1,655 $66,200 -$66,200 --------9 --
Central Park West 29 $1,680 -$2,365 $67,200 -$94,600 --------15 14
The Shoreham 15 $1,193 -$1,581 $47,720 -$63,240 ----8 7 ----
Millenium West End 20 $1,541 -$1,635 $61,640 -$65,400 ------20 ----
E2 13 $1,340 -$1,383 $53,600 -$55,320 ------13 ----
The Flats at West End 11 $1,480 -$1,480 $59,200 -$59,200 ------11 ----
The Ellipse on Excelsior 8 $1,207 -$1,469 $48,280 -$58,760 ----4 4 ----
The Camerata - Hoigaard Village 14 $1,319 -$1,339 $52,760 -$53,560 ------14 ----
The Gables at Park Pointe 1 $1,400 -$1,400 $56,000 -$56,000 ------1 ----
Arrive 4301 2 $1,215 -$1,275 $48,600 -$51,000 ----1 1 ----
Inglewood Trails 4 $1,185 -$1,320 $47,400 -$52,800 ----2 2 ----
Park Glen Apartments/TH Apts 50 $1,195 -$1,300 $47,800 -$52,000 ----25 25 ----
Lou Park Apartments 2 $965 -$965 $38,600 -$38,600 --2 --------
ReNew PARKone Apartments 6 $1,241 -$1,241 $49,640 -$49,640 ------6 ----
Edge of Uptown 4 $960 -$980 $38,400 -$39,200 --4 --------
Liv Apartments 12 $993 -$1,025 $39,720 $41,000 --12 --------
Brittany Apartments 1 $850 -$913 $34,000 $36,520 --1 --------
Target Apartments 1 $629 -$629 $25,160 $25,160 --1 --------
Colonial Terrace 3 $1,029 -$1,029 $41,160 $41,160 ----3 ------
Virginia Terrace 1 $807 -$807 $32,280 $32,280 --1 --------
Aquila Park & Royal Park 26 $1,010 -$1,025 $40,400 $41,000 --26 --------
Boulevard 100 2 $937 -$937 $37,480 $37,480 --2 --------
Park Towers 5 $1,148 -$1,276 $45,920 $51,040 ----3 2 ----
Idaho Park East Apartments 1 $850 -$995 $34,000 $39,800 --1 --------
Idaho Park West Apartments 4 $995 -$995 $39,800 $39,800 --4 --------
Park Trails 12 $1,019 -$1,039 $40,760 $41,560 --6 6 ------
Lynn Plaza 5 $950 -$950 $38,000 $38,000 --5 --------
Era on Excelsior 36 $1,015 -$1,375 $40,600 $55,000 --12 12 12 ----
Uptown West 40 $915 -$925 $36,600 $37,000 --40 --------
Minikahda Court 39 $1,024 -$1,240 $40,960 $49,600 --13 13 13 ----
6000 35th St W 4 $781 -$781 $31,240 $31,240 --4 ---------
Total/ Average 467 0 134 88 194 37 14
TABLE R-6
MULTIFAMILY MARKET RATE RENTAL DEVELOPMENTS
ASSESSMENT OF MARKET RATE RENTAL HOUSING BY AFFORDABILITY CALCULATION
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
FEBRUARY 2023
Rent Range Min. Income Units that are Market Rate Affordability by AMI2
Continued
Needed to Afford1
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 115
RENTAL MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 107
One-Bedroom 30% 50% 60% 80% 100% 120%
Volo at Texa Tonka 19 $1,520 - $2,100 $60,800 -$84,000 -- -- --10 9 --
Via Sol 19 $1,519 - $1,724 $60,760 -$68,960 -- -- --19 -- --
The Quentin 46 $1,824 - $2,460 $72,960 -$98,400 -- -- --15 16 15
Elan West End Apartments 58 $1,282 - $2,390 $51,280 -$95,600 -- --14 15 15 14
Urban Park Apartments I & II 49 $1,282 - $1,654 $51,280 -$66,160 -- --25 24 -- --
Parkway 25 77 $1,350 - $2,234 $54,000 -$89,360 -- --25 26 26 --
4800 Excelsior Apartments 80 $1,775 - $2,298 $71,000 -$91,920 -- -- --40 40 --
Central Park West 83 $1,850 - $2,340 $74,000 -$93,600 -- -- --35 48 --
The Shoreham 59 $1,559 - $2,509 $62,360 -$100,360 -- -- --20 20 19
Millenium West End 66 $1,800 - $2,051 $72,000 -$82,040 -- -- --33 33 --
Siena Apartment Homes 89 $1,565 - $2,252 $62,600 -$90,080 -- -- --45 44 --
The Curtis Apartments 2 $1,456 - $1,456 $58,240 $58,240 -- -- --2 -- --
E2 28 $1,537 - $2,229 $61,480 -$89,160 -- -- --14 14 --
The Adagio - Hoigaard Village 84 $1,570 -$1,776 $62,800 -$71,040 -- -- --84 -- --
The Flats at West End 63 $1,750 - $2,512 $70,000 -$100,480 -- -- --21 21 21
Verge Apartments 77 $1,340 - $2,025 $53,600 -$81,000 -- --26 26 25 --
The Ellipse on Excelsior 79 $1,305 - $2,229 $52,200 -$89,160 -- --26 27 26 --
The Camerata - Hoigaard Village 114 $1,528 - $1,776 $61,120 -$71,040 -- -- --114 -- --
Harmony Vista - Hoigaard Village 49 $1,784 -$2,120 $71,360 -$84,800 -- -- --24 25 --
The Gables at Park Pointe 42 $1,667 -$1,752 $66,680 -$70,080 -- -- --42 -- --
Arrive St Louis Park 88 $1,655 -$1,830 $66,200 -$73,200 -- -- --88 -- --
Inglewood Trails 100 $1,250 - $2,160 $50,000 -$86,400 -- --33 34 33 --
Excelsior & Grand 156 $1,599 -$2,099 $63,960 -$83,960 -- -- --78 78 --
Cityscape Apartments 65 $1,412 - $1,601 $56,480 -$64,040 -- -- --33 32 --
Arrive 4301 72 $1,065 -$1,590 $42,600 -$63,600 --24 24 24 -- --
Park Glen Apartments/TH Apts 188 $1,400 -$1,785 $56,000 -$71,400 -- --94 94 -- --
Tamarind 69 $1,199 - $1,249 $47,960 -$49,960 --35 34 -- -- --
Westwind Apartments 72 $1,295 -$1,490 $51,800 -$59,600 -- --36 36 -- --
Helix 98 $1,276 -$1,649 $51,040 -$65,960 -- --49 49 -- --
Park Pointe Apts 60 $1,300 $1,425 $52,000 -$57,000 -- --30 30 -- --
Somerset Oaks 20 $1,355 -$1,685 $54,200 -$67,400 -- --10 10 -- --
Lou Park Apartments 41 $1,275 -$1,305 $51,000 -$52,200 -- --41 -- -- --
Park West Apartments 36 $1,099 - $1,099 $43,960 -$43,960 --36 -- -- -- --
ReNew PARKone Apartments 60 $1,583 - $1,583 $63,320 -$63,320 -- -- --60 -- --
Shelard Village 39 $1,300 - $1,300 $52,000 -$52,000 -- --39 -- -- --
Colorado Court 30 $1,012 - $1,012 $40,480 -$40,480 --30 -- -- -- --
Texas Terrace 5 $949 -$949 $37,960 -$37,960 --5 -- -- -- --
West Lake Estates 9 $1,040 - $1,040 $41,600 -$41,600 --9 -- -- -- --
Baycliff Apartments 17 $1,042 - $1,057 $41,680 -$42,280 --17 -- -- -- --
Edge of Uptown 75 $1,125 -$1,375 $45,000 -$55,000 --37 38 -- -- --
Liv Apartments 36 $1,191 -$1,385 $47,640 -$55,400 --18 18 -- -- --
Rhode Island Chateau 40 $1,149 - $1,199 $45,960 -$47,960 --40 -- -- -- --
Westwood Chateau 33 $1,020 -$1,040 $40,800 -$41,600 --33 -- -- -- --
Brittany Apartments 26 $1,000 - $1,000 $40,000 -$40,000 --26 -- -- -- --
The Park at One Hundred 81 $1,145 -$1,195 $45,800 -$47,800 --81 -- -- -- --
Courtyard 50 $1,125 - $1,215 $45,000 -$48,600 --50 -- -- -- --
Continued
FEBRUARY 2023
TABLE R-6 CONTINUED
MULTIFAMILY MARKET RATE RENTAL DEVELOPMENTS
ASSESSMENT OF MARKET RATE RENTAL HOUSING BY AFFORDABILITY CALCULATION
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 116
RENTAL MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 108
One-Bedroom 30% 50% 60% 80% 100% 120%
Target Apartments 32 $851 -$851 $34,040 $34,040 --32 -- -- -- --
Parkway Place 71 $1,399 - $2,200 $55,960 -$88,000 -- --28 27 16 --
Colonial Terrace 18 $1,049 -$1,209 $41,960 -$48,360 --18 -- -- -- --
Hampshire House (3 parcels)3 $995 -$995 $39,800 -$39,800 --3 -- -- -- --
1328 Idaho Ave 11 $1,225 - $1,225 $49,000 -$49,000 --11 -- -- -- --
Joppa Lane I & II 84 $1,125 -$1,475 $45,000 -$59,000 --28 28 28 -- --
Knollwood Estates 3 $979 -$979 $39,160 -$39,160 --3 -- -- -- --
Aquila Park & Royal Park 49 $1,157 - $1,265 $46,280 -$50,600 --25 24 -- -- --
6224 Hamilton St 8 $726 -$726 $29,040 -$29,040 --8 -- -- -- --
Lynn Ave Apartments 10 $900 - $1,195 $36,000 -$47,800 --10 -- -- -- --
8200 W 31st St (2 parcels)10 $804 -$804 $32,160 -$32,160 --10 -- -- -- --
Boulevard 100 41 $995 -$1,110 $39,800 -$44,400 --41 -- -- -- --
Park Embassy 72 $1,155 -$1,220 $46,200 -$48,800 --72 -- -- -- --
Park Towers 67 $1,345 -$1,491 $53,800 -$59,640 -- --33 34 -- --
Park Villa 18 $899 -$899 $35,960 -$35,960 --18 -- -- -- --
Virginia Court Apartments 10 $818 -$818 $32,720 -$32,720 --10 -- -- -- --
Westwood Gardens (3 parcels)75 $1,150 - $1,150 $46,000 -$46,000 --75 -- -- -- --
White Gate Manor 13 $908 -$940 $36,320 -$37,600 --13 -- -- -- --
Idaho Park East Apartments 1 $1,225 - $1,225 $49,000 -$49,000 --1 -- -- -- --
Idaho Park West Apartments 2 $1,195 - $1,195 $47,800 -$47,800 --2 -- -- -- --
Highway 7 Apartments 7 $942 -$942 $37,680 -$37,680 --7 -- -- -- --
Aquila Court 1 $995 -$995 $39,800 -$39,800 --1 -- -- -- --
Park Trails 53 $1,049 -$1,299 $41,960 -$51,960 --27 26 -- -- --
Lynn Plaza 30 $1,075 - $1,075 $43,000 -$43,000 --30 -- -- -- --
Trailways Apartments 21 $725 -$725 $29,000 -$29,000 --21 -- -- -- --
Era on Excelsior 360 $1,030 - $1,835 $41,200 -$73,400 --120 120 120 -- --
Uptown West 80 $1,004 - $1,026 $40,160 -$41,040 --80 -- -- -- --
Huntington Ave Apartments 18 $1,029 - $1,049 $41,160 -$41,960 --18 -- -- -- --
Minikahda Court 41 $1,285 - $1,380 $51,400 -$55,200 -- --41 -- -- --
6000 35th St W 4 $910 -$910 $36,400 -$36,400 --4 -- -- -- --
Park Point Apartments (5 parcels)50 $1,075 - $1,095 $43,000 -$43,800 --50 -- -- -- --
Total/Average 4,012 0 1,179 862 1,381 521 69
Continued
TABLE R-6 CONTINUED
MULTIFAMILY MARKET RATE RENTAL DEVELOPMENTS
ASSESSMENT OF MARKET RATE RENTAL HOUSING BY AFFORDABILITY CALCULATION
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
FEBRUARY 2023
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 117
RENTAL MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 109
Total
Unit Type/Project Name Units Min Max 30%50%60%80%100%120%
Two-Bedroom 30%50%60%80%100%120%
Volo at Texa Tonka 18 $2,037 - $3,500 $81,480 -$140,000 -- -- --6 6 6
Parkway Place 24 $2,190 - $3,550 $87,600 -$142,000 -- -- --2 10 12
Via Sol 22 $2,105 - $2,509 $84,200 - $100,360 -- -- -- --11 11
The Quentin 13 $2,485 - $3,450 $99,400 -$138,000 -- -- -- --6 7
Elan West End Apartments 70 $2,485 - $2,875 $99,400 -$115,000 -- -- -- --35 35
Urban Park Apartments I & II 50 $1,717 - $1,997 $68,680 -$79,880 -- --25 25 -- --
Parkway 25 45 $2,151 - $2,895 $86,040 -$115,800 -- -- --22 23 --
4800 Excelsior Apartments 57 $2,357 - $3,445 $94,280 -$137,800 -- -- -- --28 29
Central Park West 74 $2,495 - $2,745 $99,800 -$109,800 -- -- -- --74 --
The Shoreham 74 $2,399 - $3,094 $95,960 -$123,760 -- -- -- --37 37
Millenium West End 66 $1,929 - $2,861 $77,160 -$114,440 -- -- --22 22 22
Siena Apartment Homes 43 $2,170 - $2,458 $86,800 -$98,320 -- -- --22 21 --
The Curtis Apartments 10 $1,602 - $1,939 $64,080 $77,560 -- --5 5 -- --
Medley Row THs - Hoigaard Village 22 $2,937 -$3,037 $117,480 -$121,480 -- -- -- -- --22
E2 17 $1,920 - $3,541 $76,800 -$141,640 -- -- --5 6 6
The Adagio - Hoigaard Village 16 $1,935 - $2,284 $77,400 -$91,360 -- -- --16 -- --
The Flats at West End 45 $2,395 -$3,198 $95,800 -$127,920 -- -- -- --23 22
Verge Apartments 77 $1,685 -$2,449 $67,400 -$97,960 -- --25 26 26 --
The Ellipse on Excelsior 45 $1,955 - $2,569 $78,200 -$102,760 -- -- --23 22 --
The Camerata - Hoigaard Village 92 $2,007 -$2,240 $80,280 -$89,600 -- -- --92 -- --
Harmony Vista - Hoigaard Village 24 $1,888 - $2,228 $75,520 -$89,120 -- -- --24 -- --
The Gables at Park Pointe 30 $1,884 -$2,242 $75,360 -$89,680 -- -- --30 -- --
Arrive St Louis Park 98 $1,755 -$2,515 $70,200 - $100,600 -- --32 33 33 --
Inglewood Trails 110 $1,830 - $2,745 $73,200 -$109,800 -- -- --10 100 --
Excelsior & Grand 151 $2,099 -$2,699 $83,960 -$107,960 -- -- --75 76 --
Cityscape Apartments 81 $1,781 - $1,919 $71,240 -$76,760 -- -- --81 -- --
Arrive 4301 36 $1,540 -$1,905 $61,600 -$76,200 -- --18 18 -- --
Park Glen Apartments/TH Apts 52 $1,750 -$2,100 $70,000 -$84,000 -- --26 26 -- --
Tamarind 33 $1,559 - $1,584 $62,360 -$63,360 -- --33 -- -- --
Westwind Apartments 114 $1,470 -$1,650 $58,800 -$66,000 -- --114 -- -- --
Helix 65 $1,751 -$3,201 $70,040 -$128,040 -- --14 17 17 17
Park Pointe Apts 60 $1,453 $1,770 $58,120 -$70,800 -- --30 30 -- --
Somerset Oaks 60 $1,600 - $2,095 $64,000 -$83,800 -- --30 30 -- --
Lou Park Apartments 33 $1,500 -$1,585 $60,000 -$63,400 -- --33 -- -- --
Park West Apartments 24 $1,351 - $1,351 $54,040 -$54,040 --24 -- -- -- --
ReNew PARKone Apartments 102 $1,546 -$1,940 $61,840 -$77,600 -- --51 51 -- --
Shelard Village 75 $1,535 -$1,580 $61,400 -$63,200 -- --75 -- -- --
Colorado Court 18 $1,383 - $1,383 $55,320 -$55,320 --18 -- -- -- --
Dakota Pointe 19 $1,289 - $1,289 $51,560 -$51,560 --19 -- -- -- --
Texas Terrace 12 $1,350 - $1,350 $54,000 -$54,000 --12 -- -- -- --
West Lake Estates 18 $1,450 - $1,551 $58,000 -$62,040 --9 9 -- -- --
Baycliff Apartments 6 $1,383 -$1,447 $55,320 -$57,880 --3 3 -- -- --
Edge of Uptown 65 $1,500 -$1,680 $60,000 -$67,200 -- --65 -- -- --
Liv Apartments 18 $1,450 - $1,450 $58,000 -$58,000 --18 -- -- -- --
MULTIFAMILY MARKET RATE RENTAL DEVELOPMENTS
TABLE R-6 CONTINUED
ASSESSMENT OF MARKET RATE RENTAL HOUSING BY AFFORDABILITY CALCULATION
Needed to Afford1
Min. IncomeRent Range
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Continued
FEBRUARY 2023
Units that are Market Rate Affordability by AMI2
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 118
RENTAL MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 110
Two-Bedroom 30%50%60%80%100%120%
Rhode Island Chateau 67 $1,450 -$1,499 $58,000 -$59,960 --33 34 ------
Villa Capri 12 $1,550 -$1,725 $62,000 -$69,000 ----12 ------
Westwood Chateau 13 $1,280 -$1,285 $51,200 -$51,400 --13 --------
Brittany Apartments 12 $1,300 -$1,400 $52,000 -$56,000 --12 --------
The Park at One Hundred 12 $1,295 -$1,325 $51,800 -$53,000 --12 --------
Courtyard 101 $1,280 -$1,415 $51,200 -$56,600 --101 --------
Colonial Terrace 33 $1,299 -$1,419 $51,960 -$56,760 --33 --------
Hampshire House (3 parcels)33 $1,095 -$1,280 $43,800 -$51,200 --33 --------
Virginia Terrace 11 $1,142 -$1,142 $45,680 -$45,680 --11 --------
Hampshire Apts (2 parcels)14 $860 -$860 $34,400 -$34,400 14 ----------
Joppa Lane I & II 60 $1,335 -$1,775 $53,400 -$71,000 --20 20 20 ----
Knollwood Estates 100 $1,160 -$1,160 $46,400 -$46,400 --100 --------
Aquila Park & Royal Park 100 $1,325 -$1,625 $53,000 -$65,000 --50 50 ------
6224 Hamilton St 6 $950 -$950 $38,000 -$38,000 --6 --------
Lynn Ave Apartments 20 $1,495 -$1,625 $59,800 -$65,000 ----20 ------
Minnetonka Blvd Apartments 14 $1,280 -$1,316 $51,200 -$52,640 --14 --------
8200 W 31st St (2 parcels)10 $965 -$965 $38,600 -$38,600 --10 --------
Boulevard 100 16 $1,385 -$1,385 $55,400 -$55,400 --16 --------
Park Embassy 35 $1,490 -$1,492 $59,600 -$59,680 ----35 ------
Park Towers 65 $1,545 -$1,545 $61,800 -$61,800 ----65 ------
Park Villa 3 $1,200 -$1,200 $48,000 -$48,000 --3 --------
Virginia Court Apartments 13 $880 -$880 $35,200 -$35,200 --13 --------
Westwood Gardens (3 parcels)77 $1,350 -$1,450 $54,000 -$58,000 --39 38 ------
White Gate Manor 19 $1,048 -$1,198 $41,920 -$47,920 --19 --------
4421 Minnetonka Blvd 8 $991 -$991 $39,640 -$39,640 --8 --------
6309 Excelsior Blvd 12 $1,300 -$1,300 $52,000 -$52,000 --12 --------
Idaho Park East Apartments 10 $1,495 -$1,495 $59,800 -$59,800 ----10 ------
Virginia East Apartments 10 $1,269 -$1,269 $50,760 -$50,760 --10 --------
Idaho Park West Apartments 8 $1,495 -$1,495 $59,800 -$59,800 ----8 ------
4040 36th St W 14 $1,150 -$1,150 $46,000 -$46,000 --14 --------
Highway 7 Apartments 4 $1,253 -$1,253 $50,120 -$50,120 --4 --------
Aquila Court 1 $1,095 -$1,295 $43,800 -$51,800 --1 --------
Park Trails 55 $1,269 -$1,449 $50,760 -$57,960 --28 27 ------
Royal Terrace 18 $1,279 -$1,279 $51,160 -$51,160 --18 --------
Trailways Apartments 17 $846 -$846 $33,840 -$33,840 17 ----------
Era on Excelsior 160 $1,555 -$2,205 $62,200 -$88,200 ----80 80 ----
Huntington Ave Apartments 2 $1,350 -$1,350 $54,000 -$54,000 --2 --------
Minikahda Court 51 $1,395 -$1,570 $55,800 -$62,800 --25 26 ------
Park Point Apartments (5 parcels)25 $1,150 -$1,175 $46,000 -$47,000 --25 --------
Total/ Average 3,425 31 788 1,013 791 576 226
Continued
MULTIFAMILY MARKET RATE RENTAL DEVELOPMENTS
ASSESSMENT OF MARKET RATE RENTAL HOUSING BY AFFORDABILITY CALCULATION
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
FEBRUARY 2023
TABLE R-6 CONTINUED
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 119
RENTAL MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 111
• In comparison, in the previous 2018 study, of inventoried market rate units, 41.4% were af-
fordable to householders with incomes at 60% of AMI. An estimated 22.2% of units were
affordable to households with incomes at 80% AMI while 17.6% were affordable to house-
holds with incomes at 50% AMI. Only 0.5% of units were affordable to households with in-
comes at 30% AMI. Units at 120% of AMI and 50% of AMI were affordable to 17.6% of
households and 7.9% of households, respectively.
• Of market rate units affordable at 60% of AMI, 51.1% are two-bedroom units, 43.4% are
one-bedroom units, 4.4% are studio units, and 1.1% are three-bedroom units.
• At 50% of AMI, 36.9% of market rate units are two-bedroom units, 55.1% are one-bedroom
units, 6.3% are studio units, and 1.7% are three-bedroom units.
• Of market rate units affordable at 30% of AMI (31 units), all (100%) are two-bedroom units.
Total
Unit Type/Project Name Units Min Max 30%50%60%80%100%120%
Three Bedroom 30%50%60%80%100%120%
Via Sol 6 $2,539 -$2,753 $101,560 -$110,120 ------3 3 --
The Quentin 1 $2,950 -$2,950 $118,000 -$118,000 --------1 --
Elan West End Apartments 24 $3,445 -$3,735 $137,800 -$149,400 ----------24
Urban Park Apartments I & II 14 $2,200 -$2,200 $88,000 -$88,000 ------14 ----
Central Park West 7 $3,260 -$3,530 $130,400 -$141,200 --------2 5
Millenium West End 6 $3,550 -$3,550 $142,000 -$142,000 ----------6
Siena Apartment Homes 6 $3,183 -$3,456 $127,320 -$138,240 ----------6
The Curtis Apartments 1 $2,620 -$2,620 $104,800 $104,800 ------1 ----
The Gables at Park Pointe 6 $2,480 -$2,540 $99,200 -$101,600 ------6 ----
Arrive St Louis Park 14 $2,460 -$2,610 $98,400 -$104,400 ------14 ----
Helix 4 $2,182 -$2,738 $87,280 -$109,520 ------2 2 --
Park Pointe Apts 12 $2,075 -$2,075 $83,000 -$83,000 ------6 6 --
Somerset Oaks 20 $2,140 -$2,260 $85,600 -$90,400 ------20 ----
ReNew PARKone Apartments 18 $2,070 -$2,095 $82,800 -$83,800 ------18 ----
Shelard Village 12 $1,985 -$1,985 $79,400 -$79,400 ----12 ------
Dakota Pointe 1 $1,440 -$1,440 $57,600 -$57,600 --1 --------
8200 W 31st St (2 parcels)2 $1,195 -$1,195 $47,800 -$47,800 --2 --------
Boulevard 100 3 $1,935 -$1,935 $77,400 -$77,400 ----3 ------
Park Towers 6 $1,975 -$1,976 $79,000 -$79,040 ----6 ------
Virginia East Apartments 1 $1,370 -$1,370 $54,800 -$54,800 --1 --------
Aquila Court 33 $1,269 -$1,350 $50,760 -$54,000 --33 --------
Total/ Average 197 0 37 21 84 14 41
1 Based on a 30% allocation of income to housing for general-occupancy. Senior housing is excluded from the calculation.
Source: Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC.
FEBRUARY 2023
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Note: Plus den units are categorized by their number of bedrooms. For example one-bedroom plus den units would be classified as one bedroom
units and two-bedroom plus den units would be classified as two-bedroom units. One, two, and three bedroom townhomes are also categorized in
their respective categories ie. three bedroom townhomes are classified as three bedroom units. Note both numeric mix and rents must be included to
be in table.
Units that are Market Rate Affordability by AMI2
Needed to Afford1
2 Market rate housing that has rents that could be classified as "unsubsidized affordable" units based on the monthly rents and adjusted for
household size.
MULTIFAMILY MARKET RATE RENTAL DEVELOPMENTS
NATURALLY OCCURRING RENTAL HOUSING
Rent Range Min. Income
TABLE R-6 CONTINUED
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 120
RENTAL MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 112
Unit Type 30% 50% 60% 80% 100% 120%
STUDIO 0 134 88 194 37 14
1 BR 0 1,179 862 1,381 521 69
2 BR 31 788 1,013 791 576 226
3 BR 0 37 21 84 14 41
Subtotal 31 2,138 1,984 2,450 1,148 350
Pct. Of Total 0.4% 26.4% 24.5% 30.2% 14.2% 4.3%
Pct. Of Affordability Category
STUDIO 0.0% 6.3% 4.4% 7.9% 3.2% 4.0%
1 BR 0.0% 55.1% 43.4% 56.4% 45.4% 19.7%
2 BR 100.0% 36.9% 51.1% 32.3% 50.2% 64.6%
3 BR 0.0% 1.7% 1.1% 3.4% 1.2% 11.7%
Source: Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC.
TABLE R-7
Market Rate Affordability by AMI
FEBRUARY 2023
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
MULTIFAMILY MARKET RATE RENTAL DEVELOPMENTS
NATURAL OCCURRING SUMMARY
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 121
RENTAL MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 113
Legacy Program
The City of created the Legacy program to help with the affordability of rental housing in the
community. The program provides resources to property owners if or when they decide to sell
their properties. As a result, it is hoped that housing will maintain its affordability in the City.3
Rental Licensing Program
St. Louis Park has a rental licensing program for rental units in the City specified in the City
Code. The main requirement to obtain a license is the completion of a City offered course. In
addition, after attending the course, further courses are required every three years in order to
maintain a rental license in the City. Property maintenance inspections are also required every
two years.4
Select Newer Rental Developments
Elan West End Central Park West
Via Sol The Quentin
3 “ Legacy Program.” City of St. Louis Park, https://www.stlouisparkmn.gov/government/departments-divi-
sions/housing/property-owners/st-louis-park-legacy-program. Accessed 1 Mar. 2023.
4 “Sec. 8-328. Rental Owner/Property Manager training .” City Code Chapter 8 Businesses and Licenses, Supp. No.
42 (10-21), pp 8-38, https://www.stlouisparkmn.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/24653/638118848923470000 .
Accessed 1 Mar. 2023.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 122
RENTAL MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 114
Select Newer Rental Developments (Continued)
Volo at Texa Tonka
The Camerata
Medley Row Adagio
Parkway 25 The Verge
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 123
RENTAL MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 115
Select Older Rental Developments (Continued)
Brittany Apartments
Helix
Westwood Chateau Park Embassy
Arrive 4301 Shelard Village Apartments
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 124
SENIOR HOUSING ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 116
Introduction
This section provides an assessment of the market support for senior housing (active adult, in-
dependent living, assisted living, and memory care) in St. Louis Park. An overview of the demo-
graphic and economic characteristics of the senior population in St. Louis Park, Hennepin
County, and Metro Area is presented along with an inventory of existing senior housing devel-
opments in the city. Demand for senior housing is calculated based on demographic, economic
and competitive factors that would impact demand for additional senior housing units in the
city. Our assessment concludes with an estimation of the proportion of city demand that could
be captured by senior housing communities located in St. Louis Park.
Senior Housing Defined
Senior housing is a concept that generally refers to the integrated delivery of housing and
services to seniors. However, as Figure 1 illustrates, senior housing embodies a wide variety of
product types across the service-delivery spectrum.
Products range from independent apartments and/or townhomes with virtually no services on
one end, to highly specialized, service-intensive assisted living units or housing geared for
people with dementia-related illnesses (termed "memory care") on the other end of the
spectrum.
In general, independent senior housing attracts people 65 and o lder while assisted living
typically attracts people 80 and older who need assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs).
For analytical purposes, Maxfield Research and Consulting, LLC classifies senior housing into five
primary categories based on the level and type of services offered as described in the following
figure.
Villa, Townhome or
Apartment
CONTINUUM OF HOUSING AND SERVICES FOR SENIORS
Independent Living w/
Intensive Services
Memory Care
(Alzheimer's and
Dementia Units)
Fully
Independen
t Lifestyle
Fully or
Highly
Dependent
Senior Housing Product Type
Source: Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC
Figure 1
Single-Family
Home
Independent Living w/ Optional
Services
Assisted
Living/Enhanced
Assisted Living
Nursing Facilities
Age-Restricted Independent Single-
Family, Townhomes, Apartments,
Condominiums, Cooperatives
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 125
SENIOR HOUSING ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 117
• Active Adult properties (or independent living without services available) are similar to a
general-occupancy building, in that they offer virtually no services but have age-restrictions
(typically 55 or 62 or older). Residents are generally age 70 or older if in an apartment-style
building. Organized entertainment, activities and occasionally a tran sportation program
represent the extent of services typically available at these properties. Because of the lack
of services, active adult properties generally do not command the rent premiums of more
service-enriched senior housing. Active adult properties can have a rental or owner-occu-
pied (condominium or cooperative) format.
• Independent Living properties (or independent living with services available) offer support
services such as meals and/or housekeeping, either on an optional basis or a limited
amount included in the rents. These properties often dedicate a larger share of the overall
building area to common areas, in part, because the units are smaller than in adult housing
and in part to encourage socialization among residents. Independent living properties at-
tract a slightly older target market than adult housing, typically seniors 75 o r older. Rents
are also above those of the active adult buildings. Sponsorship by a nursing home, hospital
or other health care organization is common.
• Assisted Living properties come in a variety of forms, but the target market for most is gen-
erally the same: very frail seniors, typically age 80 or older (but can be much younger, de-
pending on their particular health situation), who need extensive support services and per-
sonal care assistance. Absent an assisted living option, these seniors would otherwise need
to move to a nursing facility. At a minimum, assisted living properties include two meals per
day and weekly housekeeping in the monthly fee, with the availabil ity of a third meal and
personal care (either included in the monthly fee or for an additional cost). Assisted living
properties also have either staff on duty 24 hours per day or at least 24 -hour emergency re-
sponse.
• Memory Care properties, designed specifically for persons suffering from Alzheimer’s dis-
ease or other dementias, is one of the newest trends in senior housing. Properties consist
mostly of suite-style or studio units or occasionally one-bedroom apartment-style units, and
large amounts of communal areas for activities and programming. In addition, staff typi-
cally undergoes specialized training in the care of this population. Because of the greater
amount of individualized personal care required by residents, staffing ratios are much
higher than traditional assisted living and thus, the costs of care are also higher. Unlike con-
ventional assisted living, however, which addresses housing needs almost exclusively for
widows or widowers, a higher proportion of persons afflicted with Alzheimer’s d isease are
in two-person households. That means the decision to move a spouse into a memory care
facility involves the caregiver’s concern of incurring the costs of health care at a special facil-
ity while continuing to maintain their home.
• Skilled Nursing Care, or long-term care facilities, provides a living arrangement that inte-
grates shelter and food with medical, nursing, psychosocial and rehabilitation services for
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 126
SENIOR HOUSING ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 118
persons who require 24-hour nursing supervision. Residents in skilled nursing homes can be
funded under Medicare, Medicaid, Veterans, HMOs, and private insurance as well as use of
private funds.
Older Adult (Age 55+) Population and Household Trends
The Demographic Analysis section of this study presented general demographic characteristics
of St. Louis Park’s population in comparison to Hennepin County and the Seven County Metro
Area. The following points summarize key findings from that section as they pertain to the
older adult population in St. Louis Park and the PMA Remainder.
• Between 2010 and 2022, the fastest growing proportion of the population in St. Louis Park
was those between the ages of 65 and 74, which experienced a 68.6% increase in popula-
tion, an addition of 1,757 people. This was also the case in Hennepin County and the Metro
where 85.7% (57,010 people) and 83.0% (135,656), respectively of the population between
65 to 74 increased between 2010 and 2022.
• Over the next five years the fastest population growth in St. Louis Park is projected to be
those between the ages of 75 and 84, which are forecast to experience a 23.9% increase in
population, an addition of 606 people. This is also projected to be the case in Hennepin
County and the Metro where 29.0% (17,725 people) and 29.5% (41,802), respectively of the
population between 65 to 74 are forecast to increase between 2010 and 2022.
3,2442,6992,6331,1464,9692,5601,9101,4065,7874,3172,5361,6505,4404,5173,1421,7300
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
5,000
5,500
6,000
55 to 64 65 to 74 75 to 84 85+PopulationAge Cohort
Senior Population Age Distribution, St Louis Park, 2000 -2027
2000 2010 2022 2027
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 127
SENIOR HOUSING ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 119
• The primary market for service-enhanced housing is senior households age 75 and older.
While individuals in their 50s and 60s typically do not comprise the market base for service-
enhanced senior housing, they often have elderly parents to whom they provide support
when they decide to relocate to senior housing. Since elderly parents typically prefer to be
near their adult caregivers, growth in the older adult age cohort (age 55 to 64) generally re-
sults in additional demand for senior housing products.
• Homeownership information lends insight into the number of households that may still
have homes to sell and could potentially supplement their incomes from the sales of their
homes to support monthly fees for alternative housing.
• St. Louis Park maintains relatively high rates of homeownership in the older adult age co-
horts. The homeownership rate as of 2022 is 80.7% for households 55 to 64. Seniors typi-
cally begin to consider moving into senior housing alternatives or more convenient housing
such as apartment buildings or twin homes in their early to mid -70s. This movement pat-
tern is demonstrated by the drop in homeownership between the 65 to 74 age cohort
(78.5%) and the 75+ age cohort (59.2%).
• With a homeownership rate of 75.5% for all St. Louis Park households over the age of 65, a
large number of residents would be able to use proceeds from the sales of their homes to-
ward senior housing alternatives. The resale of single-family homes would allow additional
senior households to qualify for market rate housing products, since equity from the home
sale could be used as supplemental income for alternative housing. These considerations
are factored into our demand calculations.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 128
SENIOR HOUSING ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 120
A map on the following page, created with ESRI data, displays the percentage of 65 and older
population by block group in St. Louis Park and neighboring communities. Percentage catego-
ries for those 65 and older are as follows: under 10%; 10% to 19.99%; 20% to 29.99%; 30% to
39.99%; and 40% or more. Areas of the City with the highest percentage of those 65 and older
are highest in the southwestern portion of the city in the Amhurst, Minnehaha, and Oak Hill
neighborhoods.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 129
SENIOR HOUSING ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH & CONSULTING, LLC 121
St. Louis Park Percentage of Population 65 and Older by Block Group, 2022
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 130
SENIOR HOUSING ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 122
Supply of Senior Housing
Table SN-1 provides information on the various senior housing products in St. Louis Park by fa-
cility type and service-level. Information in the table includes year built, total units, unit sizes,
vacancies, rents, and general comments about each project. The following section summarizes
key points from our survey of senior housing facilities in the County.
• Maxfield Research identified eight senior housing developments in the PMA. Combined,
these projects contain a total of 1,004 senior housing units. Of those 1,004 units, 693 units
(69.0%) are market rate units while 123 units are shallow subsidy/income-restricted
(12.3%), and 188 units (18.7%) are deep subsidy units.
• Based on our survey, 63.7% of the units provide service-enhanced housing, for a total of 640
units. These include 432 independent living units, 120 assisted living units, 57 memory care
units, and 31 enhanced care/dementia care units. The remaining 36.3% (364 units) are ac-
tive adult, including 205 affordable (deep- and shallow-subsidy), 53 market rate rental, and
106 cooperative/ownership units. Of the 1,004 senior housing units, 99 are currently va-
cant, representing an 9.9% vacancy rate. Generally a vacancy rate of 7% is considered equi-
librium for service based senior housing.
• As of the survey, there are 92 vacant service-enhanced units (14.5% vacancy rate), including
14 memory care vacancies (24.6% vacancy), 31 assisted living vacancies (25.8%), 47 inde-
pendent living vacancies (10.9%), and one enhanced/dementia care (3.2%).
• Market rate active adult units are 5.7% vacant (three vacancies), deep subsidy active adult
properties are 1.6% vacant (three vacancies), and shallow subsidy active adult properties
have no vacancies. A 93% occupancy rate is generally considered equilibrium in assisted liv-
ing and memory care senior housing, while 95% occupancy is considered equilibrium in in-
dependent living and active adult. As such, the current supply of service -enhanced units ap-
pears to be oversupplied with the exception of enhanced/dementia care (3.2% vacancy
rate), while the active adult markets appear to be undersupplied with the exception of ac-
tive adult market rate units (5.7%).
• The affordable active adult properties are predominantly project-based Section 8 facilities
with rents based on 30% of gross monthly household income. There are two project -based
Section 8 properties (Menorah West – 45 units and Menorah Plaza – 143 units) totaling 188
units, of which are three are vacant (1.6%). These facilities target persons 62 and older.
• There is also one project, Elmwood (2021), that contains income-restricted units (shallow
subsidy. The development is mixed income and primarily contains market rate but also 17
one (5 units) and two-bedroom (12 units) income restricted units.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 131
SENIOR HOUSING ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH & CONSULTING, LLC 123
Year No. of No.Services/Amenities/
Project Name Built Units Vacant No.Type Min -Max Comments
Market Rate Active Adult Rental
Elmwood 2021 53 3 5 -1BR $1,399 -$1,749 $1.83 -$2.29
5606 W 36th St 12 -1BR+D 1,015 -1,135 $1,599 -$1,899 $1.58 -$1.67
13 -2BR 980 -1,230 $2,049 -$2,749 $2.09 -$2.23
23 -2BR+D $2,249 -$2,749 $1.83 -$2.23
Cooperative/Ownership Active Adult
Aquila Commons 2007 106 0 27 -1BR+D 883 -1,143 $169,900 -$225,000 $192 -$197
8200 W 33rd St 37 -2BR 1,133 -1,486 $185,000 -$255,000 $163 -$172
42 -2BR+D 1,137 -1,560 $199,000 -$300,000 $175 -$192
Shallow-Subsidy Active Adult
Elmwood 2021 17 0 5 -1BR
5606 W 36th St 12 -2BR 980 -1,135 $1.40 -$1.62
Deep Subsidy Active Adult
Menorah West (Sholom)1986 45 0 45 -1BR -----
3600 Phillips Pkwy
Menorah Plaza (Sholom)1981 143 3 134 -1BR -----
4925 Minnetonka Blvd 9 -2BR -----
Independent Living
Towerlight on Wooddale Avenue 2012 74 1 NA -Studio
3601 Wooddale Ave NA -1BR 558 -715 $4.29 -$5.50
(IL and AL Units Combined)NA -1BR+D
NA -2BR 801 -1,168 $3,495 -$4,015 $3.44 -$4.36
Knollwood Place (Sholom)1988 153 40 69 -1BR 650 -665 $1,702 -$1,913 $2.62 -$2.88
3630 Phillips Pkwy 84 -2BR 895 -970 $2,372 -$2,673 $2.65 $2.76
Parkshore Place 1988 205 6 51 -1BR 555 -756 $1,965 -$2,875 $3.54 -$3.80
3663 Park Center Blvd 77 -1BR+D 836 -939 $2,802 -$3,145 $3.35 -$3.35
76 -2BR 875 -1,036 $2,937 -$3,674 $3.36 -$3.55
1 - 2BR+D 975 - 1,333 $3,434 - $5,109 $3.52 - $3.83
Age restricted to those 62 plus. Amenities include the following: an
walking paths, bilingual staff - Yiddish and Russian, and off street
parking.
Units at the property include gas, electric, water, trash/sewer,
satellite TV (Directv), in unit washer/dryer (most units), weekly
housekeeping, movie theater, dining rooms, club room, craft
rooms, family rooms, fitness room, library, spa room, refelction
room, patio, guest room, and salon.
$2,230 $4.76
$4.15
Age restricted to 62 plus and also allows 55 plus with disabilities.
Amenities include the following: an emergency call system,
community room, patio, mini store, beauty/barber salon, bilingual
staff - Yiddish and Russian, housekeeping, home aide on stagg,
offstreet parking,and lunch and dinner available (Kosher options).
30% of AGI
30% of AGI
$3,070
Parkshore Place features the following amenities: dining, a
wellness center, common area, salon & spa, library, card room,
shuttle bus, and a pool. Underground parking is $60 per month.
Units at 60% AMI. Elmwood features the following amenities: a
fitness room, yoga studio, business center/library, club room,
rooftop deck conference room, bike storage, in unit washer/dryer,
balcony, community room, package service, heated underground
parking, and resident events. Currently a waitlist for units.
TABLE SN-1
SENIOR HOUSING PROPERTIES
ST LOUIS PARK
NOVEMBER 2022
Monthly Rent/Rent/Sales Price/PSFMarket/Base
Sale Price
Amenities at the property include a great room, guest suite, library,
fitness room, craft/meeting room, game room, underground
parking, car wash bay, garden plots, in unit laundry, high ceilings, in
unit laundry, & patio with grills.
Rent Ranges
Elmwood features the following amenities: a fitness room, yoga
studio, business center/library, club room, rooftop deck conference
room, bike storage, in unit washer/dryer, balcony, community
room, package service, heated underground parking, and resident
events.
$1.73
765
1,230
842
468
$3,495
CONTINUED
Knollwood place is restricted to thouse 55 plus. Amenities include
complimentary breakfast (weekdays), shuttle van, laundry facilities,
ftiness center, and community center. Underground parking is $60
per month. Kosher dining options.
580
700
537
$1,320
$1,584
765
30% of AGI
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 132
SENIOR HOUSING ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH & CONSULTING, LLC 124
Year No. of No.Services/Amenities/
Project Name Built Units Vacant No.Type Min -Max Comments
Assisted Living
Roitenberg Residence 2002 52 24 17 -Studio
3610 Phillips Pkwy 18 -1BR
17 -2BR
Parkshore Place 2001 68 7 6 -Studio 430 -479 $2,396 -$2,418 $5.05 -$5.57
3633 Park Center Blvd 38 -1BR 520 -645 $2,799 -$2,960 $4.59 -$5.38
38 -1BR+D
24 -2BR 789 -902 $2,911 -$3,590 $3.69 -$3.98
Memory Care
Towerlight on Wooddale Avenue 2012 33 1 NA -Studio 468 -566 $3.71 -$4.49
3601 Wooddale Ave NA -1BR 558 -789 $2.70 -$3.82
Roitenberg Residence 2002 24 13 24 -Studio $2,584 -$3,282 $9.07 -$11.52
3610 Phillips Pkwy
Enhanced Care & Dementia Care
Towerlight on Wooddale Avenue 2012 8 0 8 -Suites $2,105 -$8,210 $5.44 -$21.21
3601 Wooddale Ave
Parkshore Place 2002 23 1 2 -Studio 430 -479 $1,593 -$3,106 $3.70 -$6.48
3633 Park Center Blvd 13 -1BR 520 -645 $3,492 -$3,653 $5.66 -$6.72
8 -2BR 854 -902 $4,128 -$4,192 $4.65 -$4.83
Total Senior Units (excl. Skilled Nursing)1,004 99 9.9%
NA: Not Applicable.
Monthly Rent/Rent/Sales Price/PSF
Parkshore Place features the following amenities: dining, a
wellness center, common area, salon & spa, library, card room,
shuttle bus, and a pool.
$6.67
$6.15$4,000
667 $4.64$3,097
800
ST LOUIS PARK
NOVEMBER 2022
Roitenberg features an emergency call system, housekeeping
services, guest services desk, beauty/barber shop, and Kosher
dining.
Rent Ranges Sale Price
SENIOR HOUSING PROPERTIES
TABLE SN-1 (CONTINUED)
Market/Base
Roitenberg features an emergency call system, housekeeping
services, guest services desk, beauty/barber shop, and Kosher
dining.
Parkshore Place features the following amenities: dining, a
wellness center, common area, salon & spa, library, card room,
shuttle bus, and a pool.
Assisted living units at the property include gas, electric, water,
trash/sewer, satellite TV (Directv), in unit washer/dryer (most
units), weekly housekeeping, movie theater, dining rooms, club
room, craft rooms, family rooms, fitness room, library, spa room,
refelction room, patio, guest room, and salon.
Memory Care units at the property include gas, electric, water,
trash/sewer, satellite TV (Directv), weekly housekeeping, movie
theater, dining rooms, club room, craft rooms, family rooms, fitness
room, library, spa room, refelction room, patio, guest room, and
salon. Rent excludes services which would be added on to cost.
NANA
$3,000450
650
Source: Twin Cities Senior Housing Guide & Resources 2021-2022; MN Department of Health; HUD; Senior Housing/Apartment Sites; Hennepin County; & Maxfield Research and Consulting LLC.
$2,100
$2,130
285
387
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 133
SENIOR HOUSING ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 125
• Elmwood is the only property with any market rate active adult units. The development, as
mentioned in the previous bullet point, is mixed income. Of the 70 total units over 75%
(75.7%) are market rate units (53 units).
• There are three independent living with services available facilities, totaling 432 independ-
ent living units in the PMA, 47 of which are vacant (10.9% vacancy rate). Independent living
with services available unit rents range from a low of $1,702 for a one-bedroom unit to a
high of $5,109 for a two-bedroom plus den unit.
• There are 120 assisted living units in the PMA, 31 of which are vacant for a 25.8% vacancy
rate. Assisted living properties generally includes three meals per day, snacks, housekeep-
ing, linen and laundry service, and emergency call systems. Fees for service care level pack-
ages are in addition to the base monthly fee.
• There are two facilities providing 57 memory care units in the PMA. These memory care fa-
cilities are currently 24.6% vacant (15 vacant units). Towerlight on Wooddale Avenue has a
vacancy rate of only 3.0% while Roitenberg Residence has a vacancy rate over 54% (54.2%).
Fees for service care level packages are in addition to the base monthly fee.
• Pending senior projects can be found later in the report in the pending projects section.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 134
SENIOR HOUSING ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 126
Skilled Nursing Facilities
Nursing facilities provide the most service-intensive housing available and meet the needs of
seniors with complex medical needs beyond what can be accommodated in traditional assisted
living environments. In addition, seniors who exhaust private funds an d do not have financial
support from family members and/or are unable to find an assisted living facility that accepts
Elderly Waivers reside in nursing facilities with the assistance of Medicaid funding.
Table SN-2 provides a summary of the existing nursing facilities located in St. Louis Park.
# of # of
Year Beds Certified
Project Name/Location Built Lic.Beds Comments
Villa at St Louis Park 2013 100 100
7500 W 22nd St
Sholom Home West 1991 154 154
3620 Phillips Pkwy
Cedars at St Louis Park 1971 112 112
7500 W 28th St
The Estates at St Louis Park 1967 220 220
3201 Virginia Ave
Park Health 1949 70 70
4415 W 36 1/2 St
Medicare/Medicaid.
Private rooms for an
additional $25.
$217.47 $395.55 Medicare/Medicaid.
Private rooms for an
additional 11.5%.
$392.01
$201.00 $335.94
$204.25 $508.29
Sources: MN Department of Health and Human Services; Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC.
TABLE SN-2
SKILLED NURSING FACILITIES
NOVEMBER 2022
ST LOUIS PARK
Daily Rates
Lowest Highest
Case Mix Case Mix
Medicare/Medicaid.
Medicare/Medicaid.
Private rooms for an
additional $47.
Medicare/Medicaid. No
private rooms available.
$197.96 $496.69
$223.27
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 135
SENIOR HOUSING ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 127
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 136
SENIOR HOUSING ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH & CONSULTING, LLC 128
Senior Housing & Skilled Nursing Location Map: St. Louis Park
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 137
SENIOR HOUSING ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 129
Select Senior Developments
Menorah Plaza Apartments
The Elmwood
Knollwood Place Roitenberg Residence
Towerlight The Estates at St. Louis Park
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 138
FOR-SALE MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 130
Introduction
Maxfield Research and Consulting analyzed the for-sale housing market in St. Louis Park, by col-
lecting data on single-family and multifamily home sales and active listings and pending for-sale
developments.
Home Resales in St. Louis Park
Table FS-1 presents closed resale data for St. Louis Park, Hennepin County, and the Seven
County Metro between 2010 and 2022. Table FS-2 presents median resale prices during that
same time frame for St. Louis Park, Hennepin County, and the Seven County Metro. The data
was obtained from the Regional Multiple Listing Service of Minnesota (RMLS). The following
are key points observed from our analysis of this data.
Closed Sales
• Between 2010 and 2022, there has been an average of 884 residential sales per year in St.
Louis Park. Sales averaged 989 per year between 2020 and 2022 while they represented a
smaller 852 residential sales between 2010 and 2019.
• The number of closed sales between 2010 and 2022 in St. Louis Park represented 4.6% of all
sales in Hennepin County and 1.9% of all sales in the Seven County Metro.
• Throughout 2022, there were 827 closed sales in St. Louis Park, down 24.4% from 1,094
closed sales in 2021. Similarly, between 2021 and 2022, in Hennepin County and the Seven
County Metro, closed sales were down 19.6% and 19.4%, respectively.
Year St Louis Park Hennepin County Seven County Metro
2010 518 13,705 33,134
2011 693 14,787 36,194
2012 806 17,698 42,594
2013 910 19,162 46,141
2014 838 18,150 42,963
2015 966 19,919 48,746
2016 1,011 20,921 51,741
2017 960 20,733 51,737
2018 947 20,057 50,020
2019 870 20,283 50,504
2020 1,047 21,453 54,059
2021 1,094 22,895 55,880
2022 827 18,409 45,046
Source: InfoSparks & Maxfield Research and Consulting.
ST LOUIS PARK, HENNEPIN COUNTY, & SEVEN COUNTY METRO
TABLE FS-1
CLOSED RESALES
2010 - 2022
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 139
FOR-SALE MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 131
Median Resale Prices
• The median resale price in St. Louis Park declined 13.2% between 2010 and 2011 at the
trough of the real estate market. Between 2011 and 2022, the City has experienced median
resale increases every year equating to an overall 94.5% increase (8.6% annually).
• In Hennepin County the median resale price declined 11.7% between 2010 and 2011. How-
ever, since 2011 the county has experienced median resale increases every year equating to
an overall 126.5% increase (11.5% annually).
• The Seven County Metro’s median resale price declined 11.4% between 2010 and 2011.
However, since 2011, the Metro Area has experienced median resale increases of 12.3% an-
nually.
• In St. Louis Park, between 2010 and 2022, the median resale price was lowest in 2011 at
$185,000. Similarly, median resale prices were lowest in both Hennepin County and the
Seven County Metro at $162,500 and $155,000; respectively. The year 2011 had the lowest
median resale prices in all geographies as the U.S. was coming out of the Great Recession.
• Between 2021 and 2022 median resale prices increased in all three geographies. St. Louis
Park’s median resale price increased 5.9% to $359,900 while Hennepin County’s median re-
sale price increased 5.1% to $368,000, and the Seven County Metro’s median resale price
increased 6.7% to $365,000.
Year St Louis Park Hennepin County Seven County Metro
2010 $213,250 $184,000 $175,000
2011 $185,000 $162,500 $155,000
2012 $198,450 $182,488 $172,000
2013 $219,000 $209,900 $199,000
2014 $230,000 $221,000 $212,000
2015 $239,000 $235,000 $224,900
2016 $245,000 $246,555 $236,900
2017 $264,663 $263,500 $250,000
2018 $287,000 $283,000 $270,000
2019 $305,000 $300,000 $288,000
2020 $329,900 $325,000 $312,000
2021 $340,000 $350,000 $342,000
2022 $359,900 $368,000 $365,000
TABLE FS-2
MEDIAN RESALE PRICES
2010 - 2022
Source: InfoSparks & Maxfield Research and Consulting.
ST LOUIS PARK, HENNEPIN COUNTY, & SEVEN COUNTY METRO
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 140
FOR-SALE MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 132
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 141
FOR-SALE MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 133
Current Supply of Homes on the Market
To examine the current market more closely for available owner-occupied housing in St. Louis
Park, we reviewed the current supply of homes on the market (listed for sale). Hennepin
County was also examined to provide a comparison. Table FS-3 shows homes currently listed
for sale in St. Louis Park and Hennepin County distributed into eleven price ranges. The listings
were obtained November 3, 2022, from the RMLS.
• As of November 3, 2022, there were 95 homes listed for sale in St. Louis Park and 2,786
homes listed for sale in all of Hennepin County.
• The median list prices in St. Louis Park and Hennepin County, for single-family and multi-
family homes is $349,900 and $386,853, respectively. The median sale price is generally a
more accurate indicator of housing values in a community than the average sale price. Av-
erage sale prices can be easily skewed by a few very high-priced or low-priced home sales in
any given year, whereas the median sale price better represents the pricing of a majorit y of
homes in a given market.
• Hennepin County’s average listed sales price of $590,657 is 48.9% more than St. Louis
Park’s average listed sales price of $397,789.
Price Range No. Pct. No. Pct.
Under $100,000 0 0.0%29 1.0%
$100,000 to $199,999 15 15.8%280 10.1%
$200,000 to $299,999 21 22.1%539 19.3%
$300,000 to $399,999 26 27.4%640 23.0%
$400,000 to $499,999 16 16.8%365 13.1%
$500,000 to $599,999 5 5.3%217 7.8%
$600,000 to $699,999 3 3.2%159 5.7%
$700,000 to $799,999 3 3.2%113 4.1%
$800,000 to $999,999 1 1.1%77 2.8%
$900,000 to $999,999 2 2.1%57 2.0%
$1,000,000 or More 3 3.2%310 11.1%
95 100%2,786 100%
Minimum
Maximum
Median
Average
Sources: RMLS, Maxfield Research and Consulting, LLC.
$386,853
$590,657
Note: Includes single family, townhomes, twin homes, and condos
(Previously owned and completed new construction).
Hennepin County
$1,500,000
St Louis Park
$396,789
TABLE FS-3
HOMES CURRENTLY LISTED FOR-SALE
ST LOUIS PARK & HENNEPIN COUNTY
AS OF NOVEMBER 3, 2022
$349,900
$13,450,000
$125,000 $50,000
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 142
FOR-SALE MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 134
• Hennepin County has approximately 35% (33.5%) of its for sale homes priced at $500,000 or
more compared to 17.9% of homes in St. Louis Park.
• Approximately two thirds (66.3%) of homes in St. Louis Park are priced between $200,000
and $500,000 while in Hennepin County 55.4% of homes are priced in the same range.
• Based on a median list price of $349,900 for St. Louis Park, the income required to afford a
home at this price would be between $99,971 and $116,633; based on the standard of 3.0
to 3.5 times the median income (and assuming these households do not have a high level of
debt). A household with significantly more equity (in an existing home and/or savings)
could afford a higher priced home. About 45% (45.2%) of St. Louis Park households have
annual incomes at or above $99,971.
• The majority of single and multifamily homes listed for sale in St. Louis Park are priced be-
tween $300,000 and $399,999 (27.4%) and $200,000 and $299,999 (22.1%). In Hennepin
County, the majority of single and multifamily homes listed for sale are also priced between
$300,000 and $399,999 (23.0%) and $200,000 and $299,999 (19.3%).
Tables FS-4 shows homes currently listed for sale in St. Louis Park by property type while table
FS-5 does the same for Hennepin County. The listings were obtained November 2022 from the
RMLS.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 143
FOR-SALE MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 135
• Of the 95 listings in St. Louis Park, 55 (57.9%) are single family homes while 40 listings
(42.1%) are multifamily homes. In Hennepin County, of 2,786 listings, 1,812 are single family
homes (65.0%) while 974 listings are multifamily homes (35.0%).
• Condominiums (37.9%) and one-and-one half story (25.3%) listings are the two most com-
mon housing types in St. Louis Park, accounting for a combined 63.2% of all of listings. In
contrast, throughout Hennepin County, two story (24.7%) and condominiums (21.3%) list-
ings are the two most common property types accounting for a combined 46.0% of all ac-
tive listings.
• In St. Louis Park, condominiums represent 37.9% of all active listings while single family list-
ings represent 57.9% of all active listings. When adding in the four townhouse units , multi-
family units represent 42.1% of all active listings.
• Throughout Hennepin County condominiums represent 21.3% of all active listings while sin-
gle family listings represent 65.0% of all active listings. When adding in townhouse and twin
home units multifamily units represent 35.0% of all active listings
Avg. List Avg. Home Size Avg. Price Avg. Age
Property Type Listings Pct. Price Sq. Ft. Per Sq. Ft. of Home
One story 17 17.9%$399,959 1,716 $233 1950
One and one half story 24 25.3%$420,029 1,877 $224 1946
Two-story 7 7.4%$769,386 2,758 $279 1979
Two-level split 2 2.1%$429,500 2,100 $205 1967
Modified two-level 1 1.1%$924,900 4,829 $192 1953
Three-level split 2 2.1%$486,500 1,903 $256 1972
Four or more level split 2 2.1%$1,249,950 4,378 $286 1955
Total 55 57.9%$502,824 2,098 $240 1954
Townhouse 4 4.2%$258,600 1,313 $197 1976
Condominiums 36 37.9%$256,234 1,091 $235 1994
Total 40 42.1%$256,477 1,117 $230 1993
St Louis Park Totals 95 100.0%$399,517 1,687 $237 1970
TABLE FS-4
ACTIVE LISTINGS BY HOUSING TYPE
AS OF NOVEMBER 3, 2022
Single-Family
Multifamily
Sources: RMLS & Maxfield Research and Consulting, LLC.
ST LOUIS PARK
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 144
FOR-SALE MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 136
Avg. List Avg. Home Size Avg. Price Avg. Age
Property Type Listings Pct. Price Sq. Ft. Per Sq. Ft. of Home
One story 477 17.1%$543,822 2,249 $242 1967
One and one half story 350 12.6%$415,267 1,793 $232 1935
Two-story 688 24.7%$943,683 3,369 $280 1984
Two-level split 131 4.7%$449,792 2,134 $211 1979
Modified two-level 29 1.0%$895,531 3,539 $253 1982
More than two stories 49 1.8%$1,244,177 3,993 $312 1924
Three-level split 40 1.4%$481,871 2,073 $232 1991
Four or more level split 48 1.7%$538,843 2,452 $220 1982
Total 1,812 65.0%$686,064 2,647 $259 1968
Townhouse 22 0.8%$437,914 1,987 $220 2002
Twin Home 358 12.8%$453,570 2,089 $217 1990
Condominiums 594 21.3%$396,752 1,243 $319 1979
Total 974 35.0%$413,165 1,536 $269 1988
Hennepin County Totals 2,786 100.0%$590,591 2,258 $262 1975
Sources: RMLS & Maxfield Research and Consulting, LLC.
TABLE FS-5
ACTIVE LISTINGS BY HOUSING TYPE
HENNEPIN COUNTY
AS OF NOVEMBER 3, 2022
Single-Family
Multifamily
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 145
FOR-SALE MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 137
• Listings for condos report the lowest average list price in both St. Louis Park and Hennepin
County at $256,234 and $396,752; respectively. Condos also report the lowest average
square feet in both geographies, 1,091 square feet in St. Louis Park and 1,243 square feet in
Hennepin County. Condos are the newest property type in St. Louis Park with an average
age of 1994. Throughout Hennepin County condos have an older average age of 1979.
• One-and one half story homes, the most common housing type in St. Louis Park, average
$420,029, equating to $225 per square foot.
Maps of 2022 median and average home values by census block, created with ESRI data, across
St. Louis Park and neighboring communities are displayed on the following pages. Home value
categories for both maps are as follows: under $200,000; $200,000 to $299,999; $300,000 to
$399,999; $400,000 to $499,999; and $500,000 and over. Median and average home values in
St. Louis Park are highest in the northeastern portion of the city in the Lake Forest and Fern Hill
neighborhoods; in the southeastern portion of the city in the Minikahda Vista and Browndale
neighborhoods; and in the northwestern portion of the city in the Westwood Hills neighbo r-
hood (see page 11 for St. Louis Park neighborhood map).
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 146
FOR SALE MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH & CONSULTING, LLC 138
St. Louis Park Median Home Value by Block Group, 2022
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 147
FOR SALE MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH & CONSULTING, LLC 139
St. Louis Park Average Home Value by Block Group, 2022
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 148
FOR-SALE HOUSING ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH & CONSULTING, LLC 140
Owner-Occupied Turnover
Table FS-6 illustrates existing home turnover as a percentage of owner-occupied units in St.
Louis Park, Hennepin County, and the Seven County Metro. Resales are based on historic trans-
action volume between 2010 and 2021 as obtained from Northstar MLS. Owner-occupied
housing units are sourced to the American Community Survey.
As displayed in the table, approximately 6.4% of St. Louis Park’s owner-occupied housing stock
is sold annually. The turnover rate in Hennepin County is 5.7% and 5.4% in the Seven County
Metro. Typically, we find owner-occupied turnover ranges from 3% at the low-end to 8% at the
high-end in many communities throughout the Midwest.
Owner-occupied Resales Turnover
Geography Housing Units1 Annual Avg.2 Pct.
St Louis Park 13,910 888 6.4%
Hennepin County 337,704 19,147 5.7%
Seven County Metro 870,013 46,976 5.4%
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, Northstar MLS, Maxfield Research and Consulting, LLC.
TABLE FS-6
OWNER-OCCUPIED TURNOVER
ST LOUIS PARK, HENNEPIN COUNTY, & SEVEN COUNTY METRO
2 Annual average of resales between 2010 and 2021.
1 Owner-occupied housing units in 2022 (based on American Community
Survey 5-year average (2016-2020) adjusted to 2022 by Maxfield Research.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 149
FOR-SALE HOUSING ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH & CONSULTING, LLC 141
Condominium Developments
Table FS-7 identifies all condominium properties located in St. Louis Park. The table presents
data on condominium project address, year built or converted, number of units, unit mix range,
pricing range, market values. Market values are based on 2022 Hennepin County total market
values. No resale data is presented as no condominium resales were completed between Janu-
ary 1st and November 30th, 2022. Table FS-8 summarizes St. Louis Park condominium projects
by year built. Key findings from the tables follow.
• There are 41 condominium projects with a total of 2,756 units in St. Louis Park.
• Overall, condominium units are older (30+ years) as over 50% of the units were constructed
in the 1970s and 1980s.
• A total of 14 condominium projects were developed in the 2000s, accounting for 35.6% of
St. Louis Park’s total inventory.
• The two most recent condominium projects, Parkside Lofts, built in 2011, and Woodda le
Flats, built in 2016, account for 2.9% of St. Louis Park’s total inventory.
• Wooddale Flats, according to 2022 Hennepin County tax records, has the largest range in
estimated market values ($605,300) from a low of $326,700 to a high of $932,100.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 150
FOR-SALE HOUSING ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH & CONSULTING, LLC 142
No. of
Project Name Project Address City Zip Code Year Built Converted Units Unit Types
3023 Lynn 3023 Lynn Avenue South St. Louis Park 55416 1966 2004 12 1BR, 2BR $157,000 - $227,300
3300 on the Park 3300 Louisiana Avenue South St. Louis Park 55426 1980 new 132 1BR, 2BR, 3BR $137,000 - $227,700
6222 West 35th 6222 West 35th Street St. Louis Park 55416 1969 2003 11 1BR, 2BR $108,600 - $163,200
Aquila Commons 8200 33rd Street West St. Louis Park 55426 2007 new 104 1BR, 2BR $161,200 - $267,300
Bridgewalk 450 Ford Road St. Louis Park 55426 1972 new 91 1BR, 2BR, 3BR $95,600 - $183,900
Brookside Lofts 4132 Vernon Avenue South St. Louis Park 55416 2006 new 41 2BR, 3BR $228,200 - $285,800
Cedar Trails 4400-4654 Cedar Lake Road St. Louis Park 55416 1973 1994 273 0BR, 1BR, 2BR $99,100 - $185,000
Cedar Trails West 4801-4861 Cedar Lake Road St. Louis Park 55416 1977 1997 46 1BR, 2BR $220,600 - $242,300
Coach Homes of Shelard I 300-350 Shelard Parkway St. Louis Park 55426 1980 new 48 1BR, 2BR $131,600 - $162,200
Coach Homes of Shelard II 375-491 Shelard Parkway St. Louis Park 55426 1981-83 new 79 2BR $131,600 - $164,100
Condos at Excelsior & Grand 3707 Grand Way St. Louis Park 55416 2004 new 123 1BR, 2BR, 3BR $240,000 - $542,700
Fern Hill Place 3000 Raleigh Avenue South St. Louis Park 55416 2001 new 30 1BR, 2BR, 3BR $142,200 - $258,900
Grand Condos 4730 Park Commons Drive St. Louis Park 55416 2007 new 96 1BR, 2BR, 3BR $240,000 - $588,300
Greensboro 7412 22nd Street West St. Louis Park 55426 1970 1975 134 1BR, 2BR $105,600 - $143,800
Harmony Vista 5650 36th Street West St. Louis Park 55416 2007 new 74 1BR, 2BR $166,900 - $336,000
Inglewood Boutique Condos 3125 Inglewood Avenue South St. Louis Park 55416 2007 new 6 2BR, 3BR $260,800 - $464,300
Lofts of Excelsior 4525 Park Commons Drive St. Louis Park 55416 2006 new 86 1BR, 2BR, 3BR $230,500 - $434,444
Lynnwood 4516 Highway 7 St. Louis Park 55426 1965 1982 11 1BR, 2BR $129,900 - $214,900
Monterey Cooperative 2925 Monterey Avenue South St. Louis Park 55416 1992 new 8 2BR $71,700 - $155,900
Monterey Place 4550 Minnetonka Boulevard St. Louis Park 55416 1986 new 30 2BR $245,500 - $264,800
Monterey West 2901-2913 Monterey Avenue St. Louis Park 55416 1996 new 7 2BR $160,400 - $417,000
Murphy's Ridge 6300 Cambridge Street St. Louis Park 55426 1898 new 4 2BR $165,500 - $165,500
Natchez Place 4625 Minnetonka Boulevard St. Louis Park 55416 1987 new 26 2BR $144,900 - $220,300
Oxford Commons 5911 Oxford Street St. Louis Park 55426 1965 2003 12 1BR, 2BR $97,000 - $128,500
Parkside Lofts 462 Ford Road St. Louis Park 55426 2011 new 46 1BR, 2BR $204,600 - $402,900
Pointe West Commons 5970 16th Street West St. Louis Park 55416 2002 new 86 2BR, 3BR $330,417 - $365,300
Pond View 1400 Dakota Avenue South St. Louis Park 55426 1983 2004 30 1BR, 2BR $97,100 - $167,500
South Cedar Trails 4401-4561 Cedar Lake Road St. Louis Park 55416 1977 1977 32 1BR, 2BR, 3BR $99,100 - $221,700
Sungate 2551-2671 Alabama Avenue South St. Louis Park 55426 1970 1983 60 1BR, 2BR $106,900 - $217,700
Sunset Ridge 2010-2260 Ridge Drive St. Louis Park 55416 1984 new 240 1BR, 2BR, 3BR $132,300 - $300,700
Twin Fountains 350 Shelard Parkway St. Louis Park 55426 1980 new 88 1BR, 2BR $131,600 - $162,200
Village in the Park 3600 Wooddale Avenue South St. Louis Park 55416 2006 new 60 1BR, 2BR, $207,500 - $318,300
Village in the Park-Lofts 3640 Wooddale Avenue South St. Louis Park 55416 2006 new 60 1BR, 2BR $228,600 - $304,600
Village in the Park-Urban 3712 Wooddale Avenue South St. Louis Park 55416 2005 new 77 2BR, 3BR $333,000 - $363,400
Westmarke 1155 Ford Road St. Louis Park 55426 2007 new 64 1BR, 2BR $170,000 - $508,400
West Oaks 3251 Louisiana Avenue South St. Louis Park 55426 2007 new 74 2BR, 3BR $214,200 - $441,100
Westmoreland 4530 Park Commons Drive St. Louis Park 55416 1966 1982 72 1BR, 2BR $85,600 - $178,900
Westwood Villa 2200 Nevada Avenue South St. Louis Park 55426 1971 1993 66 1BR, 2BR $111,400 - $178,900
Wolfe Lake 4820 & 4860 Park Commons Drive St. Louis Park 55416 1971 1991 129 1BR, 2BR, 3BR $113,800 - $282,000
Wooddale Flats 3962 - 3990, Wooddale Avenue St. Louis Park 55416 2016 new 33 2BR, 3BR $326,700 - $932,000
Wynmoor Condos 3200 Virginia Avenue South St. Louis Park 55426 1969 1991 55 1BR, 2BR $106,900 - $174,300
Total/Average Summary 1986 2,756 $71,700 - $932,000
Source: Hennepin County & Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC.
1 Based on 2022 Hennepin County tax records.
TABLE FS-7
ST. LOUIS PARK MULTIFAMILY CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENTS
NOVEMBER 2022
Estimated Market Value 1
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 151
FOR-SALE HOUSING ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH & CONSULTING, LLC 143
St. Louis Park Condominiums
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 152
FOR-SALE MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 144
• Over one-third (34.1%) of the condominium projects were converted from a previous use.
Most of the conversions were former older rental properties converted in the 1990s and
2000s (each at 9.8% of all projects).
Select Condominium Developments
Wooddale Flats Westmarke Condos
Parkside Lofts
Wynmoor Condos
Decade Projects Units Pct. of Units
Pre-1960 1 4 0.1%
1960s 6 173 6.3%
1970s 8 831 30.2%
1980s 8 673 24.4%
1990s 2 15 0.5%
2000s 14 981 35.6%
2010s 2 79 2.9%
Total 41 2,756 100.0%
Table FS-8
CONDOMINIUM DVELOPMENTS BY DECADE
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
Source: Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 153
FOR-SALE MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 145
Select Condominium Developments (Continued)
Cedar Trails Condos Aquila Condos
Excelsior & Grand
Fern Hill Place
School District
School districts have a direct impact on community home values. All of St. Louis Park is in-
cluded in the St. Louis Park School District (District 283). The St. Louis Park District is bordered
by the following school districts: Edina (District 273), Minneapolis (District 1), and Hopkins (Dis-
trict 270). Also nearby are Robbinsdale (District 281) and Wayzata (District 284). A map on the
following page of St. Louis Park and nearby districts, followed by a table displaying high school
rankings for St. Louis Park Senior High and nearby high schools follows.
• St. Louis Park Senior High is ranked the 82nd best high school in the state and 67th best high
school in the Metro Area according to the latest data available in an online study published
by US News and World Report. Nationally St. Louis Park Senior High is ranked 4,713 across
all surveyed schools in the nation.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 154
FOR-SALE MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 146
• Of the thirteen high schools in nearby school districts, St. Louis Park Senior High has the
third highest college readiness score 48.6 (After Edina Senior High - 66.9 and Wayzata Sen-
ior High – 56.4). The college readiness score is based on state and Advanced Placement
(AP) Testing. Just after St. Louis Park Senior High are two Minneapolis schools, Southwest
Senior High (47.6% college readiness) and Washburn Senior High (47.0 college readiness).
• St. Louis Park Senior High has the fourth highest graduation rate among nearby schools at
92%. Only Wayzata Senior High (97%), Edina (94%), and Hopkins (93.0%) had higher gradu-
ation rates. Following St. Louis Park (92%) are Robbinsdale Armstrong Senior High in Plym-
outh (91%) and Southwest Senior High in Minneapolis (90%). The average graduation rate
among the thirteen schools analyzed was 85.0% and ranged from 97% at Wayzata Senior
High to 66% at North Community Senior High.
• Among the thirteen schools examined, St. Louis Park Senior High has the ninth highest en-
rollment at 1,467, below the average enrollment of 1,645 of all thirteen schools.
• The student-teacher ratio of 23 students to every teacher at St. Louis Park Senior High is the
fifth lowest out of the thirteen examined schools.
• One measure of college preparation is the taking of Advanced Placement (AP) courses in
high school. The AP participation rate at St. Louis Park Senior High was approximately 60%
(59.0%).
• Benilde-St Margaret’s is a large private school in St. Louis Park. While the sch ool serves
grades 7 through 12 there are 938 students in grades 9 through 12. The student to teacher
ratio is significantly less than nearby public high schools at a ratio of 9 students to every
teacher. Annual tuition is a little over $14,000 a year.5
St. Louis Park High School Benilde-St Margaret’s High School
5 “Benilde-St Margaret’s” US News & World report. https://www.usnews.com/education/k12/minnesota/benilde-
st-margaret-s--722. Accessed 3 Mar. 2023.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 155
FOR-SALE MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC 147
High School Address National
Rankings
Statewide
Rankings
Minneapolis
Metro
Rankings
Grades
Served Enrollment Student
Teacher Ratio
Graduation
Rate
College
Readiness*
Advanced Placement
(AP) or International
Baccalaureate (IB)
Participation Rate
1 Wayzata Senior High 4955 Peony LN N Plymouth 55446 463 6 6 9-12 3,502 20:1 97%56.4 62%
2 Edina Senior High 6754 Valley View Rd Edina 55439 486 7 7 9-12 2,683 24:1 94%66.9 72%
3 Hopkins Senior High 2400 Lindbergh Dr Minnetonka 55305 2,996 50 47 10-12 1,611 28:1 93%44.0 54%
4 Washburn Senior High 201 W 49th St Minneapolis 55419 2,900 45 42 9-12 1,690 29:1 87%47.0 59%
5 Southwest Senior High 3414 W 47th St Minneapolis 55410 3,076 53 49 9-12 1,918 28:1 90%47.6 63%
6 Henry Senior High 4320 Newton Ave N Minneapolis 55412 3,895 68 60 9-12 949 18:1 83%24.9 38%
7 St Louis Park Senior High 6425 W 33rd St St Louis Park 55426 4,713 82 67 9-12 1,467 23:1 92%48.6 59%
8 Robbinsdale Armstrong Senior 10635 36th Ave N Plymouth 55441 5,009 89 75 9-12 1,926 31:1 91%45.7 58%
9 Robbinsdale Cooper Senior 8234 47th Ave N New Hope 55428 10,279 188 107 9-12 1,694 28:1 84%19.3 30%
10 South Senior High 3131 19th Ave S Minneapolis, Mn 55407 12,264 251 120 9-12 1,644 20:1 81%33.0 52%
11 Roosevelt Senior High 4029 28th Ave S Minneapolis, MN 55406 12,307 253 121 9-12 957 16:1 79%31.4 49%
12 Edison Senior High 700 22nd Ave NE Minneapolis, MN 55418 12,618 258 122 9-12 938 15:1 69%24.3 35%
13 North Community Senior High 1500 James Ave N Minneapolis, MN 55411 13,383-17,843 282-414 129-173 9-12 402 10:1 66%7.7 31%
Table FS-9
Source: US News and World Report and RTI International utilizing data from The Common Core of Data (U.S. Department of Education), state math and reading assessments, The College Board, and International
Baccalaureate (IB) - 2022 Data.
Note: Analyzed Data is based off 2020-2021, 2019-2020, and 2018-2019 school years.
*: Based on state proficiency and Advanced Placement (AP) tests.
ST LOUIS PARK & NEARBY COMMUNITIES: 2022 HIGH SCHOOL RANKINGS
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 156
FOR-SALE MARKET ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC 148
St. Louis Park and Neighboring School District Boundaries
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 157
PLANNED/PENDING RENTAL & SENIOR DEVELOPMENTS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 149
Planned and Proposed Rental & Senior Developments
There are several pending rental and senior developments currently in the planning process
within the City of St. Louis Park. This section discusses the developments that have already sub-
mitted plans to the City, some of which have received preliminary and/or final approvals. Be-
low are brief discussions of pending rental and senior projects in the city. Table P-1 lists pending
and recently completed rental and senior housing developments in the City.
The pending list breaks down into three categories including recently completed projects (2020
and more recent), under construction projects, and planned/pending projects. For recently
completed projects the breakdown by unit type is as follows: 577 market rate rental units, 218
affordable rental units, 53 active adult (55+) market rate units, and 17 active adult (55+) afford-
able units. Under construction projects are broken down by the following unit types: 610 mar-
ket rate rental units, 456 affordable rental units, 152 active adult (55+) market rate units, and
18 active adult (55+) affordable units. Planned/proposed units are broken down into 741 mar-
ket rate rental units and 63 affordable rental units.
Of pending and recently completed projects, only two were active adult (age-restricted) pro-
jects while the remaining 22 are rental projects. The most recent projects to open in St. Louis
Park include Via Sol, Parkway Place, Parkway Flats, and Volo at Texa Tonka. Via Sol is a mixed
income project of 70 market rate units and 17 affordable units. Parkway Place (95 units) and
Volo at Texa Tonka (112 units) are both market rate projects while Parkway Flats is a 6 unit af-
fordable townhome development. Parkway Place and Parkway Flats are both a part of the
Parkway Residences project which is constructing market rate and affordable units along Min-
nesota State Highway 7 near the City’s border with Minneapolis. The area serves as a gateway
to Minneapolis’ three popular lakes (Bde Maka Ska, Lake Harriet, and Lake of the Isles), and the
Uptown District of Minneapolis.
Also near Highway 7, the Parkway Residences, and future SWLRT Beltline Boulevard Line Sta-
tion, are a number of pending projects. Beltline Station Building Three, which will be com-
prised of 82 affordable units, has been approved and is projected to begin construction in July
2023. The other two Beltline Station projects, which are projected to include 298 units, have
yet to begin construction. The Corsa project, near the Beltline Station projects, is currently un-
der construction and when built out will comprise 225 market rate units and 25 affordable
units. The Risor, a 55 plus active adult project also nearby is under construction and will when
complete have 152 active adult market rate units and 18 active adult affordable units .
Other areas of St. Louis Park experiencing multiple pending projects include the West End Dis-
trict and nearby areas and the Knollwood Mall area.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 158
PLANNED/PENDING RENTAL & SENIOR DEVELOPMENTS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC 150
Project
Project Name/Address Developer Status Aff.MR Total Type Affordability Comments
Urban Park II Apartments Completed 2020 0 61 61 Market Rate NA
3601 Phillips Pkwy
Elan West End DLC Residential Completed 2020 5 159 164 Mixed Income 5 units at 50% AMI Six-story building
1325 Utica Ave S
Via Sol PLACE Completed 2022 152 65 217 Mixed Income Five-story building
5855 MN 7 Service Rd
The Elmwood (55+)36th Street, LLC Completed 2021 17 53 70 17 units at 60% AMI
5605 36th St W
The Quentin Completed 2021 8 71 79 Mixed Income 8 units at 50% AMI Six-story building
4900 Cedar Lake S
Parkway Place Sela Investments, LLC Completed 2022 0 95 95 Market Rate NA Four-story building
4040 W 31st St
Parkway Flats Sela Investments, LLC Completed 2022 6 0 6 Affordable 6 units at 60% AMI Six-unit townhome - Three-story building
3917 W 31st St
Volo at Texa Tonka Sela Investments, LLC Completed 2022 23 89 112 Mixed Income 23 units at 50% AMI 101 unit apartment & 11 townhomes
7920 Minnetonka Blvd
Parkway Residences - Rehab Sela Investments, LLC Completed 24 0 24 Affordable 24 units at 50% AMI Two three-story buildings
4009, 4001, & 3925 31st St W
Parkway Commons Sela Investments, LLC Completed 0 37 37 Market Rate Four-story building
4141 31st St. W.
Corsa Opus Group Under Construction 25 225 250 Mixed Income 25 units at 50% AMI Five-story mixed use building
3440 Beltline Blvd.
Risor (55+)Roers Companies Under Construction 18 152 170 18 units at 50% AMI Six-story mixed use building
3510 Beltline Blvd
Mera
9920 Wayzata Blvd Bigos Management Under Construction 47 186 233 47 units at 50% AMI Six-story building
Rise on 7 CommonBond Under Construction 120 0 120 Affordable Five-story mixed use building
8115 Hwy 7
Caraway Dolce Living Under Construction 8 199 207 Mixed Income 8 units at 60% AMI Six-story building
5235 Wayzata Blvd
Arbor House Real Estate Equities Under Construction 114 0 114 Affordable Four-story building
3801 Woodale Ave S
Union Park Flats Project for Pride in Living (PPL)Under Construction 60 0 60 Affordable Three-story building. Beginning construction June 2023.
3700 Alabama Ave
Beltline Station Bldg. 2 Sherman Associates Under Construction 82 0 82 Affordable Five-story building. Beginning construction July 2023.
4725 Highway 7
17 units at 60% AMI, 27 units at
50% AMI, & 16 units at 30% AMI
77 units at 60% AMI & 5 units at
30% AMI
NA
CONTINUED
Under Construction
Additional four-story apartment building to
complement phase I.
Mixed Income
Active Adult 55+
Active adult 55+ project - Five-story building
130 units at 80% AMI & 22 units at
50% AMI
Mixed Income
Active Adult
Crowe Companies, LLC, Patrick
Crowe
North Shore Development
Partners, LLC
Mixed Income
58 Units at 60% AMI, 21 units at
50% AMI, 22 units at 40% AMI, & 19
units at 30% AMI
104 units at 60% AMI, 5 units at
50% AMI, & 5 units at 30% AMI
TABLE P-1
RENTAL & SENIOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT PIPELINE
ST LOUIS PARK
MAY 2023
Recently Completed (2020+)
Units/Lots
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 159
PLANNED/PENDING RENTAL & SENIOR DEVELOPMENTS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC 151
Project
Project Name/Address Developer Status Aff.MR Total Type Affordability Comments
Beltline Station Bldg. 1 Sherman Associates Approved 0 152 152 Market Rate NA
4725 Highway 7
Beltline Station Bldg. 3 Sherman Associates Approved 0 146 146 Market Rate NA Four-story building
4725 Highway 7
Parkway Plaza Sela Investments, LLC Approved 0 73 73 Market Rate NA Eleven-story building
4111 County Road 25
OlyHi Approved 63 252 315 Mixed Income Ordinance Rezoning Approved. Two six-story buildings
4725 Highway 7
Arlington Row - East & West Melrose Company Approved 0 61 61 Market Rate NA
7905 and 7705 Wayzata Blvd.
Louisiana Avenue Project DJR 0 57 57 Market Rate NA
2625 Louisiana Ave S
None
Two three story buildings totaling 34 units and a three
story 27 unit building.
NA: Not Assessed or Not Applicable.
Sources: City of St. Louis Park Staff; Apartment Sites; & Maxfield Research & Constulting, LLC.
Speculative/Concept
Approved - 2 of 3
variances
31 units at 60% AMI, & 32 units at
50% AMI
TABLE P-1
RENTAL & SENIOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT PIPELINE
ST LOUIS PARK
MAY 2023
Units/Lots
Seven-story mixed use building - residential &
Commercial
Four-story mixed use building - 54 units and 3
live/work units
Saturday Properties/Anderson
Companies
Planned/Proposed
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 160
PLANNED/PENDING RENTAL & SENIOR DEVELOPMENTS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC 152
Planned/Pending Rental/Senior Projects in St. Louis Park
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 161
PLANNED/PENDING RENTAL & SENIOR DEVELOPMENTS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 153
Select Recently Opened/Under Construction Developments
Mera Corsa
Risor Caraway
Wooddale Station Parkway Place
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 162
HOUSING AFFORDABILITY
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 154
Introduction
Affordable housing is a term that has various definitions according to different people and is a
product of supply and demand. According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Devel-
opment (HUD), the definition of affordability is for a household to p ay no more than 30% of its
annual income on housing (including utilities). Families who pay more than 30% of their in-
come for housing (either rent or mortgage) are considered cost burdened and may have diffi-
culty affording necessities such as food, clothing, transportation, and medical care.
Generally, housing that is income-restricted to households earning at or below 80% of Area Me-
dian Income (AMI) is considered affordable. However, many individual properties have income
restrictions set anywhere from 30% to 80% of AMI. Rent is not based on income but instead is
a contract amount that is affordable to households within the specific income restriction seg-
ment. Moderate-income housing, often referred to as “workforce housing,” refers to both
rental and ownership housing. Hence the definition is broadly defined as housing that is in-
come-restricted to households earning between 50% and 120% AMI. Figure 1 below summa-
rizes income ranges by definition for the Minneapolis-St Paul-Bloomington Area.
Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing (i.e. Unsubsidized Affordable)
Although affordable housing is typically associated with an income-restricted property, there
are other housing units in communities that indirectly provide affordable housing. Housing
units that were not developed or designated with income guidelines (i.e. assisted) yet are more
affordable than other units in a community are considered “naturally -occurring” or “unsubsi-
dized affordable” units. This rental supply is available through th e private market, versus as-
sisted housing programs through various governmental agencies. Property values on these
units are lower based on a combination of factors, such as: age of structure/housing stock, loca-
tion, condition, size, functionally obsolete, school district, etc. Because of these factors, hous-
ing costs tend to be lower.
Definition
Extremely Low Income 0%-30%
Very Low Income 31%-50%
Low Income 51%-80%
Moderate Income | Workforce Housing 80%-120%
AMI Range
AREA MEDIAN INCOME (AMI) DEFINITIONS
FIGURE 1
Note: Minneapolis-St Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI HUD FMR Area 4-person
AMI = $118,200 (2022).
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 163
HOUSING AFFORDABILITY
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 155
According to the Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University, the privately unsubsi-
dized housing stock supplies three times as many low -cost affordable units than assisted pro-
jects nationwide. Unlike assisted rental developments, most unsubsidized affordable units are
scattered across small properties (one to four-unit structures) or in older multifamily structures.
Many of these older developments may be vulnerable to redevelopment due to their age, mod-
est rents, and deferred maintenance.
Because many of these housing units have affordable rents, project-based and private housing
markets cannot be easily separated. Some households (typically those with household incomes
of 50% to 60% AMI) income-qualify for both market rate and project-based affordable housing.
Based on the review of St. Louis Park’s housing stock and the inventory of rental properties; we
find a substantial portion of the housing stock would be classified as naturally occurring afford-
able housing.
Rent and Income Limits
Table HA-1 shows the maximum allowable incomes by household size to qualify for affordable
housing and maximum gross rents that can be charged by bedroom size in the Minnesota-St
Paul-Bloomington Area. These incomes are published and revised annually by the Department
of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and also published separately by the Minnesota
Housing Finance Agency based on the date the project was placed into service. Fair market
rent is the amount needed to pay gross monthly rent at modest rental housing in a given area.
This table is used as a basis for determining the payment standard amount used to calculate the
maximum monthly subsidy for families at financially assisted housing.
Table HA-2 shows the maximum rents by household size and AMI based on income limits illus-
trated in Table HA-1. The rents on Table HA-2 are based on HUD’s allocation that monthly rents
should not exceed 30% of income. In addition, the table reflects maximum household size
based on HUD guidelines of number of persons per unit. For each additional bedroom, the
maximum household size increases by two persons.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 164
HOUSING AFFORDABILITY
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 156
1 pph 2 phh 3 phh 4 phh 5 phh 6 phh 7 phh 8 phh
30% of median $24,660 $28,170 $31,680 $35,190 $38,010 $40,830 $43,650 $46,470
50% of median $41,100 $46,950 $52,800 $58,650 $63,350 $68,050 $72,750 $77,450
60% of median $49,320 $56,340 $63,360 $70,380 $76,020 $81,660 $87,300 $92,940
80% of median $65,760 $75,120 $84,480 $93,840 $101,360 $108,880 $116,400 $123,920
100% of median $82,200 $93,900 $105,600 $117,300 $126,700 $136,100 $145,500 $154,900
120% of median $98,640 $112,680 $126,720 $140,760 $152,040 $163,320 $174,600 $185,880
EFF 1BR 2BR 3BR 4BR
30% of median $616 $704 $792 $879 $950
50% of median $1,027 $1,173 $1,320 $1,466 $1,583
60% of median $1,233 $1,408 $1,584 $1,759 $1,900
80% of median $1,644 $1,878 $2,112 $2,346 $2,534
100% of median $2,055 $2,347 $2,640 $2,932 $3,167
120% of median $2,466 $2,817 $3,168 $3,519 $3,801
EFF 1BR 2BR 3BR 4BR
Fair Market Rent $932 $1,078 $1,329 $1,841 $2,145
Sources: HUD; Novogradac; Maxfield Research and Consulting LLC.
Fair Market Rent
TABLE HA-1
MHFA/HUD INCOME AND RENT LIMITS
MINNEAPOLIS-ST PAUL-BLOOMINGTON, MN-WI HUD FMR AREA- 2022 (Effective 04/18/22)
Income Limits by Household Size
Maximum Gross Rent
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 165
HOUSING AFFORDABILITY
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 157
Maximum Rent Based on Household Size (@30% of Income)
Unit Type 1 Min Max Min. Max.Min. Max.Min. Max.
Studio 1 1 $617 -$617 $1,028 -$1,028 $1,233 -$1,233
1BR 1 2 $617 -$704 $1,028 -$1,241 $1,233 -$1,409
2BR 2 4 $704 -$880 $1,241 -$1,466 $1,409 -$1,760
3BR 3 6 $792 -$1,021 $1,320 -$1,701 $1,584 -$2,042
4BR 4 8 $880 -$1,162 $1,466 -$1,936 $1,760 -$2,324
Maximum Rent Based on Household Size (@30% of Income)
Unit Type 1 Min Max Min. Max.Min. Max.Min. Max.
Studio 1 1 $1,644 - $1,644 $2,055 - $2,055 $2,466 - $2,466
1BR 1 2 $1,644 - $1,878 $2,055 - $2,348 $2,466 - $2,817
2BR 2 4 $1,878 - $2,346 $2,348 - $2,933 $2,817 - $3,519
3BR 3 6 $2,112 - $2,722 $2,640 - $3,403 $3,168 - $4,083
4BR 4 8 $2,346 - $3,098 $2,933 - $3,873 $3,519 - $4,647
Sources: HUD; Maxfield Research and Consulting, LLC.
100%120%
TABLE HA-2
1 One-bedroom plus den and two-bedroom plus den units are classified as 1BR and 2BR units,
respectively. To be classified as a bedroom, a den must have a window and closet.
MAXIMUM RENT BASED ON HOUSEHOLD SIZE AND AREA MEDIAN INCOME
MINNEAPOLIS-ST PAUL-BLOOMINGTON, MN-WI HUD METRO FMR AREA - 2022 (Effective 04/18/22)
Note: Minneapolis-St Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI HUD FMR Area 4-person AMI = $118,200 (2022).
HHD Size 30%60%50%
HHD Size 80%
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 166
HOUSING AFFORDABILITY
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 158
Housing Cost Burden
Table HA-3 shows the number and percentage of owner and renter households in St. Louis
Park, Hennepin County, the Seven-County Metro Area, and the State of Minnesota that pay
30% or more of their gross income for housing. This information was compiled fro m the Ameri-
can Community Survey 2021 estimates. This information is different than the 2000 Census
which separated households that paid 35% or more in housing costs. As such, the information
presented in the tables may be overstated in terms of household s that may be “cost bur-
dened.” The Federal standard for affordability is 30% of income for housing costs. Without a
separate break out for households that pay 35% or more, there are likely a number of house-
holds that elect to pay slightly more than 30% o f their gross income to select the housing that
they choose. Moderately cost-burdened is defined as households paying between 30% and
50% of their income to housing; while severely cost-burdened is defined as households paying
more than 50% of their income for housing.
Higher-income households that are cost-burdened may have the option of moving to lower
priced housing, but lower-income households often do not. The figures focus on owner house-
holds with incomes below $50,000 and renter households with incomes below $35,000.
Key findings from Table HA-3 follow.
• In St. Louis Park, 17.6% of owner households and 34.3% of renter households are consid-
ered cost burdened. In comparison, 18.9% of owner households and 43.8% of renter
households are considered cost burdened in the City as a whole. The Seven-County Metro
Area has 18.0% of its owner households cost burdened and 44.9% of its renter households
cost burdened. Across the State of Minnesota 17.9% of owner households and 43.6% of
renter households are considered cost burdened.
• Among owner households earning less than $50,000, 64.0% are cost burdened in St. Louis
Park. In comparison, among owner households earning less than $50,000, 66.5% are cost
burdened in Hennepin County. In the Seven County Metro Area, 60.4% of owner house-
holds earning less than $50,000 are cost burdened while Statewide, 51.8% of owner house-
holds earning less than $50,000 are cost burdened .
• In St. Louis Park 74.0% of renter households earning less than $35,000 are cost burdened
while 79.5% of Hennepin County renter households earning less than $35,000 are cost bur-
dened. In the Seven County Metro Area, 80.2% of renter households earning less than
$35,000 are cost burdened. Statewide, 74.9% of renter households earning less than
$35,000 are cost burdened.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 167
HOUSING AFFORDABILITY
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 159
Community No.Pct.No.Pct.No.Pct.No.Pct.
Owner Households
All Owner Households 14,025 330,286 848,779 1,610,801
Cost Burden 30% or greater 2,464 17.6%62,410 18.9%153,152 18.0%288,694 17.9%
Owner Households w/ incomes <$50,000 2,417 56,217 142,569 351,498
Cost Burden 30% or greater 1,547 64.0%37,397 66.5%86,122 60.4%182,009 51.8%
Renter Households
All Renter Households 10,110 193,242 379,008 618,299
Cost Burden 30% or greater 3,468 34.3%84,654 43.8%170,253 44.9%269,438 43.6%
Renter Households w/ incomes <$35,000 2,233 66,941 133,456 251,105
Cost Burden 30% or greater 1,652 74.0%53,250 79.5%107,030 80.2%188,005 74.9%
Median Contract Rent1
1 Median Contract Rent 2021
Note: Calculations exclude households not computed.
TABLE HA-3
HOUSING COST BURDEN
Hennepin County
$1,271
St Louis Park MinnesotaSeven County Metro
$1,142
Sources: American Community Survey 2021 estimates; Maxfield Research and Consulting LLC.
ST LOUIS PARK
2021
$1,166 $972
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 168
HOUSING AFFORDABILITY
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 160
Housing Vouchers
In addition to subsidized apartments, “tenant-based” subsidies like Housing Choice Vouchers,
can help lower income households afford market-rate rental housing. The tenant-based sub-
sidy is funded by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and is managed by
the St. Louis Park Housing Authority. Under the Housing Choice Voucher program (also re-
ferred to as Section 8) qualified households are issued a voucher that can be used in a rental
unit within the private market that has rents in line wit h payment standards. Payment stand-
ards are set with guidance from the annually published HUD Fair Market Rents. The household
pays approximately 30% of their adjusted gross income for rent and utilities, and the Federal
government pays the remainder of the rent to the landlord. The maximum income limit to be
eligible for a Housing Choice Voucher is 50% AMI based on household size, as shown in Table
HA-1. The following are key points about the Housing Choice Voucher Program in St. Louis Park.
• There are approximately 300 Section 8 housing vouchers in the City of St. Louis Park.
• The City’s Housing voucher waitlist is currently closed but opens approximately every two to
three years.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 169
HOUSING AFFORDABILITY
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 161
Housing Costs as Percentage of Household Income
Housing costs are generally considered affordable at 30% of a households’ adjusted gross in-
come. Table HA-4 on the following page illustrates key housing metrics based on housing costs
and household incomes in St. Louis Park. The table estimates the percentage of St. Louis Park
householders that can afford rental and for -sale housing based on a 30% allocation of income
to housing. Housing costs are based on the St. Louis Park average.
The housing affordability calculations assume the following:
For-Sale Housing
▪ 10% down payment with good credit score
▪ Closing costs rolled into mortgage
▪ 30-year mortgage at 7.180% interest rate
▪ Private mortgage insurance (equity of less than 20%)
▪ Homeowners insurance for single-family homes and association dues for townhomes
▪ Owner household income per 2021 ACS adjusted to 2023 by Maxfield Research
Rental Housing
▪ Background check on tenant to ensure credit history
▪ 30% allocation of income
▪ Renter household income per 2021 ACS adjusted to 2023 by Maxfield Research
Because of the down payment requirement and strict underwriting criteria for a mortgage, not
all households will meet the income qualifications as outlined above.
• The median income of all St. Louis Park households in 2021 was about $87,639. However,
the median income varies by tenure. According to the 2021 American Community Survey,
the median income of a homeowner is $111,272, 70.9% higher than that of renters
($65,118).
• Approximately 50% (49.5%) of all households and 62.0% of owner households could afford
to purchase an entry-level home in St. Louis Park ($300,000). When adjusting for move-up
buyers ($450,000) 28.8% of all households and 39.6% of owner households would income
qualify.
• Of existing renter households, 69.0% can afford to rent a one-bedroom unit in St. Louis Park
($1,100/month). The percentage of renter income-qualified households decreases to 50.1%
that can afford an existing three-bedroom unit ($1,600/month). After adjusting for new
construction rental housing, the percentage of renters that are income-qualified decreases.
About 43% (42.6%) of renters can afford a new market rate one-bedroom unit while 23.1%
can afford a new three-bedroom unit.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 170
HOUSING AFFORDABILITY
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 162
For-Sale (Assumes 10% down payment and good credit)
Entry-Level Move-Up Executive Entry-Level Move-Up Executive
Price of House $300,000 $450,000 $750,000 $250,000 $375,000 $450,000
Pct. Down Payment 10.0%10.0%10.0%10.0%10.0%10.0%
Total Down Payment Amt.$30,000 $45,000 $75,000 $25,000 $37,500 $45,000
Estimated Closing Costs (rolled into mortgage)$9,000 $13,500 $22,500 $7,500 $11,250 $13,500
Cost of Loan $279,000 $418,500 $697,500 $232,500 $348,750 $418,500
Interest Rate 6.000%6.000%6.000%6.000%6.000%6.000%
Number of Pmts.360 360 360 360 360 360
Monthly Payment (P & I)-$1,673 -$2,509 -$4,182 -$1,394 -$2,091 -$2,509
(plus) Prop. Tax -$435 -$653 -$1,088 -$363 -$544 -$653
(plus) HO Insurance/Assoc. Fee for TH -$100 -$150 -$250 -$100 -$100 -$100
(plus) PMI/MIP (less than 20%)-$121 -$181 -$302 -$101 -$151 -$181
Subtotal monthly costs -$2,329 -$3,493 -$5,822 -$1,957 -$2,886 -$3,443
Housing Costs as % of Income 30%30%30%30%30%30%
Minimum Income Required $93,146 $139,719 $232,865 $78,288 $115,432 $137,719
Pct. of ALL PMA HHDS who can afford1 49.5%28.8%N/A 55.4%37.4%29.5%
No. of PMA HHDS who can afford1 12,293 7,153 N/A 13,775 9,290 7,329
Pct. of PMA owner HHDs who can afford2 62.0%39.6%N/A 68.0%49.2%40.4%
No. of PMA owner HHDs who can afford2 8,957 5,724 N/A 9,827 7,110 5,838
No. of PMA owner HHDS who cannot afford2 5,487 8,720 N/A 4,617 7,334 8,606
Rental (Market Rate)
1BR 2BR 3BR 1BR 2BR 3BR
Monthly Rent $1,100 $1,350 $1,600 $1,800 $2,400 $2,700
Annual Rent $13,200 $16,200 $19,200 $21,600 $28,800 $32,400
Housing Costs as % of Income 30%30%30%30%30%30%
Minimum Income Required $44,000 $54,000 $64,000 $72,000 $96,000 $108,000
Pct. of ALL PMA HHDS who can afford1 78.5%71.8%64.9%59.4%45.2%40.0%
No. of PMA HHDS who can afford1 19,514 17,840 16,130 14,762 11,224 9,944
Pct. of PMA renter HHDs who can afford2 69.0%59.4%50.1%42.6%27.8%23.1%
No. of PMA renter HHDs who can afford2 7,187 6,182 5,211 4,435 2,895 2,410
No. of PMA renter HHDS who cannot afford2 3,225 4,230 5,201 5,977 7,517 8,002
N/A: Not able to be assessed.
Existing Rental New Construction Rental
TABLE HA-4
ST LOUIS PARK HOUSING AFFORDABILITY - BASED ON HOUSEHOLD INCOME
Single-Family Townhome/Twinhome
Source: Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC.
1 Based on 2021 household income for ALL households adjusted to 2023 by Maxfield Research.
2 Based on 2021 ACS household income by tenure adjusted to 2023 by Maxfield Research.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 171
HOUSING DEMAND ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 163
Introduction
Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC was engaged to quantify the demand potential for housing
development in St. Louis Park from 2022 to 2030. Earlier sections of this report examined
growth trends and demographic characteristics of the household base, employment trends,
housing characteristics, along current and pending housing options in the St. Louis Park PMA.
This section of the report quantifies demand for general occupancy ownership housing and
rental housing (market rate and affordable) from 2022 to 2030, as well as senior housing de-
mand in 2023 and 2028.
Demographic Profile and Housing Demand
The demographic profile of a community affects housing demand and the types of housing that
are needed. The housing life-cycle stages are:
1. Entry-level householders
• Often prefer to rent basic, inexpensive apartments
• Usually singles or couples in their early 20’s without children
• Will often “double-up” with roommates in apartment setting
2. First-time homebuyers and move-up renters
• Often prefer to purchase modestly priced single-family homes or rent
more upscale apartments
• Usually married or cohabiting couples, in their mid-20's or 30's, some
with children, but most are without children
3. Move-up homebuyers
• Typically prefer to purchase newer, larger, and therefore more expen-
sive single-family homes
• Typically, families with children where householders are in their late
30's to 40's
4. Empty-nesters (persons whose children have grown and left home) and
never-nesters (persons who never have children)
• Prefer owning but will consider renting their housing
• Some will move to alternative lower-maintenance housing products
• Generally, couples in their 50's or 60's
5. Younger independent seniors
• Prefer owning but will consider renting their housing
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 172
HOUSING DEMAND ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 164
• Will often move (at least part of the year) to retirement havens in the
Sunbelt and desire to reduce their responsibilities for upkeep and
maintenance
• Generally, in their late 60's or 70's
6. Older seniors
• May need to move out of their single-family home due to physical
and/or health constraints or a desire to reduce their responsibilities
for upkeep and maintenance
• Generally single females (widows) in their mid-70's or older
Demand for housing can come from several sources including household growth, changes in
housing preferences, and replacement need. Household growth necessitates building new
housing unless there is enough desirable vacant housing available to absorb the increase in
households. Demand is also affected by shifting demographic factors such as the aging of the
population, which dictates the type of housing preferred. New housing to meet replacement
need is required, even in the absence of household growth, when existing units no longer meet
the needs of the population and when renovation is not feasible because the structure is physi-
cally or functionally obsolete.
The graphic on the following page provides greater detail of various housing types supported
within each housing life cycle. Information on square footage, average bedrooms/bathrooms,
and lot size is provided on the subsequent graphic.
Housing Demand Overview
The previous sections of this assessment focused on demographic and economic factors driving
demand for housing in St. Louis Park. In this section, we utilize findings from the economic and
demographic analysis to calculate demand for new general occupancy housing units in the St.
Louis Park.
Housing markets are driven by a range of supply and demand factors that vary by location and
submarket. The following bullet points outline several of the key variables driving housing de-
mand.
Demographics
Demographics are major influences that drive housing demand. Household growth and for-
mations are critical (natural growth, immigration, etc.), as well as household types, size, age of
householders, incomes, etc.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 173
HOUSING DEMAND ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 165
Age Student Rental 1st-time Move-up 2nd Empty Nester/Senior
Cohort Housing Housing Home Buyer Home Buyer Home Buyer Downsizer Housing
18-24 18 - 24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60-64
65-69
70-74
75-79
80-84
85+
Source: Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC
DEMOGRAPHICS & HOUSING DEMAND
18-34
65-79
25-39
30-49
40-64
55-74
55+ & 65+Lifestyle RentersStudy session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 174
HOUSING DEMAND ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 166
Economy & Job Growth
The economy and housing market are intertwined; the health of the housing market affects the
broader economy and vice versa. Housing market growth depends on job growth (or the pro-
spect of); jobs generate income growth which results in the formation of more households.
Historically low unemployment rates have driven both existing home purchases and new-home
purchases. Lack of job growth leads to slow or diminishing household growth, which in -turn re-
lates to reduced housing demand. Additionally, low income growth results in fewer move -up
buyers which results in diminished housing turnover across all income brackets.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 175
HOUSING DEMAND ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 167
Consumer Choice/Preferences
A variety of factors contribute to consumer choice and preferences. Many times, a change in
family status is the primary factor for a change in housing type (i.e. growing families, empty -
nest families, etc.). However, housing demand is also generated from the turnover of existing
households who decide to move for a range of reasons. Some households may want to move-
up, downsize, change their tenure status (i.e. owner to renter or vice versa), or simply move to
a new location.
Supply (Existing Housing Stock)
The stock of existing housing plays a crucial component in the demand fo r new housing. There
are a variety of unique household types and styles, not all of which are desirable to today’s con-
sumers. The age of the housing stock is an important component for housing demand, as com-
munities with aging housing stocks have higher demand for remodeling services, replacement
new construction, or new home construction as the current inventory does not provide the
supply that consumers seek.
Pent-up demand may also exist if supply is unavailable as householders postpone a move until
new housing product becomes available.
Housing Finance
Household income is the fundamental measure that dictates what a householder can afford to
pay for housing costs. According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD), the definition of affordability is for a household to pay no more than 30% of its annual
income on housing (including utilities). Families who pay more than 30% of their income for
housing (either rent or mortgage) are considered cost burdened and may have difficulty afford-
ing necessities such as food, clothing, transportation, and medical care.
Due to the rapid increase of mortgage rates this past year to combat inflation (3% to 7%, back
down to 6.5%), affordability has been hit hard and fewer buyers can afford to purchase in 2023.
Mobility
It is important to note that demand is somewhat fluid between St. Louis Park and the surround-
ing areas and will be impacted by development activity in nearby areas, including other com-
munities outside of the community.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 176
HOUSING DEMAND ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 168
Estimated Demand for For-Sale Housing
Table HD-1 presents our demand calculations for general occupancy for-sale housing in St. Louis
Park between 2023 and 2030 while table HD-2 presents demand calculations between 2030
and 2035.
The 65 and older cohort is typically not a target market for ne w single-family homes as many of
these households will remain in their single-family homes or may relocate to owned multifamily
or a senior housing option. For the purpose of this analysis, we only include households under
age 65. Using household income by age of householder data, St. Louis Park is expected to add
1,136 households under 65 between 2023 to 2030 and 757 households from 2030 to 2035. We
estimate, based on land availability, development trends, building permits, and consumer pref-
erences, that 10.0% would choose to own their housing or 114 new general occupancy for-sale
housing units from 2023 to 2030.
Additional demand is also forecast from existing St, Louis Park households through turnover.
There are an estimated 10,776 owner-occupied households in St. Louis Park as of 2023. Based
on mobility data from the Census Bureau, an estimated 80.3% of owner households will turn
over in the next seven years, resulting in 8,653 existing households projected to turn over.
Finally, we estimate 10% of the existing owner households would seek new for-sale housing,
resulting in demand for 865 for-sale units to 2030. Combined demand projected household
growth and existing owner households equals 979 for sale units.
Next, we estimate that 20% of the total demand for new for-sale units in St. Louis Park will
come from people currently living outside of the City. Adding demand from outside the City to
the existing demand potential, results in a total estimated demand for 1,152 for-sale housing
units to 2030.
Based on land availability, building trends, and demographic shifts (increasing older adult popu-
lation), we estimate that 12% of the for-sale owners will prefer traditional single-family product
types while the remaining 88% will prefer a maintenance-free multi-family product (i.e. twin
homes, townhomes, or condominiums). This leaves demand for 138 single-family lots and
1,013 multifamily lots/units by 2030.
Next platted lots that are under construction or approved are subtracted from the total. As
there are currently no platted lots demand remains for 138 single-family lots and 1,013
multifamily lots/units to 2030. Demand in 2035 is projected to exist for 94 single-family lots
and 690 multifamily lots/units by 2035. Strong demand is not likely achievable.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 177
HOUSING DEMAND ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 169
Projected household (under age 65) growth in the City 2023 to 2030¹
(times) Estimated % propensity to own 2 x
(equals) Number of potential owner households from HH growth =
Number of owner households (under age 65) in the City, 2023 3 =
(times) Estimated % of owner turnover (age 64 and younger, 2023 to 2030)x
(equals) Total existing households projected to turnover between 2023 and 2030 =
(times) Estimated % desiring new owner housing x
(equals) Demand from existing households =
Total Demand From Household Growth and Existing Households, 2023 to 2030 =
(times) Ownership demand generated from outside the City of St. Louis Park +
(equals) Total demand potential for ownership housing in the City =
(times) Percent desiring for-sale single family (SF) vs. multifamily (MF)4 x
(equals) Total demand potential for new single-family & multifamily for-sale housing
(minus) Units under construction or approved platted lots (undeveloped and developled lots)
(equals) Total demand potential for new for-sale housing in St. Louis Park =
1 Estimated household growth based on projections as adjusted by Maxfield Research and Consulting LLC .
3 Based on household turnover and mobility data (2021 American Community Survey, Five Year Estimates).
4 Based on on turnover from 2020 American Community Survey for households moving over a Five-year period.
5 Based on preference for housing type and land availability.
7 Multifamily demand includes demand for townhomes, twinhomes, and condominium units.
979
2 Pct. of owner households under the age of 65 adjusted by Maxfield Research based on land availability, development
trends, building permits, and consumer preferences.
6 Approved platted lot data does not account for the scattered lot supply which includes individual lots and lots in older
non-marketing subdivisions.
1,152
138
88%
1,013
Multi-
family5
Single
Family
138 1,013
0 0
12%
Source: Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC.
1,136
TABLE HD-1
GENERAL OCCUPANCY FOR-SALE HOUSING DEMAND
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
2023 to 2030
Demand From Projected Household Growth
10.0%
114
10,776
80.3%
20%
Demand from Existing Owner Households
8,653
10.0%
865
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 178
HOUSING DEMAND ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 170
Projected household (under age 65) growth in the City 2030 to 2035¹
(times) Estimated % propensity to own 2 x
(equals) Number of potential owner households from HH growth =
Number of owner households (under age 65) in the City, 2030 3 =
(times) Estimated % of owner turnover (age 64 and younger, 2030 to 2035)4 x
(equals) Total existing households projected to turnover between 2030 and 2035 =
(times) Estimated % desiring new owner housing x
(equals) Demand from existing households =
Total Demand From Household Growth and Existing Households, 2030 to 2035 =
(times) Ownership demand generated from outside the City of St. Louis Park +
(equals) Total demand potential for ownership housing in the City =
(times) Percent desiring for-sale single family (SF) vs. multifamily (MF)5 x
(equals) Total demand potential for new single-family & multifamily for-sale housing
(minus) Units under construction or approved platted lots (undeveloped and developled lots)6
(equals) Total demand potential for new for-sale housing in St. Louis Park =
1 Estimated household growth based on projections as adjusted by Maxfield Research and Consulting LLC .
3 Based on household turnover and mobility data (2021 American Community Survey, Five Year Estimates).
4 Based on on turnover from 2020 American Community Survey for households moving over a Five-year period.
5 Based on preference for housing type and land availability.
7 Multifamily demand includes demand for townhomes, twinhomes, and condominium units.
Source: Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC.
2 Pct. of owner households under the age of 65 adjusted by Maxfield Research based on land availability, development
trends, building permits, and consumer preferences.
6 Approved platted lot data does not account for the scattered lot supply which includes individual lots and lots in older
non-marketing subdivisions.
757
TABLE HD-2
GENERAL OCCUPANCY FOR-SALE HOUSING DEMAND
CITY OF St. LOUIS PARK
2030 to 2035
Demand From Projected Household Growth
Single
Family
Multi-
family7
10.0%
76
Demand from Existing Owner Households
10,300
57.3%
5,905
10.0%
590
666
20%
784
94 690
12%88%
94 690
0 0
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 179
HOUSING DEMAND ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 171
Estimated Demand for General-Occupancy Rental Housing
Table HD-3 presents our calculation of general-occupancy rental housing demand in St. Louis
Park between 2023 and 2030 while Table HD-4 presents demand calculations between 2030
and 2035. The analysis identifies potential demand for rental housing that is generated from
new households and turnover households. A portion of the demand will be drawn from exist-
ing households in St. Louis Park that want to upgrade their housing situations.
Although the 65 and older cohort is not typically a primary target market for new general occu-
pancy rental housing, the rising cost of owned housing and senior options has encouraged more
seniors to move into the general occupancy market before considering age -restricted options.
As such, we include all age groups in the demand calculation. Based on land availability, devel-
opment trends, building permits, and consumer preferences, we estimate a 90% propensity to
rent leaving projected demand for 1,930 rental units between 2023 and 2030.
Demand will also occur from existing renter households through turnover. As of 2023, there
are an estimated 8,796 renter households in St. Louis Park. Based on mobility data from the
Census Bureau, an estimated 100.0% of renter households will turn over resulting in existing
households projected to turn over. Finally, we estimate 15% of the existing renter households
will seek new rental housing, resulting in demand for 1,319 rental units to 2030. Combined de-
mand projected household growth and existing renter households equals 3,249 units.
Next, we estimate that 25% of the total demand for new rental units in St. Louis Park will come
from people currently living outside of the Market Area. Adding demand from outside the City
to the existing demand potential, results in a total estimated demand for 4,332 rental housing
units to 2030.
Based on a review of rental household incomes and sizes and monthly rents at existing projects,
we estimate that approximately 15% of the total demand will be for subsidized housing (50% or
less AMI), 25% will be for affordable housing (51% to 80% AMI) and 60% will be for market rate
housing (80% AMI or above and non-income restricted).
Next, we subtract housing developments under construction or pending, since these projects
will satisfy some of the calculated demand for general occupancy rental housing. There are cur-
rently 1,099 market rate units, 474 affordable units, and 45 deep subsidy units either under
construction or recently approved. These units are subtracted at 95% occupancy.
After subtracting pending units either under construction or recently approved results in de-
mand for 647 subsidized units, 607 affordable units and 1,555 market rate units between
2023 and 2030. Demand is projected to call for to 607 subsidized units, 633 affordable units
and 1,555 market rate units between 2030 and 2035.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 180
HOUSING DEMAND ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 172
Demand From Household Growth
Projected household growth in St. Louis Park 2023 to 2030¹
(times) Proportion Estimated to Be Renting Their Housing 2 x
(equals) Projected Demand for Rental Housing Units =
Demand From Existing Renter Households
Number of renter households in St. Louis Park, 2023 3 =
(times) Estimated % of renter turnover between 2023 & 2030 4 x
(equals) Existing Renter Households Projected to Turnover, 2023 to 2030 =
(times) Estimated % Desiring New Rental Housing 5 x
(equals) Demand From Existing Households =
Total Demand From Household Growth and Existing Households
(plus) Rental demand from outside St. Louis Park +
(equals) Total Demand for Rental Housing in St. Louis Park =
Deep
Subsidy
Shallow
Subsidy
Market
Rate
(times) Percent of rental demand by product type 6 x 15.0%25.0%60.0%
(equals) Total demand for new general occupancy rental housing units =650 1,083 2,599
(minus) Units under construction or approved 7 -43 450 1,044
(equals) Excess demand for new general occupancy rental housing =607 633 1,555
1 Projected household growth
3 Renter households age 64 and younger plus 20% of renter households age 65 and older.
Source: Maxfield Research & Consuting, LLC.
6 Based on the combination of current rental product and household incomes of area renters (non-senior households).
7 Pending competitive units at 95% occupancy.
90.0%
1,930
8,796
100.0%
8,796
15.0%
1,319
3,249
25.0%
4,332
2 Pct. of renter households under the age of 65 adjusted by Maxfield Research based on land availability, development
trends, building permits, and consumer preferences.
5 Source - The Upscale Apartment Market: Trends and Prospects. Prepared by Jack Goodman of Hartrey Advisors for the
National Multi Housing Council.
4 Based on on turnover from 2021 American Community Survey for households moving overa Seven-year period.
TABLE HD-3
DEMAND FOR GENERAL OCCUPANCY RENTAL HOUSING
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
2023 to 2030
2,144
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 181
HOUSING DEMAND ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 173
Demand From Household Growth
Projected household growth in the St. Louis Park 2030 to 2035¹
(times) Proportion Estimated to Be Renting Their Housing 2 x
(equals) Projected Demand for Rental Housing Units =
Demand From Existing Renter Households
Number of renter households in the St. Louis Park, 2030 3 =
(times) Estimated % of renter turnover between 2030 & 2035 4 x
(equals) Existing Renter Households Projected to Turnover, 2030 to 2035 =
(times) Estimated % Desiring New Rental Housing 5 x
(equals) Demand From Existing Households =
Total Demand From Household Growth and Existing Households
(plus) Rental demand from outside the St. Louis Park +
(equals) Total Demand for Rental Housing in St. Louis Park =
Deep
Subsidy
Shallow
Subsidy
Market
Rate
(times) Percent of rental demand by product type 6 x 15.0%25.0%60.0%
(equals) Total demand for new general occupancy rental housing units =430 717 1,721
(minus) Units under construction or approved 7 -0 0 0
(equals) Excess demand for new general occupancy rental housing =430 717 1,721
1 Projected household growth
3 Renter households age 64 and younger plus 20% of renter households age 65 and older.
Source: Maxfield Research & Consuting, LLC.
7 Pending competitive units at 95% occupancy.
2,151
25.0%
2,868
2 Pct. of renter households under the age of 65 adjusted by Maxfield Research based on land availability, development
trends, building permits, and consumer preferences.
4 Based on on turnover from 2021 American Community Survey for households moving overa Five-year period.
5 Source - The Upscale Apartment Market: Trends and Prospects. Prepared by Jack Goodman of Hartrey Advisors for the
National Multi Housing Council.
6 Based on the combination of current rental product and household incomes of area renters (non-senior households).
1,251
TABLE HD-4
DEMAND FOR GENERAL OCCUPANCY RENTAL HOUSING
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
2030 to 2035
1,000
90.0%
900
11,000
75.8%
8,339
15.0%
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 182
HOUSING DEMAND ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 174
Demand for Active Adult (55+) Housing
Table HD-5 presents our demand calculations for market rate active adult/few services housing
in St. Louis Park for 2023 and 2030.
In order to determine demand for active adult housing, the potential market is reduced to
those households that are both age and income qualified. The age-qualified market is defined
as older adults 55 and older, although most of these properties will primarily attract households
age 65 and older.
We calculate that the minimum income needed to afford monthly rents is $40,000 or more plus
homeowner households with incomes between $30,000 and $39,999 who would be able to
supplement their incomes with the proceeds from a home sale. We estimate the nu mber of
age/income-qualified senior households in St. Louis Park in 2023 to be 7,620 households.
Adjusting to include appropriate long-term capture rates for each age cohort (1.5% of house-
holds age 55 to 64, 7.5% of households age 65 to 74, and 15.0% of households age 75 and over)
results in a market rate demand potential for 515 active adult (55+) units in 2023.
Some additional demand will come from outside St. Louis Park. We estimate that 25% of the
demand will be generated by seniors currently residing outside the City. This demand will con-
sist primarily of parents of adult children living in St. Louis Park, individuals who live just outside
St. Louis Park and have an orientation to the area, as well as former residents who desire to re-
turn. Demand increases to 686 units after accounting for outside demand.
Next, demand is apportioned between ownership and rental housing. Based on the age distri-
bution, homeownership rates and current product available in St. Louis Park, we estimate that
40% of St. Louis Park's demand will be for adult ownership housing (275 units) and 60% will be
for rental housing (412 units).
Next, we subtract existing and pending competitive market rate units (minus a vacancy factor
of 5% to allow for sufficient consumer choice and turnover) from the owner and rental demand.
Subtracting the existing competitive market rate units results in total demand potential for 174
adult owner-occupied units and 217 active adult rental units.
Adjusting for inflation, we have estimated that households with incomes of $47,500 or more
and homeowners with incomes of $37,500 to $47,499 would income qualify for market rate in-
dependent senior housing in 2030. Considering the growth in the older adult base and the in-
come distribution of the older adult population in 2030, the methodology estimates demand
for 231 adult owner-occupied units and 304 active adult rental units in St. Louis Park . The de-
mand is cumulative, meaning any additional units developed over the period would reduce the
demand in 2030.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 183
HOUSING DEMAND ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 175
Demand for Subsidized/Affordable Active Adult Housing
Table HD-6 presents our demand calculations for subsidized/affordable active adult (55+ or
62+) housing in St. Louis Park in 2023 and 2030.
In order to arrive at the potential age and income qualified base for low income and affordable
housing, we include all older adult (55+) households with incomes less than $40,000. We ex-
clude 55+ homeowner households with incomes between $30,000 and $39,999, as these
households are most likely to have additional equity that could be converted to monthly in-
come following the sales of their single-family homes and they would no longer qualify for in-
come-restricted housing. After applying homeownership rates of 72.5% for those 55 to 64,
78.7% for those 65 to 74, and 72.0% for those 75 and older demand totals 21,807 units.
55-64 65-74 75+55-64 65-74 75+
# of Households w/ Incomes of >40,000 1 3,254 2,273 1,660 3,459 2,671 2,232
# of Households w/ Incomes of $30,000 to $39,999 1 +105 138 345 +64 112 267
(times ) Homeownership Rate x 72.5%78.7%72.0%x 72.5%78.7%72.0%
(equals) Total Potential Market Base =3,330 2,382 1,908 =3,505 2,759 2,424
(times) Potential Capture Rate x 1.5%7.5%15.0%x 1.5%7.5%15.0%
(equals) Demand Potential =50 179 286 =53 207 364
Potential Demand from St. Louis Park Residents =515 =623
(plus) Demand from Outside St. Louis Park (25%)2 +172 +208
(equals) Total Demand Potential =686 =831
Owner Renter Owner Renter
(times) % by Product Type x 40%x 60%x 40%x 60%
(equals) Demand Potential by Product Type =275 =412 =332 =499
(minus) Existing and Pending MR Active Adult Units 3 -101 -195 -101 -195
(times) Percent capturable in St. Louis Park =174 =217 =231 =304
Source: Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC.
TABLE HD-5
MARKET RATE ACTIVE ADULT/FEW SERVICES HOUSING DEMAND
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
2023 & 2030
3 Existing and pending units are deducted at market equilibrium (95% occupancy).
2023 2030
Age of Householder Age of Householder
2 We estimate that roughly 25% of demand will come from outside of the Study Area.
1 2030 calculations define income-qualified households as all households with incomes greater than $47,500 and
homeowner households with incomes between $37,500 and $47,499.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 184
HOUSING DEMAND ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 176
Next the estimated percentage of those needing or desiring affordable or subsidized housing
(20%) is multiplied by the remaining units. This decreases demand to 361 units. After this addi-
tional demand is added for those coming from outside . Maxfield estimates an additional 35%
of demand will be generated by seniors currently residing outside the City increasing demand
to 556 units.
Next, demand is apportioned between deep subsidy and shallow subsidy affordable housing.
We estimate that 60% of St. Louis Park’s demand will be for shallow subsidy active adult hous-
ing (334 units) and 40% will be for deep subsidy active adult housing (222 units).
Next we subtract existing and pending competitive units from the overall demand. There are
52 existing/pending shallow subsidy units and 188 existing/pending deep subsidy units in the
Market Area - minus a vacancy factor of 3% to allow for sufficient consumer choice and turno-
ver). After subtracting these units, demand remains for 40 deep subsidy and 284 shallow sub-
sidy age-restricted units in 2023.
Adjusting for inflation, we estimate that households with incomes up to $47,500 would be can-
didates for financially assisted independent housing in 2023. We reduce the potential market
55-64 65-74 75+55-64 65-74 75+
# of Households w/ Incomes of <$40,000 1 546 542 1,082 371 466 1,197
(minus) Owner HHs w/Incomes of $30,000 to $39,999 -105 138 248 -65 106 253
(times ) Homeownership Rate x 72.5%78.7%72.0%x 72.5%78.7%72.0%
(equals) Total Potential Market Base by Age =470 433 903 =324 383 1,015
(equals) Total Potential Market Base ==
(times) % of Seniors Needing/Desiring Affordable/Sub. Hsg x 20%x 20%
(equals) Potential Demand from St. Louis Park Residents =361 344
+195 +185
=556 =530
Product (Subsidy) Type
Deep-
Subsidy
Shallow-
Subsidy
Deep-
Subsidy
Shallow-
Subsidy
(times) % by Product Type x 40%x 60%x 40%x 60%
(equals) Demand Potential by Product Type =222 =334 =212 =318
(minus) Existing and Pending Affordable/Subsidized Units 2 -182 -50 -182 -50
(equals) Excess affordable/subsidized demand in St. Louis Park =40 284 =30 268
Source: Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC.
2023
² Existing and pending units are deducted at market equilibrium, or 97% occupancy.
Age of Householder Age of Householder
(plus) Demand from Outside St. Louis Park (35%)
(equals) Total Demand Potential
1 2030 calculations define income-qualified households as all households less than $47,500. Homeowner households with
incomes between $37,500 and $46,999 are excluded from the market potential for financially assisted housing.
1,807 1,721
TABLE HD-6
DEEP SUBSIDY/SHALLOW SUBSIDY ACTIVE ADULT HOUSING DEMAND
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
2023 & 2030
2030
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 185
HOUSING DEMAND ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 177
by homeowner households earning between $37,500 and $46,999 that would exceed income-
restrictions once equity from their home sales is converted to monthly income.
Following the same methodology, we project demand in St. Louis Park for 30 deep subsidy units
and 268 affordable units in 2030.
Demand for Independent Living Housing
Table HD-7 presents our demand calculations for independent living housing in St. Louis Park in
2023 and 2030.
The potential age- and income-qualified base for independent living senior housing includes all
senior (65+) households with incomes of $40,000 or more as well as homeowner households
with incomes between $30,000 and $39,999 who would qualify with the proceeds from the
sales of their homes. The proportion of income-qualified homeowners is based on the esti-
mated 2023 homeownership rates of St. Louis Park seniors, which are then adjusted over time
based on long-term homeownership trends. The number of age, income, and asset-qualified
households in St. Louis Park is estimated to be 4,319 households in 2023.
Demand for independent living housing is need-driven, which reduces the qualified market to
only the portion of seniors who need some assistance. Adjusting to include appropriate cap-
ture rates for each age cohort (1.5% of households age 65 to 74 and 14.5% of households age
75 and older) results in a local demand potential for 313 independent living units in 2023.
We estimate that seniors currently residing outside of St. Louis Park will generate 25% of the
demand. Together, the demand from St. Louis Park seniors and demand from seniors who are
willing to locate to St. Louis Park totals 417 independent living units in 2023. Next, we subtract
existing/pending independent living units in St. Louis Park leaving demand for 7 units.
Adjusting for inflation, we estimate that households with incomes of $47,500 or more and sen-
ior homeowners with incomes between $37,500 and $47,499 would qualify for independent
living housing in 2030. Following the same methodology, leaves demand at 129 units in 2030.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 186
HOUSING DEMAND ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 178
Demand for Assisted Living Housing
Table HD-8 presents our demand calculations for assisted living senior housing in St. Louis Park
in 2023 and 2030. This analysis focuses on the potential private pay/market rate demand for
assisted living units.
The availability of more intensive support services such as meals, housekeeping and personal
care at assisted living facilities usually attracts older, frailer seniors. According to the 2009
Overview of Assisted Living (which is a collaborative research project by the American Associa-
tion of Homes and Services for the Aging, the American Seniors Housing Association, National
Center for Assisted Living, and National Investment Center for the Seniors Housing and Care In-
dustry), the average age of residents in freestanding assisted living facilities was 87 years in
2018. Hence, the age-qualified market for assisted living is defined as seniors ages 75 and over,
as we estimate that of the half of demand from seniors under age 87, almost all would be over
age 75. In 2023, there are an estimated 4,276 seniors ages 75 and over in the Market Area.
The number is projected to increase to 5,225 people by 2030.
Demand for assisted living housing is need-driven, which reduces the qualified market to only
the portion of seniors who need assistance. According to a study completed by the CDC and
# of Householders w/ Incomes of $40,000+ in 2023 / $47,500K in 2030
(plus) HHs w/ Incomes of $30,000 to $39,999 in '23 & $37,500 to $47,499 in '30
(times) Homeownership Rate x x
(equals) Potential Market ==
(equals) Total Potential Market Base ==
(times) Potential Capture Rate of Independent Living Demand 1 x x
(equals) Potential Demand =+=+
Total Local Demand Potential ==
(plus) Demand from Outside the Study Area (25%)++
(equals) Total Demand Potential ==
(minus) Existing & Pending Competitive Units 2 --
(equals) # of Units Supportable in St. Louis Park ==
Source: Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC.
TABLE HD-7
INDEPENDENT LIVING DEMAND
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
2023 & 2030
2,273 1,660 2,671 2,232
2023 2030
Age of
Householder
Age of
Householder
65-74 75+65-74 75+
7 129
1 The potential capture rate is derived from data from the Summary Health Statistics for the U.S. Population: National Health
Interview Survey, 2007 by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The capture rate used is the percentage of seniors
needing assistance with IADLs, but not ADLs (seniors needing assistance with ADLs typcially need assistance with multiple IADLs and
are primary candidates for service-intensive assisted living.).
417 539
410 410
175 345 142 370
135
138 248 112 266
277 42 362
313 404
104
78.7%72.0%78.7%72.0%
1.5%14.5%1.5%14.5%
2,411 1,908 2,783 2,498
2 Competitive existing and pending units at 95% occupancy (market equilibrium).
36
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 187
HOUSING DEMAND ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 179
National Center for Health Statistics (Health, United States, 20 18 Health and Aging Chartbook),
25.5% of 75-to-79-year-olds, 33.6% of 80-to-84-year-olds and 51.6% of 85+ year olds are unable
to perform or need help with ADLs. Applying these percentages to the senior population yields
a potential assisted living market of an estimated 1,623 seniors in the Market Area in 2023 and
1,938 seniors in 2030.
Due to the supportive nature of assisted living housing, most daily essentials are included in
monthly rental fees which allow seniors to spend a higher proportion of their incomes on hous-
Percent Percent
Needing Needing
Age group People Assistance¹People Assistance¹
75 - 79 1,494 25.5%1,925 25.5%
80 - 84 1,082 33.6%1,430 33.6%
85+1,700 51.6%1,870 51.6%
Total 4,276 5,225
(times) Percent Income-Qualified 2 x x
Total potential market
(times) Percent living alone (2021 ACS 5- Year Estimates)x x
(equals) Age/income-qualified singles needing assistance ==
(plus) Proportion of demand from couples (12%)³++
(equals) Total age/income-qualified market needing assistance ==
(times) Potential penetration rate4 x x
(equals) Potential demand from St. Louis Park residents ==
(plus) Proportion from outside St. Louis Park (25%)++
(equals) Total potential assisted living demand ==
(minus) Existing market rate assisted living units 5 --
(equals) Excess market rate assisted living demand in St Louis Park ==
Source: Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC.
4 We estimate that 60% of the qualified market needing assistance with ADLs could either remain in their homes or reside at
less advanced senior housing with the assistance of a family member or home health care, or would need greater care
provided in a skilled care facility.
5 Existing and pending units at 93% occupancy. We exclude 15.0% of units to account for seniors utilizing public subsidy.
1 The percentage of seniors unable to perform or having difficulting with ADLs, based on the publication Health, United
States, 2018 Health and Aging Chartbook, conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National
Center for Health Statistics.
2 Includes households with incomes of $40,000 or more ($47,500 in 2030) plus 40% of the estimated owner households
with incomes below $40,000 ($47,500 in 2030) who will spend down assets, including home-equity, in order to live in
assisted living housing).
3 The 2009 Overview of Assisted Living (a collaborative project of AAHSA, ASHA, ALFA, NCAL & NIC) found that 12% of
assisted living residents are couples.
157 226
119 119
69 86
276 345
40.0%40.0%
207 258
60 75
518 646
Number Number
Needing Needing
1,623 1,938
Assistance¹Assistance¹
382 492
364 481
39.2%
TABLE HD-8
MARKET RATE ASSISTED LIVING DEMAND
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
2023 & 2030
2023 2030
39.2%
458 571
878 966
1,167 1,457
71.9%75.1%
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 188
HOUSING DEMAND ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 180
ing with basic services. Therefore, the second step in determining the potenti al demand for as-
sisted living housing in the PMA is to identify the income -qualified market based on a senior’s
ability to pay the monthly rent. We consider seniors in households with incomes of 40,000 or
greater to be income-qualified for assisted living senior housing in the PMA. Households with
incomes of $40,000 could afford monthly assisted living fees of approximately $2,667 by allo-
cating a high proportion of their income toward the fees (roughly 80%).
According to the 2009 Overview of Assisted Living, the average arrival income of assisted living
residents in 2008 was $27,260, while the average annual assisted living fee was $37,281
($3,107/month). This data highlights that seniors are spending down assets to live in assisted
living and avoid institutional care. Thus, in addition to households with incomes of $40,000 or
greater, there is a substantial base of senior households with lower incomes who would in-
come-qualify based on assets – their homes, in particular.
We estimate the income-qualified percentage to be all seniors in households with incomes at or
above $40,000 plus 40% of the estimated seniors in owner households with incomes below
$40,000 (who will spend down assets, including home-equity, in order to live in assisted living
housing). This results in a total potential market of 1,167 seniors from the Market Area in 2023.
Because most assisted living residents are single (88% according to the 2009 Overview of
Assisted Living), our demand methodology multiplies the total potential market by the
percentage of seniors age 65+ in the PMA living alone, or 39.2%, based on 2021 American
Community Survey 5-year estimates data. This results in a total base of 458 age/income-
qualified singles in 2023.
The 2009 Overview of Assisted Living found that 12% of residents in assisted living were cou-
ples. Including couples results in a total of 518 age/income-qualified seniors needing assistance
in the Market Area in 2023.
We estimate that 60% of the qualified market needing significant assistance with ADLs could
either remain in their homes or less service-intensive senior housing with the assistance of a
family member or home health care or would need greater care provided in a skilled care facil-
ity. The remaining 40% could be served by assisted living housing. Applying this market pene-
tration rate of 40% results in demand for 207 assisted living units in 2023.
We estimate that a portion of demand for assisted living units in the PMA (25%) will come from
outside the area. This secondary demand will include seniors currently living just outside the
area, former residents, and parents of adult children who desire supportive housing near their
adult children. Applying this figure increases the total potential demand to 276 assisted living
units in 2023.
Next, existing/pending assisted living units at a 93% occupancy rate are subtracted from overall
demand. An additional 15% of units are subtracted from existing and pending assisted living
units to account for units occupied by Elderly Waiver residents. After subtracting 15% for EW
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 189
HOUSING DEMAND ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 181
units and the 93% occupancy rate, a total of 119 units are deducted as competitive giving a to-
tal excess demand of 157 assisted living units in 2023 and increasing to 226 units in 2030.
Most assisted living developments require residents to have lived in their facility for a certain
amount of time before they can use a waiver, and most limit the number of waivers accepted
within the community to no more than 15% to 20%. Some small facilities may accept higher
amounts of residents on waivers and some new facilities will not accept waivers from first -time
residents.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 190
HOUSING DEMAND ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 182
Demand for Memory Care Housing
Table HD-9 presents our demand calculations for market rate memory care senior housing in St.
Louis Park in 2023 and 2030.
Demand is calculated by starting with the estimated Market Area senior (age 65+) population in
2023 and multiplying by the incidence rate of Alzheimer’s/dementia among this population’s
age cohorts. According to the Alzheimer’s Association (Alzheimer’s Disease Facts and Figures,
2021), 5.3% of seniors ages 65 to 74 years, 17.0% of seniors ages 75 to 84, and 32.0% of seniors
ages 85+ are afflicted with Alzheimer’s Disease. This yields a potential market of 1,216 seniors
in the Primary Market Area in 2023.
According to data from the National Institute of Aging, about 20% of all individuals with
memory care impairments comprise the market for memory care housing units. This figure
considers that seniors in the early stages of dementia will be able to live independently with the
care of a spouse or other family member, while those in the later stages of dementia will re-
quire intensive medical care that would only be available in skilled care facilities. Applying this
figure to the estimated population with memory impairments yields a potential market of 243
seniors in St. Louis Park.
Because of the staff-intensive nature of dementia care, typical monthly fees for this type of
housing start at about $4,000 or more. A portion of the seniors in the Market Area will have
high incomes that they can use to cover the costs of private pay memory care housing
($60,000+), but many other seniors (or family member of seniors) will be willing to spend down
assets and/or would receive financial assistance to afford memory care housing. Based on our
review of senior household incomes in the Market Area, homeownership rates, and home sale
data, we estimate that 44.4% of all seniors in the Market Area have incomes and/or assets to
sufficiently cover the costs for memory care housing in 2023. This figure accounts for married
couple households where one spouse may have memory care needs and allows for a sufficient
income for the other spouse to live independently. Multiplying the potential market by 59.1%
results in a total of 144 income-qualified seniors with Alzheimer’s or dementia in the Market
Area in 2023. By 2030, the proportion of income-qualified seniors is project to increase to
67.4%.
We estimate that 25% of the overall demand for memory care housing would come from out-
side of St. Louis Park. As a result demand increases by 48 units in 2023 to 192 units.
We reduce the demand potential by accounting for the existing/pending memory care product
in St. Louis Park There are 57 units; however, we reduce the competitive units to include
memory care units at a 7% vacancy rate and a portion of units occupied by residents utilizing
Elderly Waiver. Subtracting these competitive units results in demand for 150 units as of 2023.
Potential demand for market rate memory care units in St. Louis Park is expected to increase to
214 units by 2030.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 191
HOUSING DEMAND ANALYSIS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 183
65 to 74 Population
(times) Dementia Incidence Rate1 x x
(equals) Estimated Senior Pop. with Dementia ==
75 to 84 Population
(times) Dementia Incidence Rate1 x x
(equals) Estimated Senior Pop. with Dementia ==
85+ Population
(times) Dementia Incidence Rate1 x x
(equals) Estimated Senior Pop. with Dementia ==
(equals) Total Population with Dementia
(times) Percent Needing Specialized Memory Care Assistance x
(equals) Total Need for Dementia Care ==
(times) Percent Income/Asset-Qualified 2 x x
(equals) Total Income-Qualified Market Base in the Study Area ==
(plus) Demand from Outside the Study Area (25%)++
Total Demand for Memory Care Units
(minus) Existing and Pending Memory Care Units 3 --
(equals) Number of Units Supportable in St. Louis Park ==
Source: Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC.
2 Includes seniors with incomes at $65,000 or above ($77,000 in 2030) plus 25% of homeowners with incomes below this
threshold (who will spend down assets, including home-equity, in order to live in memory care housing.
192
214150
4242
2030
4,840
5.3%
257
32.0%
598
3,355
17.0%
570
1,870
64
TABLE HD-9
MEMORY CARE DEMAND
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
2023 & 2030
67.4%
1,425
20.0%
285
20.0%
243
144
48
192
1,216
59.1%
17.0%
2023
4,429
5.3%
235
2,575
438
1,700
32.0%
256
¹ Alzheimer's Association: Alzheimer's Disease Facts & Figures (2021)
3 Existing and pending units at 93% occupancy. We exclude 20% of units to account for seniors utilizing public subsidy.
544
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 192
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 184
Introduction/Overall Housing Recommendations
This section summarizes demand calculated for specific housing products in the City of St. Louis
Park and recommends development concepts to meet the housing needs forecast for St. Louis
Park. All recommendations are based on findings of the Comprehensive Housing Market Analy-
sis. Please note: Demand subtracts housing projects under construction or projects with ap-
provals (see Table P-1). The following table and charts illustrate calculated demand by product
type.
Based on the finding of our analysis and demand calculations, Table CR-2 provides a summary
of the recommended development concepts by product type for the City of St. Louis Park . It is
important to note that these proposed concepts are intended to function as a development
guide to meet the housing needs of existing and future households most effectively in St. Louis
Park. The recommended development types do not directly coincide with total demand as il-
lustrated in Table CR-1, mainly due to the lack of developable land in St. Louis Park.
For-Sale Units 1,152 For-Sale Units 784
Detached Single-Family 138 Detached Single-Family 94
Other Owned General Occupancy Units*1,013 Other Owned General Occupancy Units*690
General Occupancy Rental Units 2,795 General Occupancy Rental Units 2,868
Market Rate 1,555 Market Rate 1,721
Shallow-Subsidy^633 Shallow-Subsidy^717
Deep-Subsidy^607 Deep-Subsidy^430
Total General Occupancy Housing Units 3,947 Total General Occupancy Housing Units 3,651
2023 2030
Market Rate Active Adult 390 535
Owner-Occupied 174 231
Renter-Occupied 217 304
Affordable Active Adult 324 298
Deep-Subsidy^40 30
Shallow-Subsidy^284 268
Service-Enhanced Senior Housing 352 618
Independent Living w/ Services 45 179
Assisted Living 157 226
Memory Care 150 214
Total Senior Housing Units 1,066 1,451
Source: Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC.
*Attached single-family (i.e.
townhomes, twin homes), villas,
condominiums, etc.
Senior Housing Demand 2023 and 2030
*Attached single-family (i.e. townhomes, twin
homes), villas, condominiums, etc.
^Shallow-subsidy = affordable to households at 30% to 60% AMI
^Deep-subsidy = affordable to households at 30% AMI or less
TABLE CR-1
HOUSING DEMAND SUMMARY
General Occupancy Housing Demand 2023 to 2030
2023-2030/35
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
General Occupancy Housing Demand 2030 to 2035
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 193
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 185
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 194
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 186
Purchase Price/Development
Monthly Rent Range¹Timing
Owner-Occupied Homes
Single Family 2
Move-up $450,000 - $699,999 40 -50 Ongoing
Executive $700,000+60 -70 Ongoing
Total 100 -120
Townhomes/Twinhomes/Villas 2
Attached Townhomes $400,000 - $600,000 100 -200 2024+
Twinhomes / Detached Townhomes/Villas $600,000+100 -200 2024+
Total 200 -400
Condominums
Entry-level <$350,000 90 -100 2024+
Move-up $350,000 - $500,000 140 -150 2025+
Executive $500,000+110 -120 2025+
Total 340 -370
Total MF Style For-Sale 540 -770
Total Owner-Occupied 640 -890
General Occupancy Rental Housing
Market Rate Rental Housing
Apartment-style (moderate)$975/Eff - $2,200/3BR 350 -400 2026+
Apartment-style (luxury)$1,100/Eff - $3,200/3BR 500 -600 2026+
Rental Townhomes $2,000/2BR - $3,000/3BR 60 -80 2024+
Total 910 -1,080
Affordable Rental Housing
Apartment-style Moderate Income3 200 -220 2024+
Townhomes Moderate Income3 70 -80 2024+
Subsidized 30% of Income4 250 -350 2024+
Total 520 -650
Total Renter-Occupied 1,430 -1,730
Senior Housing (i.e. Age Restricted)
Active Adult Ownership / Co-op4 $200,000+120 -150 2024+
Active Adult Market Rate Rental5 $1,800/1BR - $2,500/2BR 80 -100 2027+
Active Adult Affordable Rental5 Moderate Income3 70 -80 2024+
Independent Living $2,400+ per month 90 -100 2027+
Assisted Living $3,000/EFF - $5,000/2BR 150 -200 2026+
Memory Care $5,000/EFF - $6,000/2BR 80 -100 2026+
Subsidized Senior 30% of Income4 70 -90 2026+
Total 660 -820
Total - All Units 2,730 -3,440
TABLE CR-2
RECOMMENDED HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
ST. LOUIS PARK
2023 to 2030
No. of
Units
Source: Maxfield Research and Consulting, LLC.
¹ Pricing in 2023 dollars. Pricing can be adjusted to account for inflation.
2 Replacement need, infill, and redevelopment. Development of single-family homes and townhomes/twinhomes will hinge on land availability. Due to
St. Louis Park's location, there is pent-up demand that exceeds replacement need.
3 Affordablity subject to income guidelines per Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (MHFA). See Table HA-1 for Hennepin County Income limits.
4 Subsized housing will be difficult to develop financially
5 Alternative development concept is to combine active adult affordable and market rate active adult into mixed-income senior community
Note - Recommended development does not coincide with total demand. St. Louis Park may not be able to accommodate all recommended housing
types based on land availability and development constraints.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 195
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 187
Recommended Housing Product Types
For-Sale Housing
Single-Family Housing
Table HD-1 identified demand for about 132 single-family units in the St. Louis Park through
2030. Another 94 single family units are demanded from 2030 to 2035. However, given the
lack of vacant land all single-family housing will be through teardowns, lot splits, or other repur-
posing of land uses to accommodate new construction. Because of the lack of land, most new
for-sale housing has been reallocated to multifamily concepts that have a greater propensity to
develop.
Due to the age and price of the existing housing stock in St. Louis Park , most of the existing
older housing stock appeals to entry-level buyers. Entry-level homes, which we generally clas-
sify as homes priced under $350,000 will be mainly satisfied by existing single-family homes as
residents of existing homes move into newer housing products built in St. Louis Park, such as
move-up single-family homes, rental housing, and senior housing. A move-up buyer or step-up
buyer is typically one who is selling one house and purchasing another one, usually a larger and
more expensive home. Usually the move is desired because of a lifestyle change, such as a new
job or a growing family. Based on our interviews with real estate professionals, move -up
homes are generally priced around $450,000; however it will be difficult to construct new
homes for much less than $450,000 given today’s development costs and high cost of land ac-
quisition. Executive-level homes are loosely defined as those homes priced above $750,000.
Most of these homes would be teardowns with base price points of at least $750,000 or more.
The new construction market has been rather quiet in St. Louis Park over the past few years as
about six to seven homes have been constructed annually. Earlier in the last decade some
years almost hit 30 new homes per year, before falling after 2015. Since 2010, about nine
homes annually have been constructed in St. Louis Park. Demand in Table HD -1 is higher than
historical construction trends, therefore construction is generally estimated at around eight
new homes per year.
Much of the new single-family construction in St. Louis Park and the surrounding cities has tar-
geted move-up and executive buyers (pricing $800,000+); in part because of the high land ac-
quisition costs (i.e. tear downs) and increasing construction, material, and labor costs. How-
ever, through our research and housing experience we find demand for a variety of price points
of new single-family homes.
Although there would be substantial demand for a new single-family housing product priced
under $400,000, financially it will be extremely difficult to develop even with public assistance
due to acquisitions costs, infrastructure costs, and rising labor and material costs.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 196
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 188
In the short-term, new construction could be on curtailed given the ever increasing pricing of
construction since the pandemic and todays rising mortgage interest rates which are at 20-year
highs in 2023. Therefore, new construction could be constrained in until pricing levels out and
inflation is under control and mortgage rates loosen.
For-Sale Multifamily Housing
A growing number of households desire alternative housing types such as townhouses,
twinhomes, detached villas, and condominiums. Typically, the target market for for -sale multi-
family housing is empty-nesters and retirees seeking to downsize from their single-family
homes. In addition, professionals, particularly singles and couples without children, also will
seek condominiums and townhomes if they prefer not to have the maintenance responsibilities
of a single-family home. In some housing markets, younger households also find purchasing
multifamily units to be generally more affordable than purchasing new single-family homes.
Our analysis of the St. Louis Park for-sale housing stock found over 40 condominium develop-
ments in St. Louis Park boasting over 2,700 units. The majority of these units are old and target
first-time home buyers. At the same time, demand is strong for all maintenance-free products
such as twin homes, townhomes, villas, etc. Given the aging of the population and the growth
rate in the 65+ population, St. Louis Park would benefit from a more diversified housing stock.
Based on the changing demographics and the need for alternative housing types, demand was
calculated for 970 new multifamily for-sale units in St. Louis Park through 2030. Like single-
family, it will be difficult to achieve this level of development given land acquisition costs and
the lack of new condominium construction in the marketplace.
These attached units could be developed as twinhomes, detached townhomes or villas, cot-
tages, townhomes/row homes, condominiums, or any combination. Because the main target
market for many maintenance-free products is empty-nesters and young seniors, the majority
of townhomes should be one-level, or at least have an owner’s suite on the main level if a unit
is two-stories. The following provides greater detail into several for-sale concepts.
• Twinhomes– By definition, a twinhome is basically two units with a shared wall with each
owner owning half of the lot the home is on. Some one-level living units are designed in
three-, four-, or even six-unit buildings in a variety of configurations. The swell of support
for twinhome and one-level living units is generated by the aging baby boomer generation,
which is increasing the numbers of older adults and seniors who desire low -maintenance
housing alternatives to their single-family homes but are not ready to move to service-en-
hanced rental housing (i.e. downsizing or right sizing).
Traditionally most twinhome developments have been designed with the garage being the
prominent feature of the home; however, today’s newer twinhomes have much more archi-
tectural detail. Many higher end twin home developments feature designs where one gar-
age faces the street and the other to the side yard. This design helps reduce the promi-
nence of the garage domination with two separate entrances. Housing products designed
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 197
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 189
to meet the needs of these aging St. Louis Park residents, many of whom desire to stay in
their current community if housing is available to meet their needs, will be needed into the
near future.
Twinhomes are also a preferred for-sale product by builders as units can be developed as
demand warrants. Because twinhomes bring higher density and economies of scale to the
construction process, the price point can be lower than stand -alone single-family housing.
We recommend a broad range of pricing for twinhomes; however pricing should start at
around $600,000 per side.
Many older adults and seniors will move to this housing product with substantial equity in
their existing single-family home and will be willing to purchase a maintenance-free home
that is priced similar to their existing single-family home. The twinhomes should be associa-
tion-maintained with 40’- to 50’-wide lots on average. Given lot acreage needed, this prod-
uct will be challenging to develop in St. Louis Park.
• Detached Townhomes/Villas – An alternative to the twinhome is the one-level villa
product and/or rambler. This product also appeals mainly to baby boomers and empty
nesters seeking a product similar to a single-family living on a smaller scale while receiv-
ing the benefits of maintenance-free living. Many of these units are designed with a
walk-out or lookout lower level if the topography warrants. We recommend lot widths
ranging from 45 to 55 feet with main level living areas between 1,600 and 1,800 square
feet. The main level living area usually features a master bedroom, great room, dining
room, kitchen, and laundry room while offering a “flex room” that could be another
bedroom, office, media room, or exercise room. However, owners should also be able
to purchase the home with the option to finish the lower level (i.e. additional bedrooms,
game room, storage, den/study, etc.) and some owners may want a slab-on-grade prod-
uct for affordability reasons. Finally, builders could also provide the option to build a
two-story detached product that could be mixed with the villa product.
Pricing for a detached townhome/villa will vary based on a slab-on-grade home versus a
home with a basement. Base pricing should start at $550,000 and will fluctuate based
on custom finishes, upgrades, etc.
• Side-by-Side and Back-to-Back Townhomes – This housing product is designed with three or
four or more separate living units in one building and can be built in a variety of configura-
tions. With the relative affordability of these units and multi-level living, side-by-side and
back-to-back townhomes have the greatest appeal among entry-level households without
children, young families, and singles and/or roommates across the age span. However, two-
story townhomes would also be attractive to middle-market, move-up, and empty-nester
buyers. Many of these buyers want to downsize from a single-family home into mainte-
nance-free housing, many of which will have equity from the sale of their single -family
home.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 198
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 190
New attached housing products have taken off since the pandemic as builders try to allevi-
ate high prices through increased density. Side-by-side concepts targeting entry-level buy-
ers should have base prices around $375,000 and range to about $600,000.
• Condominiums – Condominium development remains slow across the Metro Area since
the housing downturn coming out of the Great Recession. Most new condominium devel-
opment today is high-end luxury product in select submarkets: Wayzata, North Oaks,
Edina, Minnetonka, Downtown Minneapolis, etc. The most recent project in St. Louis Park
was the Wooddale Flats project on Wooddale Avenue completed roughly seven years ago.
The lack of new condominium development is due to a variety of factors: overbuilding in
the mid-2000s, strict state statutes on condominium construction and warranty laws, and
strong rental housing demand and easier financing for apartments than condominiums.
Together with lender pre-sale requirements and regulations, developers are mainly focus-
ing on boutique projects and stricter construction methods to avoid Minnesota State Stat-
ute laws. As a result, construction costs are extremely high, and the retail price of the con-
dominium then is priced at the top of the market. Although the State of Minnesota re-
vised some of the state laws, Minnesota still has some of the strictest condominium regula-
tions in the country.
However, similar to all the new apartment construction in St. Louis Park, condominium
buyers would find St. Louis Park an excellent location for new condo construction targeting
a wide range of buyers; including first-time home buyers, move-up, executive, and down-
sizing seniors.
Demand is strong for multifamily for-sale in St. Louis Park as nearly 1,000 units exists
through 2030. However although demand is strong it will be cha llenging to build this level
of new construction given land challenges and preference for developers to pursue rental
housing options. We recommend roughly 100 entry-level condominiums (sub $350,000),
about 150 move-up units ($350,000 to $500,000), and about 120 executive condominiums
($500,000 or more). Condominium development could be spread across a variety of build-
ing types; from low-rise to high-rise construction. However, in order to achieve upward to
1,000 new units over the next decade the majority of construction would have to be in
mid-rise to hi-rise style structures.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 199
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 191
General Occupancy Multifamily Rental Housing
Table R-2 identified an overall vacancy rate of only 3.8% among all stabilized rental units. This
vacancy rate is up slightly but still below market equilibrium for rental housing (5% vacancy) in-
dicting continued pent-up demand for rental housing. Maxfield Research found demand for
nearly 2,800 units of rental housing through 2030 (1,555 market rate, 633 affordable, and
607subsidized units).
• Market Rate Rental – St. Louis Park continues to be one of the hottest new construction
markets for new rental housing over the past decade. Despite all the new supply being
delivered, vacancy rates are about 4.0% and remain below stabilization. However, due
to the new supply vacancy rates have been slowly trending upward over the past few
years, yet still low by historical standards. At the time of this study, there are numerous
projects under construction and in the development pipeline as over 750 market rate
units are under construction and another 741 have been approved. This equates to
over 1,500 units that may deliver in the next few years.
Given the elevated construction in the short-term, vacancy rates are expected to in-
crease as new supply is delivered. Many projects will likely offer concessions to new ten-
ants to accelerate the initial lease-up period as these projects are finished. At the same
time high construction costs and high financing costs are putting projects on -hold as
many projects do not pencil today as interest rates have doubled this past year. The
slowdown of new projects being permitted will help keep the market at equilibrium ver-
sus flooding the market with newer product simultaneously. High mortgage rates are
also benefiting the rental industry as would-be home buyers are on the sidelines as they
wait for interest rate drops and more housing supply.
Demand remains strong throughout the decade, but a small pause is welcome news so
new product can adequately absorb. Therefore, we recommend new market rate prod-
uct hold in the near-term and deliver new units after 2025. St. Louis Park will continue
to be a sought after submarket for rental housing, especially with the new LRT planned
later this decade. Although St. Louis Park would have demand for a variety of rental
product types, because of land constraints development will target mid -rise and high-
rise development styles with densities over 50 units per acre.
• Market Rate General Occupancy Rental Townhomes– In addition to the traditional
multifamily structures, we find that demand exists for larger townhome units for
families – including those who are new to St. Louis Park and want to rent until they
find a home for purchase. A portion of the overall market rate demand could be a
townhome style development versus traditional multifamily design. We recommend
a project with rents of approximately $2,000 for two-bedroom units to $3,000 for
three-bedroom units. Units should feature contemporary amenities (i.e. in -unit
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 200
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 192
washer/dryer, high ceilings, etc.) and an attached two car garage. Because of high
land acquisition costs, these would likely be denser rowhome style apartments and
more vertically integrated.
• Affordable and Subsidized Rental Housing– Subsidized housing receives financial as-
sistance (i.e. operating subsidies, tax credits, rent payments, etc.) from governmen-
tal agencies in order to make the rent affordable to low-to-moderate income house-
holds. Although we find demand for 633 subsidized units over this decade, this
product is difficult to pencil out given the lack of funding available. As such, all of
the income-restricted housing will fall under the “affordable” product through the
tax credit program. We found strong demand for affordable rental housing (633
units); hence development could result from an apartment-style building and/or
townhome style affordable units.
Senior Housing
As illustrated in Table CR-1, demand exists for all types of senior housing product types in St.
Louis Park through 2030. Over the course of this decade, there is demand for roughly 1,450
new senior units through 2030. The unmet need of additional senior housing is recommended
to provide housing opportunity to these aging residents in their stages of later life. The devel-
opment of additional senior housing serves a two-fold purpose in meeting the housing needs in
St. Louis Park: older adult and senior residents can relocate to new age-restricted housing in St.
Louis Park, and existing homes and rental units that were occupied by seniors become available
to other new households. Hence, development of additional senior housing does not mean the
housing needs of younger households are neglected; it simply means that a greater percentage
of housing need is satisfied by housing unit turnover. The types of housing products needed to
accommodate the aging population base are discussed individually in the following section.
• Active Adult Senior Cooperative – There is one senior age-restricted for-sale develop-
ment in St. Louis Park at this time – Aquila Commons which has 106 units and no units
available for purchase. Maxfield Research and Consulting, LLC projected demand for
over 231 active adult ownership units through 2030. Construction of a new larger
stand-alone cooperative facility would satisfy most adult ownership demand through
this decade.
Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC recommends a cooperative development with a
mix of two- and three-bedroom units with share costs starting around $75,000 (unit
value started at about $225,000). The cooperative model, in particular, appeals to a
larger base of potential residents in that it has characteristics of both rental and owner-
ship housing. Cooperative developments allow prospective residents an ownership op-
tion and homestead tax benefits without a substantial upfront investment as would be
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 201
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 193
true in a condominium development or life care option. Maxfield Research & Consult-
ing, LLC has found the cooperative model to be very well-accepted in rural communities
across the Midwest.
• Active Adult Rental – There is only one active adult rental community in St. Louis Park –
the newly completed Elmwood off of 36th Street. In addition, there are two active adult
projects under construction, Risor and OlyHI. We have projected demand for 304 mar-
ket rate active adult rental units in St. Louis Park by 2030. Many of the seniors who
would consider an active adult product are presently residing in their existing single -
family home or general-occupancy rental housing. Development of this product could
be in separate stand-alone facilities or in a mixed-income project. A mixed-income
building could include a portion of units that would be affordable to seniors with in-
comes established by the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency.
Although we find strong demand for this product type; since this product is not need -
driven and development costs are expected to be high in the short -term; this product
may be best if developed after inflationary pressures subsidize and financing costs ar e
lower. We recommend a product with base rents from $1,800 to $2,500.
Because of the hot real estate market since the pandemic, seniors who decide to sell
their home today will receive top dollar and can capitalize on the strong housing market
and reallocate funds to maintenance-free housing products.
• Affordable and Subsidized Rental – St. Louis Park demand for affordable senior housing
is 268 units through 2030; while demand for subsidized housing is 30 units. Affordable
senior housing products can also be incorporated into a mixed income building which
may increase the projects financial feasibility. Affordable senior housing will likely be a
low-income tax credit project through the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency of
through the City’s inclusionary zoning ordinance. Financing subsidized senior housing is
difficult as federal funds have been shrinking. A new subsidized development would
likely rely on a number of funding sources; from low -income tax credits (LIHTC), tax-ex-
empt bonds, Section 202 program, USDA 515 program, among others to get financed
today.
• Independent Living – There are three existing independent living projects in St. Louis
Park boasting over 430 units. Maxfield Research found demand for 179 units through
this decade, however demand is strongest near the latter half of the decade as seniors
age and need more services. In the short-term there are vacancies in this product and
the existing supply needs to absorb more units to reach stabilized occupancy. As such,
we recommend holding on independent living until the existing stock reaches market
equilibrium.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 202
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 194
• Assisted Living and Memory Care Senior Housing – Based on our analysis, we project
demand to support an additional 226 assisted living units and 214 memory care units
in St. Louis Park through 2030. Similar to independent living, although there is strong
demand existing supply needs to be leased to reach market equilibrium. The COVID
pandemic severely impacted service-based senior housing and occupancies are still
recovering from the downturn from 2020. As such, we recommend holding on new
serviced-based senior housing for a few more years until occupancies reach pre-pan-
demic numbers. Senior housing occupancies across the Twin Cities are still elevated
and likely need at least another one to-two years to reach stabilization.
We recommend assisted living units include a mix of studio, and one-bedroom, and a
few two-bedroom units with base monthly rents ranging from $3,000 to $5,000.
Memory care unit mix should be studios, one-bedroom units, and small two-bedroom
units with base monthly rents ranging from $5,000 to $6,000. Memory care units
should be located in a secured, self-contained wing located on the first floor of a build-
ing and should feature its own dining and common area amenities including a secured
outdoor patio and wandering area.
The base monthly fees should include all utilities (except telephone and basic ca-
ble/satellite television) and the following services:
• Three meals per day;
• Weekly housekeeping and linen service;
• Two loads of laundry per week;
• Weekly health and wellness clinics;
• Meal assistance;
• Regularly scheduled transportation;
• Professional activity programs and scheduled outings;
• Nursing care management;
• I’m OK program;
• 24-hour on site staffing;
• Personal alert pendant with emergency response; and
• Nurse visit every other month.
Additional personal care packages should also be available for an extra monthly charge
above the required base care package. A care needs assessment is recommended to be
conducted to determine the appropriate level of services for prospective residents.
Given the service-intensive nature of memory care housing and staffing ratios, typically
most memory care facilities are attached to either an assisted living development or are
a component of a skilled nursing facility. However, stand-alone memory care facilities
are gaining marketing traction and could be considered later this decade.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 203
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH & CONSULTING, LLC 195
Challenges and Opportunities
The following were identified as the greatest challenges and opportunities for developing the
recommended housing types (in no particular order – sorted alphabetically).
• Accessory Dwelling Units (“ADU”): Accessory dwelling units (“ADUs”) go by several differ-
ent names such as: In-law suites, garage apartments, backyard cottages, granny flats, guest
houses, etc. An ADU is simply a small, stand-alone residential dwelling unit located on the
same property as a detached single-family home. However, in some cases an ADU could in-
clude an addition on an existing home, apartment over a garage, or be locating within an
attic or basement within the home. Legally, however, an ADU is still a part of the original
parcels PID number and title is with the property owner. The most common reason for
building an ADU is generating rental income for the homeowner or housing a family mem-
ber (often for free).
Because of increased density on the property and smaller sized units, ADUs have the poten-
tial to increase housing affordability and create a wider range of housing options. Many
communities that permit ADUs in their zoning code limit the number of accessory structures
to just one; however, some cities have recently revised their zoning code to allow up to two
accessory structures. Some communities monitor ADU construction by limiting new con-
struction to only owner-occupied housing units (main structure is owned), minimum lot
size, setbacks, and number of occupants or bedrooms in the accessory structure.
Maxfield Research recommends that local planning departments review their existing zon-
ing code and if not already permitted, revise zoning codes to ensure ADUs can be a permit-
ted use. Demand for ADUs has increased significantly since the COVID-19 pandemic as
homeowners sought to move family members together in a multi-generational environ-
ment. Also, many homeowners will design the ADU as a multifunctional space as a home
office and living space away from the main home. Finally, ADUs offer another solution for
meeting rental housing demand and/or short-term housing needs.
• Affordable Housing/Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing . Table HA-1 identified Henne-
pin County/Twin Cities Median Incomes (“AMI”) and the fai r market rents by bedroom type
(i.e. $1,078/one-bedroom unit). The average market rate rent averages for one -bedroom
units is about $1,500/month and the overall average rent per square foot is about $2.00.
The influx of new market rate rentals has driven up the average cost of a one-bedroom unit
in St. Louis Park that is higher than fair market rents. At 60% AMI the maximum gross rent
for a one-bedroom is $1,400. According to our inventory the number of the market rate
rental stock, approximately 50% of the rental units in St. Louis Park are affordable at 50% or
60% of AMI. Another 30% of the market rate rental stock is affordable at 80% AMI, or
workforce housing. However, these numbers have shifted since the 2018 housing study
where a higher percentage of units were affordable at 50% and they have now shifted to
affordable at 60% AMI. Similarly, the number of units affordable at 60% AMI has declined
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 204
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH & CONSULTING, LLC 196
and has shifted to 80% AMI. Rent inflation from the after effects of the pandemic and rising
operational expenses from 40-year high inflation has driven up rents faster than inflation in
the past few years. has often
Because of the higher proportion of new rental product and higher rent structures at the
new market rental buildings in St. Louis Park , the minimum incomes needed to afford a lux-
ury rental are significantly higher than older existing rentals in St. Louis Park. New rental
housing development targets “lifestyle renters” or those with higher incomes who have
enough money to buy a house but choose to rent for the convenience and lifestyle. Many of
these renters may be cost burdened, but they choose so for the location or amenities and
the option to live adjacent to transit and lose car ownership expenses.
• Age of Existing Housing Stock. As illustrated in the Housing Characteristics Section of the
report (Table HC-3), the median year built for a home in St. Louis Park is 1954 and about
58% of the total housing stock was built prior to 1970 while 68% of the single-family hous-
ing stock was constructed prior to 1960. Much of the single-family housing stock in St.
Louis Park is comprised of smaller one-story and 1.5-story homes on smaller lots. Although
there is a rental housing boom underway over the past decade, the majority of rental hous-
ing stock is over 40 years old and lacks contemporary amenities today’s renters seek. Be-
cause of the older housing stock, we recommend continued promotion of remodeling and
move-up housing programs that encourage reinvestment into the city’s owner and renter
housing stock.
14.8%20.1%33.0%6.0%7.4%7.7%3.0%5.8%2.1%2.4%2.3%14.3%18.0%16.3%17.0%7.1%11.2%11.5%0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
35.0%
<1940s 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s 2010s% of Housing Stock by DecadeAge of Housing Stock by Tenure: St Louis Park -2021
Owner Renter
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 205
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH & CONSULTING, LLC 197
Given St. Louis Park’s location and age of housing stock, demand for larger single-family
homes via teardowns or additions will continue to grow. Today’s home buyers, especially
those buyers with children, are demanding larger home sizes and modern amenities that
are not offered withing some the city’s older housing stock. Teardowns are driven by a de-
sire to live in a well-established neighborhood near other more valuable homes. Teardown
buyers are purchasing “buildable lots” when the value of the lot is equal to or higher than
the value of the home. As a result, the cost for a teardown is substantial as high land acqui-
sition costs drive up the overall retail purchase price of the home.
• Aging Population. As illustrated in Table D-2, there is growth in the City of St. Louis Park
senior population, especially among ages 75 to 84 (28% growth through 2028). In addi-
tion, Table D-7 shows the City of St. Louis Park homeownership rates among seniors 65+
is approximately 75% and 72% for homeowners over age 75. St. Louis Park ownership
rates are higher than both Hennepin County and the Twin Cities Metro Area. High home-
ownership rates among seniors indicate there could be lack of senior housing options, or
simply that many seniors prefer to live in their home and age in place. Because of the ris-
ing population of older adults, demand for alternative maintenance-free housing products
should be rising. In addition, demand for home health care services and home remodeling
programs to assist seniors with retrofitting their existing homes should also increase. The
smaller size of the majority of homes in St. Louis Park also makes them more manageable
for aging in place for longer periods of time, especially if they feature bedrooms on the
main-level.
2.5%
7.4%
5.4%
2.2%
3.9%
-2.4%
7.3%
27.9%
8.0%
-5.0%
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
Under 18 18 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 to 74 75 to 84 85 and
over
Pop. Change, 2023 to 2028
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 206
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH & CONSULTING, LLC 198
• Construction & Development Costs. The cost to build and develop new single-family hous-
ing has increased significantly over the past decade and since the Great Recession in all
markets across the U.S.A., as seen in the chart below. New construction pricing peaked last
decade between 2005 and 2007 before falling during the recession. Pricing in nearly every
market across the United States decreased between 2008 and 2011 before starting to re-
bound in 2012 and beyond. However, since the Great Recession it has become increasingly
difficult for builders to construct entry-level new homes due to a number of constraints –
rising land costs, rising material and labor costs, lack of construction labor, and increasing
regulation and entitlement fees. As a result, affordable new construction homes have be-
come rare as builders are unable to pencil-out modestly priced new construction. New con-
struction in St. Louis Park is difficult to achieve under $500,000 and most new infill product
is even surpassing $1 million. At the same time, new construction pricing is at an all-time
high coming out of the pandemic due to strong demand and supply and labor constraints
for builders that are driving up housing costs. However, with continued interest rate hikes
from the Federal Reserve in 2022, construction costs are slowly starting to normalize as la-
bor is loosening. Given the complexities of new construction in a built-out community like
St. Louis Park; new construction will cater to the move-up and executive buyer.
• COVID-19 Impacts. The COVID-19 pandemic has had both direct and indirect effects on the
housing industry. The senior housing industry was directly impacted as the virus affected
older adults at a much higher rate. Senior properties hit record high vacancy rates and many
seniors continue to age in place as long as possible as they have avoided living in a shared
space. This is evident in St. Louis Park where elevated vacancies persist for service-based
senior housing.
$0
$50,000
$100,000
$150,000
$200,000
$250,000
$300,000
$350,000
$400,000
2000 2005 2010 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Median Sales Price of New SF Homes: 2000 to 2021
U.S.A.Midwest
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 207
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH & CONSULTING, LLC 199
Economically, the unemployment rate in St. Louis Park was considerably low compared to
the rest of the country during the pandemic. In early 2020, the unemployment rates were
under 3% before peaking at 5.7% for the year. Unemployment quickly decreased to 2.8% in
2021 and is at a record low of 2.2% at the end of 2022.
Despite the pandemic over the past three years, the local real estate market has performed
above expectations and strong demand remains for housing. St. Louis Park was a major
destination for relocating households from the central cities/n eighborhoods in the Twin Cit-
ies. Supply remains at an all-time low, however that is slowly leveling-out now with ele-
vated mortgage rates. The pandemic has changed buyer preferences as buyers have a
greater desire for outdoor features, green space, more square footage, flexible spaces for
home offices, and healthy living conditions. Buyers are also trading location for more home
by locating further from their place of employment.
On the rental side, social distancing initially had an impact on common co rridor apartment
buildings as all communal areas were shut down and tenants could not utilize amenities.
Since the pandemic, the demand for smaller unit sizes has waned as renters desire larger
spaces as they work from home, utilize for fitness, etc. With telecommuting and work from
home being the norm tenants are seeking a separation of work and live spaces as well as
access to balconies and patios to provide fresh air and extra space. There has been strong
demand for townhome-style rentals or a building that has been designed with a separate
entrance to eliminate the possible of interacting with others and catching the virus. These
trends and preferences will likely continue as the pandemic has waned.
• Housing Programs. The St. Louis Park Housing Authority (HA) and City of St. Louis Park offer
many programs to promote and preserve the existing housing stock in St. Louis Park. Com-
pared to other housing authorities and cities throughout the Metro Area and State of Min-
nesota, St. Louis Park offers significantly more programs than many other communities of
similar size. Some of the key programs that are offered or promoted through the City or
through 3rd party referrals in St. Louis Park include:
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 208
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 200
o Architectural design services;
o Home Energy Squad;
o Community fix-up funds;
o Deferred loan programs;
o Energy Efficient rebates;
o First-time home-buyer programs;
o Foreclosure prevention;
o Home energy loans;
o Home Improvement Area (HIA);
o Home Point of Sale;
o Housing Fair;
o Housing Choice Voucher Program
o Inclusionary Housing Policy;
o Kids in the Park rental assistance;
o Land Trust;
o Down payment assistant program;
o First-generation down payment as-
sistance program;
o Public housing;
o Realtor forum;
o Remodeling advisor;
o Rental license ordinance;
o Stable Home Rental Assistance Pro-
gram
o SPARC – SLP Rental Coalition
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 209
CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 201
• Inflation. U.S. inflation rates hit a new 40-year high of 8.6% in 2022, the biggest yearly in-
crease since December 1981. Rampant price increased for nearly every good and service
and specifically energy and food costs are having an impact on American consumers and will
eventually affect housing affordability. As a result, the Federal Reserve is implementing in-
terest rate hikes and increasing borrowing costs to hopefully offset a recession. As interes t
rates have increased for-sale housing demand has slowed and demand for rental housing
has increased. This has resulted in higher housing costs for both buyers and renters. Hous-
ing assets are in higher demand during inflationary times as real estate va lues tend to hedge
inflation and investors seek out rental housing assets as equity continues to grow. In the
short term, household balance sheets will continue to be stretched as rising costs affect St.
Louis Park residents. This could hinder housing production in the near term as new con-
struction will be difficult to pencil.
• Job Growth/Employment. The Covid-19 pandemic created a number of new challenges for
businesses, workers, and government. As depicted earlier, the unemployment rate in St.
Louis Park has historically been under 4.0% before shortly rising to 5.7% during the peak
shutdowns in spring 2020. These unprecedented challenges had an economic ripple effect
across the country as thousands of Americans found themselves out of work with increases
in unemployment. However, St. Louis Park employers weathered the pandemic much bet-
ter than most of the country as the unemployment rate has stayed low and the area
brought back lost jobs from the initial shutdowns earlier in 2020.
The St. Louis Park unemployment rate has declined to a low of 2.2% and the labor force has
improved annually since 2020, but the labor force has not met pre -pandemic numbers as of
yet. Although a low unemployment rate is generally considered positive news, an ex-
tremely low unemployment rate can be challenging for employers looking to add additional
staff. Although additional job creation supports the need for housing, a lack of housing, and
especially, affordable housing, can place pressure on attracting workers and new jobs.
• Land Supply (Lack of). As a first-ring suburban community, St. Louis Park lacks developable
land to accommodate all the demand and recommended concepts in Table CR -2. Develop-
ment will be primarily via redevelopment or via infill sites. Due to St. Louis Park’s excellent
location, housing demand could be significantly higher should St. Louis Park have the availa-
ble land to accommodate future growth. The vast majority of residential land transactions
are for multifamily development targeting the rental sector.
• Lifestyle Renters. Historically, householders rented because they couldn’t afford to buy or
didn’t have the credit to qualify for a mortgage. Today that is no longer the case, and many
householders are renting by choice. High-income renters represent the fastest growing
market segment of the rental market today; having grown 48% over the past decade. De-
mand is being driven by the Millennials, would-be buyers on the side-line, and empty nest-
ers. As a result, rental housing is one of the preferred real estate asset classes today across
country. Lifestyle renters are attracted to developments offering excellent finishing quality,
extensive common area facilities, and typically focus on an environment providing a more
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 210
CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 202
social experience. Most of the new market rate rental construction in St. Louis Park tar-
gets the lifestyle renter.
• Modular Housing. Modular housing, often referred to as prefab housing, is the construc-
tion of housing units in a controlled factory-like setting or on a manufacturers site or lumber
yard. Modular housing is gaining steam from developers and investors to combat high con-
struction costs, labor shortages, and speed-up the construction timeline. The biggest ad-
vantage modular housing provides is time and shaving months of holding costs off the con-
sumer’s bottom line. Originally modular housing was mostly single-family oriented; how-
ever, developers are now constructing entire apartment buildings, hotels, senior living, man
camps, and college dorms. Historically the biggest challenge of modular housing is trans-
portation, shipping costs, and perception. Modular housing has made huge strides over the
decades and are now built on concrete foundations or include basements. The industry
continues to battle the stigma of the older mobile homes as the appraisal community con-
tinually mis-appraises modular homes due to biases or lack of education on the product.
Locally, there is a new manufacturer in Owatonna and future modular plants are in the
works along the Interstate 94 corridor and potentially in North Minneapolis. Maxfield Re-
search believes there is opportunity in the modular construction sector that can be utilized
in St. Louis Park , providing a win-win scenario by providing housing production and passing
cost savings along to consumers.
If not already, we recommend the City of St. Louis Park revise zoning codes to allow for this
type of housing if it is not permitted. However, design standards should be enforced in or-
der to ensure incompatible housing does not deter neighborhoods.
• Mortgage Rates. Mortgage rates play a crucial part in housing affordability. Lower mort-
gage rates result in a lower monthly mortgage payment and buyers receiving more home
for their dollar. Rising interest rates often require homebuyers to raise their down payment
in order to maintain the same housing costs. Mortgage rates have stayed at historic lows
for most of the past decade trending under 4.5% (30 -year fixed) since around 2010. At the
on-set of the COVID-19 pandemic, rates plummeted to at or near an all-time low under 3%
for part of 2020 and most of 2021. However, due to a 40-year high inflation the Federal Re-
serve began hiking rates in 2022 to slow the economy and curtail inflation . The Federal Re-
serve has implemented five rate hikes to date in 2022 and is expected to be aggressive
throughout the end of year into 2023. As a result, the cost of for -sale housing has increased
significantly this year and many would-be-buyers are on the sidelines and have been priced
out of the market. Compared to early 2022, mortgage payments in the Fall of 2022 are on
average about 60% higher than the beginning of 2022 (3.25% vs. 6.75%). As a result, afford-
ability has been crushed and a housing market reset is in play.
The following charts illustrates historical mortgage rate averages as compiled by Freddie
Mac. The Freddie Mac Market Survey (PMMS) has been tracking mortgage rates since 1972
and is the most relied upon benchmark for evaluating mortgage interest market conditions.
The Freddie Mac survey is based on 30-year mortgages with a loan-to-value of 80%.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 211
CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 203
• Short-Term Stay Housing. The short-term stay housing market continues to gain ground;
in-part from pandemic and from households desiring temporary housing accommodations.
Establishments range from hotels, suites, apartments, townhomes, or single-family homes,
etc. Many of these furnished units offer weekly and monthly rates that have flexible rental
agreements. There has been a growing preference for non -traditional lodging choices as
0.00%
2.00%
4.00%
6.00%
8.00%
10.00%
12.00%
14.00%
16.00%
18.00%1972747678198082848688199092949698200002040608201012141618202022Historic 30-year Mortgage Rates 1972 to 2023 YTD
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
2022 to 2023 YTD
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 212
CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 204
companies such as VRBO, Airbnb, Stay Alfred, Sonder, and others make a splash into the
rental and hospitality sector. Many apartment owners are entertaining relationships with
short-term stay companies as an avenue to lock-up long-term leases with a short-term op-
erator. Maxfield Research recommends addressing local zoning codes to monitor futur e
multifamily concepts that may include short-term and long-term stay leases.
• Single-Family Rental Housing Demand. Table HC-4 showed that about 7% of the rental
housing inventory in St. Louis Park in 2020 is within single-unit housing structures. Another
4.2% of units were located within an attached structure such a townhome or condo. Na-
tionwide, it is estimate that 25 of the 43 million rental households in the United States
(58%) reside in either single-family rentals, townhomes, duplexes, triplexes, and quads. Sin-
gle-family units, townhomes, and condos make-up about 34% of all rental units in the coun-
try, 27% in Minnesota, and about 23% in the Twin Cities Metro Area. Compared to the
Twin Cities and Minnesota averages, St. Louis Park has significantly fewer single-family rent-
als.
A recent study by Freddie Mac identified the market share of single-family rentals
(“SFR”) by ownership type across the country. The study found that 88% of SFR are owned
by investors with between 1 and 10 homes. Institutional investors make -up only 1% of the
market share today; even though they are they have the financial backing and are able to
acquire larger portfolios.
Demand is strong for SFR by providing renter lifestyle choice and the ability to reside in a
detached unit without having to obtain the funds for a down payment on a mortgage. Es-
pecially today with mortgage rates that have doubled in the past year there is even stronger
demand for single-family rentals. Many SF renters may consider purchasing; however, the
rising costs of real estate and the down payment requirements hinder some renters from
making the leap to home ownership. The COVID-19 pandemic increased demand for SFR as
renters desire more square footage, green space/yards, separate entrances, and more pri-
vacy than traditional multifamily structures.
Single-family rental communities have been one of the hottest real estate products to come
out of the pandemic over the past few years. Although the Twin Cities is behind the rest of
the country, there are several developments in the pipeline or that have recently been com-
pleted in the Twin Cities. Nearly all of these developments are located in suburban tertiary
markets with available land, however in other markets in the U.S. these communities are
developed in core cities and inner-ring suburbs. We recommend exploring purpose-built
single-family rental communities in the City of St. Louis Park and zoning codes that permit
the project concept.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 213
APPENDIX
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 205
APPENDIX
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 214
APPENDIX
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 206
Definitions
Absorption Period – The period of time necessary for newly constructed or renovated proper-
ties to achieve the stabilized level of occupancy. The absorption period begins when the first
certificate of occupancy is issued and ends when the last unit to reach the stabilized lev el of oc-
cupancy has signed a lease.
Absorption Rate – The average number of units rented each month during the absorption pe-
riod.
Active adult (or independent living without services available) – Active Adult properties are
similar to a general-occupancy apartment building, in that they offer virtually no services but
have age-restrictions (typically 55 or 62 or older). Organized activities and occasionally a trans-
portation program are usually all that are available at these properties. Because of the lack of
services, active adult properties typically do not command the rent premiums of more service -
enriched senior housing.
Adjusted Gross Income “AGI” – Income from taxable sources (including wages, interest, capital
gains, income from retirement accounts, etc.) adjusted to account for specific deductions (i.e.
contributions to retirement accounts, unreimbursed business and medical expenses, alimony,
etc.).
Affordable housing – Housing that is income-restricted to households earning at or below 80%
AMI, though individual properties can have income-restrictions set at 40%, 50%, 60% or 80%
AMI. Rent is not based on income but instead is a contract amount that is affordable to house-
holds within the specific income restriction segment. It is essentially housing affordable to low
or very low-income tenants.
Amenity – Tangible or intangible benefits offered to a tenant in the form of common area
amenities or in-unit amenities. Typical in-unit amenities include dishwashers, washer/dryers,
walk-in showers, and closets and upgraded kitchen finishes. Typical common area amenities
include detached or attached garage parking, community room, fitness center and an outdoor
patio or grill/picnic area.
Area Median Income “AMI” – AMI is the midpoint in the income distribution within a specific
geographic area. By definition, 50% of households earn less than the median income and 50%
earn more. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) calculates AMI an-
nually and adjustments are made for family size.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 215
APPENDIX
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 207
Assisted Living – Assisted Living properties come in a variety of forms, but the target market for
most is generally the same: very frail seniors, typically age 80 or older (but can be much
younger, depending on their particular health situation), who need extensive support services
and personal care assistance. Absent an assisted living option, these seniors would otherwise
need to move to a nursing facility. At a minimum, assisted living properties include two meals
per day and weekly housekeeping in the monthly fee, with the availability of a third meal and
personal care (either included in the monthly fee or for an additional cost). Assisted living
properties also have either staff on duty 24 hours per day or at least 24 -hour emergency re-
sponse.
Building Permit – Building permits track housing starts, and the number of housing units au-
thorized to be built by the local governing authority. Most jurisdictions require building permits
for new construction, major renovations, as well as other building improvements. Building per-
mits ensure that all the work meets applicable building and safety rules and is typically required
to be completed by a licensed professional. Once the building is complete and meets the in-
spector’s satisfaction, the jurisdiction will issue a “CO” or “Certificate of Occupancy.” Building
permits are a key barometer for the health of the housing market and are often a leading indi-
cator in the rest of the economy as it has a major impact on consumer spendi ng.
Capture Rate – The percentage of age, size, and income-qualified renter households in a given
area or “Market Area” that the property must capture to fill the units. The capture rate is cal-
culated by dividing the total number of units at the proper ty by the total number of age, size,
and income-qualified renter households in the designated area.
Comparable Property – A property that is representative of the rental housing choices of the
designated area or “Market Area” that is similar in construction, size, amenities, location and/or
age.
Concession – Discount or incentives given to a prospective tenant to induce signature of a
lease. Concessions typically are in the form of reduced rent or free rent for a specific lease
term, or free amenities, which are normally charged separately, such as parking.
Independent living with services available – Independent living properties offer support ser-
vices such as meals and/or housekeeping, either on an optional basis or a limited amount in-
cluded in the rents. These properties typically dedicate a larger share of the overall building
area to common areas, in part, because the units are smaller than in adult housing and in part
to encourage socialization among residents. Independent living properties attract a slightly
older target market than adult housing, typically seniors 75 and older. Rents are also above
those of the active adult buildings, even excluding the services.
Contract Rent – The actual monthly rent payable by the tenant, including any r ent subsidy paid
on behalf of the tenant, to the owner, inclusive of all terms of the lease.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 216
APPENDIX
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 208
Demand – The total number of households that would potentially move into a proposed new or
renovated housing project. These households must be of appropriate age, income, tenure, and
size for a specific proposed development. Components vary and can include, but are not lim-
ited to: turnover, people living in substandard conditions, rent over-burdened households, in-
come-qualified households, and age of householder. Demand is project specific.
Density – Number of units in a given area. Density is typically measured in dwelling units (DU)
per acre – the larger the number of units permitted per acre the higher the density; the fewer
units permitted results in lower density. Density is often presented in a gross and net format:
• Gross Density – The number of dwelling units per acre based on the gross site acreage.
Gross Density = Total residential units/total development area
• Net Density - The number of dwelling units per acre located on the site, but excludes
public right-of-way (ROW) such as streets, alleys, easements, open spaces, etc.
Net Density = Total residential units/total residential land area (excluding ROWs)
Detached housing – a freestanding dwelling unit, most often single-family homes, situated on
its own lot.
Effective Rents – Contract rent less applicable concessions.
Elderly or Senior Housing – Housing where all the units in the property are restricted for occu-
pancy by persons 62 years or older, or at least 80% of the units in each building are restricted
for occupancy by households where at least one household member is 55 years of age or better
and the housing is designed with amenities, facilities, and services to meet the needs of senior
citizens.
Extremely low-income – person or household with incomes below 30% of Area Median In-
come, adjusted for respective household size.
Fair Market Rent – Estimates established by HUD of the Gross Rents needed to obtain modest
rental units in acceptable conditions in a specific geographic area. The amount of rental income
a given property would command if it were open for leasing at any given moment and/or the
amount derived based on market conditions that is needed to pay gross monthly rent at mod-
est rental housing in a given area. This figure is used as a basis for determining the payment
standard amount used to calculate the maximum monthly subsidy for families on at financially
assisted housing.
Minneapolis-St Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI HUD FMR Area – 2022
EFF 1BR 2BR 3BR 4BR
Fair Market Rent $932 $1,078 $1,329 $1,841 $2,145
Fair Market Rent
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 217
APPENDIX
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 209
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) Ratio of the floor area of a building to area of the lot on which the build-
ing is located.
Foreclosure – A legal process in which a lender or financial institute attempts to recover the
balance of a loan from a borrower who has stopped making payments to the lender by using
the sale of the house as collateral for the loan.
Gross Rent – The monthly housing cost to a tenant which equals the Contract Rent provided for
in the lease, plus the estimated cost of all utilities paid by tenants. Maximum Gross Rents for
Hennepin County in 2022 are as follows:
Gross Rent
Minneapolis-St Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI HUD FMR Area – 2022
Household – All persons who occupy a housing unit, including occupants of a single-family, one
person living alone, two or more families living together, or any other group of related or unre-
lated persons who share living arrangements.
Household Trends – Changes in the number of households for any particular areas over a
measurable period of time, which is a function of new household’s formations, changes in aver-
age household size, and met migration.
Housing Choice Voucher Program – The federal government's major program for assisting very
low-income families, the elderly, and the disabled to afford decent, safe, and sanitary housing
in the private market. A family that is issued a housing voucher is responsible for find ing a suit-
able housing unit of the family's choice where the owner agrees to rent under the program.
Housing choice vouchers are administered locally by public housing agencies. They receive fed-
eral funds from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to administer
the voucher program. A housing subsidy is paid to the landlord directly by the public housing
agency on behalf of the participating family. The family then pays the difference between the
actual rent charged by the landlord and the amount subsidized by the program.
Housing unit – House, apartment, mobile home, or group of rooms used as a separate living
quarters by a single household.
EFF 1BR 2BR 3BR 4BR
30% of median $616 $704 $792 $879 $950
50% of median $1,027 $1,173 $1,320 $1,466 $1,583
60% of median $1,233 $1,408 $1,584 $1,759 $1,900
80% of median $1,644 $1,878 $2,112 $2,346 $2,534
100% of median $2,055 $2,347 $2,640 $2,932 $3,167
120% of median $2,466 $2,817 $3,168 $3,519 $3,801
Maximum Gross Rent
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 218
APPENDIX
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 210
HUD Project-Based Section 8 – A federal government program that provides rental housing for
very low-income families, the elderly, and the disabled in privately owned and managed rental
units. The owner reserves some or all of the units in a building in return for a Federal govern-
ment guarantee to make up the difference between the tenant's contrib ution and the rent. A
tenant who leaves a subsidized project will lose access to the project -based subsidy.
HUD Section 202 Program – Federal program that provides direct capital assistance and operat-
ing or rental assistance to finance housing designed for occupancy by elder household who
have incomes not exceeding 50% of Area Median Income.
HUD Section 811 Program – Federal program that provides direct capital assistance and operat-
ing or rental assistance to finance housing designed for occupancy of per sons with disabilities
who have incomes not exceeding 50% Area Median Income.
HUD Section 236 Program – Federal program that provides interest reduction payments for
loans which finance housing targeted to households with income not exceeding 80% Area Me-
dian Income who pay rent equal to the greater or market rate or 30% of their adjusted income.
Income limits – Maximum household’s income by a designed geographic area, adjusted for
household size and expressed as a percentage of the Area Median Income, for the purpose of
establishing an upper limit for eligibility for a specific housing program.
Income Limits
Minneapolis-St Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI HUD FMR Area – 2022
Inflow/Outflow – The Inflow/Outflow Analysis generates results showing the count and charac-
teristics of worker flows in to, out of, and within the defined geographic area.
Low-Income – Person or household with gross household incomes below 80% of Area Median
Income, adjusted for household size.
Low-Income Housing Tax Credit – A program aimed to generate equity for investment in af-
fordable rental housing authorized pursuant to Section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code. The
1 pph 2 phh 3 phh 4 phh 5 phh 6 phh 7 phh 8 phh
30% of median $24,660 $28,170 $31,680 $35,190 $38,010 $40,830 $43,650 $46,470
50% of median $41,100 $46,950 $52,800 $58,650 $63,350 $68,050 $72,750 $77,450
60% of median $49,320 $56,340 $63,360 $70,380 $76,020 $81,660 $87,300 $92,940
80% of median $65,760 $75,120 $84,480 $93,840 $101,360 $108,880 $116,400 $123,920
100% of median $82,200 $93,900 $105,600 $117,300 $126,700 $136,100 $145,500 $154,900
120% of median $98,640 $112,680 $126,720 $140,760 $152,040 $163,320 $174,600 $185,880
Income Limits by Household Size
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 219
APPENDIX
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 211
program requires that a certain percentage of units built be restricted for occupancy to house-
holds earning 60% or less of Area Median Income, and rents on these units be restricted ac-
cordingly.
Market analysis – The study of real estate market conditions for a specific type of property, ge-
ographic area or proposed (re)development.
Market rent – The rent that an apartment, without rent or income restrictions or rent subsi-
dies, would command in a given area or “Market Area” considering its location, features, and
amenities.
Market study – A comprehensive study of a specific proposal including a review of the housing
market in a defined market or geography. Project specific market studies are often used by de-
velopers, property managers or government entities to determine the appropriateness of a pro-
posed development, whereas market specific market studies are used to determine what house
needs, if any, existing within a specific geography.
Market rate rental housing – Housing that does not have any income-restrictions. Some prop-
erties will have income guidelines, which are minimum annual incomes required in order to re-
side at the property.
Memory Care – Memory Care properties, designed specifically for person s suffering from Alz-
heimer’s disease or other dementias, is one of the newest trends in senior housing. Properties
consist mostly of suite-style or studio units or occasionally one-bedroom apartment-style units,
and large amounts of communal areas for activities and programming. In addition, staff typi-
cally undergoes specialized training in the care of this population. Because of the greater
amount of individualized personal care required by residents, staffing ratios are much higher
than traditional assisted living and thus, the costs of care are also higher. Unlike conventional
assisted living, however, which deals almost exclusively with widows or widowers, a higher pro-
portion of persons afflicted with Alzheimer’s disease are in two -person households. That
means the decision to move a spouse into a memory care facility involves the caregiver’s con-
cern of incurring the costs of health care at a special facility while continuing to maintain their
home.
Migration – The movement of households and/or people into or out of an area.
Mixed-income property – An apartment property contained either both income-restricted and
unrestricted units or units restricted at two or more income limits.
Mobility – The ease at which people move from one location to another.
Moderate Income – Person or household with gross household income between 80% and 120%
of the Area Median Income, adjusted for household size.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 220
APPENDIX
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 212
Multifamily – Properties and structures that contain more than two housing units.
Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing – Although affordable housing is typically associated
with an income-restricted property, there are other housing units in communities that indi-
rectly provide affordable housing. Housing units that were not developed or designated with
income guidelines (i.e. assisted) yet are more affordable than other units in a community are
considered “naturally-occurring” or “unsubsidized affordable” units. This rental supply is avail-
able through the private market, versus assisted housing programs through various governmen-
tal agencies. Property values on these units are lower based on a combination of factors, such
as: age of structure/housing stock, location, condition, size, functionally obsolete, school dis-
trict, etc.
Net Income – Income earned after payroll withholdings such as state and federal income taxes,
social security, as well as retirement savings and health insurance.
Net Worth – The difference between assets and liabilities, or the total value of assets after the
debt is subtracted.
Pent-up demand – A market in which there is a scarcity of supply and as such, vacancy rates are
extremely low or non-existent.
Population – All people living in a geographic area.
Population Density – The population of an area divided by the number of square miles of land
area.
Population Trends – Changes in population levels for a particular geographic area over a spe-
cific period of time – a function of the level of births, deaths, and in/out migration.
Project-Based rent assistance – Rental assistance from any source that is allocated to the prop-
erty or a specific number of units in the property and is available to each income eligible tenant
of the property or an assisted unit.
Redevelopment – The redesign, rehabilitation, or expansion of existing properties.
Rent burden – gross rent divided by adjusted monthly household income.
Restricted rent – The rent charged under the restriction of a specific housing program or sub-
sidy.
Saturation – The point at which there is no longer demand to support additional market rate,
affordable/subsidized, rental, for-sale, or senior housing units. Saturation usually refers to a
particular segment of a specific market.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 221
APPENDIX
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 213
Senior Housing – The term “senior housing” refers to any housing development that is re-
stricted to people 55 and older. Today, senior housing includes an entire spectrum of housing
alternatives. Maxfield Research Inc. classifies senior housing into four categories based on the
level of support services. The four categories are: Active Adult, Independent Living, Assisted
Living and Memory Care.
Short Sale – A sale of real estate in which the net proceeds from selling the property do not
cover the sellers’ mortgage obligations. The difference is forgiven by the lender, or other ar-
rangements are made with the lender to settle the remainder of the debt.
Single-family home – A dwelling unit, either attached or detached, designed for use by one
household and with direct street access. It does not share heating facilities or other essential
electrical, mechanical, or building facilities with another dwelling.
Stabilized level of occupancy – The underwritten or actual number of occupied units that a
property is expected to maintain after the initial lease-up period.
Subsidized housing – Housing that is income-restricted to households earning at or below 30%
AMI. Rent is generally based on income, with the household contributing 30% of their adjusted
gross income toward rent. Also referred to as extremely low-income housing.
Subsidy – Monthly income received by a tenant or by an owner on behalf of a tenant to pay the
difference between the apartment’s contract/market rate rent and the amount paid by the ten-
ant toward rent.
Substandard conditions – Housing conditions that are conventionally considered unacceptable
and can be defined in terms of lacking plumbing facilities, one or more major mechanical or
electrical system malfunctions, or overcrowded conditions.
Target population – The market segment or segments of the given population a development
would appeal or cater to.
Tenant – One who rents real property from another individual or rental company.
Tenant-paid utilities – The cost of utilities, excluding cable, telephone, or internet necessary for
the habitation of a dwelling unit, which are paid by said tenant.
Tenure – The distinction between owner-occupied and renter-occupied housing units.
Turnover – A measure of movement of residents into and out of a geographic location.
Turnover period – An estimate of the number of housing units in a geographic location as a per-
centage of the total house units that will likely change occupants in any one year.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 222
APPENDIX
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING 214
Unrestricted units – Units that are not subject to any income or rent restrictions.
Vacancy period – The amount of time an apartment remains vacant and is available on the
market for rent.
Workforce housing – Housing that is income-restricted to households earning between 80%
and 120% AMI. Also referred to as moderate-income housing.
Zoning – Classification and regulation of land use by local governments according to use catego-
ries (zones); often also includes density designations and limitations.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 2)
Title: Maxfield housing report and dashboard primer Page 223
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: October 9, 2023
Discussion item: 3
Executive summary
Title: Proposed agenda topic
Recommended action: City council and city manager review the proposed agenda topic and
decide next steps.
Policy consideration: Does the city council want to move forward with the proposed topic?
Summary: A proposed agenda topic related to the Dakota Park pedestrian bridge was submitted
for consideration. The city council previously considered and approved the Dakota Park
infrastructure improvements project on June 5, 2023. A contract was awarded for the project on
August 21, 2023. Supporting documents from previous discussions and council actions are linked
below. The next step in the process is for the council to decide, as a group, if they would like to
open a new discussion regarding this project.
Current considerations: The city has entered into a standard contract for this project. It is currently
under construction with completion expected by the end of October. The city attorney provided
an opinion that the contract cannot be altered or amended without the city being subject to a
breach of contract and the costs associated therewith. Similarly, the contract does not provide an
option for the city to stop or pause the current project.
If the council would like to consider the addition of a bridge, they would need to do so through a
separate competitive bidding process. Construction of a bridge would not be able to occur this
year and would carry additional costs and budget implications for future years. If the council
chooses to open a new discussion regarding the project, staff recommends additional discussion
at a future study session.
Topic Proposed by Councilmember(s)
Dakota Park pedestrian bridge Margaret Rog
Financial or budget considerations: Not applicable.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: Topic proposal
January 23, 2023 study session report (p. 78)
May 8, 2023 study session staff report (p. 2)
June 5, 2023 staff report (p. 63)
Resolution No. 23-082
Minutes of June 5, 2023
August 21, 2023 staff report (p. 22)
Prepared by: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager
City Council
Study Session Topic Proposal
Date:
Prepared by:
Proposed agenda topic:
Brief Description of topic (no more than 200 words):
How does this topic align with the council strategic priorities? If not, why should the council
consider the topic:
** Please email completed forms to Kim Keller and Melissa Kennedy.
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 3)
Title: Proposed agenda topic Page 2
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: October 9, 2023
Written report: 4
Executive summary
Title: Housing programs updates
Recommended action: Review upcoming program/policy changes to the Affordable Housing
Trust Fund (AHTF) guide and the first-generation homeownership program.
Policy consideration: None at this time.
Summary: Staff review housing programs and policies annually, making changes as needed to
best serve the community. As a result of staff’s most recent review, staff is proposing two
changes.
1. During the 2023 budgeting process a future gap in funding was identified with the lack
of a continuous, dedicated funding stream for housing programs that are currently
funded out of the housing rehab fund. Changes to the Affordable Housing Trust Fund
guide will address this funding issue while continuing to provide funding to valuable
programs in St. Louis Park.
2. The first-generation homeownership program requires a minimum credit score to
access the program. Staff is removing the credit score requirement for the first-
generation program to remove an equity-related barrier to accessing the program.
This report is provided to council for awareness purposes and to provide feedback as staff
implements the changes above.
Financial or budget considerations: No additional funds will be required to make the changes
to the Affordable Housing Trust Fund or first-generation program.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of
housing and neighborhood oriented development.
Supporting documents: Discussion
Prepared by: Marney Olson, housing supervisor
Reviewed by: Karen Barton, community development director
Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 4) Page 2
Title: Housing programs updates
Discussion
Background and current considerations
Staff review housing programs and policies annually to ensure they meet the needs of the
community. During the most recent review, two concerns were noted that staff is addressing
with the changes below.
Affordable Housing Trust Fund and Housing Rehab Fund
The city has long had a housing rehab fund, out of which its housing assistance programs were
run. Previously, the housing rehab fund was funded with an administration fee of one-eighth of
one percent of the principal amount of certain types of bond issuances sponsored by the city
(“conduit bonds”). In 2018, the city council approved establishing a local affordable housing
trust fund (AHTF) in order to be better positioned for matching funds from other entities. When
the AHTF was established, the city elected to utilize the Housing and Redevelopment Authority
(HRA) levy as the primary source of funding for the AHTF and reallocate the bond fee to the
general levy.
Presently, the primary sources of funding for the city’s trust fund are an annual budgeted
allocation of HRA Levy funds and pooled tax increment financing for affordable housing. At the
time the AHTF was developed, staff and council recognized that these funding decisions would
lead to a drawdown on the Housing Rehab Fund, which would no longer have a sustainable
revenue source. Most of the city’s homeownership and home rehab programs qualify for AHTF
dollars; however, several programs had to remain in the Housing Rehab Fund as they did not
meet the established requirements of the AHTF and continue to rely on the remaining balance
in the housing rehab fund for funding.
Two of the city’s programs, the downpayment assistance program and the Move up in the Park
program both qualify for AHTF resources based on the State of Minnesota’s eligibility criteria.
However, the city’s AHTF Use Guide provides further guidance for city staff about eligible and
ineligible activities, distribution of funds and development/program affordability requirements.
The guide currently has an income target requirement for homeownership housing at or below
80% area median income (AMI). The DPA program’s AMI limit is set at 100%/115% and the
Move up in the Park program’s AMI limit is set at 120%. To bring programming and financial
policies into alignment and ensure the continued operation of these programs, staff is
recommending that the AHTF income limits for homeownership programs increase to 120%
AMI.
First-generation homeownership program
It’s recognized that historical and institutional racism has disproportionately created housing
challenges and disparities for Black communities, as well as members of communities who do
not identify as white, and other underserved low-income communities. Additionally, the
income and education gap between households of color and white households has resulted in
difficulty for Black and African American people and households of color to obtain mortgages,
leading to ongoing wealth accumulation equity issues.
The city’s first-generation homeownership program is designed to address these historic
injustices and inequities and to support inclusive and equitable communities by facilitating
Study session meeting of October 9, 2023 (Item No. 4) Page 3
Title: Housing programs updates
affordable homeownership and providing a means for wealth-building. The goal is to address
housing disparities and build power in communities most impacted by housing challenges and
disparities through an innovative program to address housing challenges for Black communities
as well as members of communities who don’t identify as white, and other underserved low-
income communities.
A buyer must be a first-generation homeowner, which, for the purposes of the program, means
they have never owned a home and parents must have never owned a home. The program is
currently available to homebuyers with a maximum household income at or below 80% of area
median income. The loan amount is based on the household’s income and the purchase price of
the home, with a maximum loan amount of $75,000. The loan is zero-interest and is forgiven at
5% per year over a 20-year owner occupancy period.
The program was launched in November 2021 and the first loan was closed in September 2022,
two additional loans have closed so far in 2023.
In reviewing the first-generation program, it was determined that that the credit score
requirement should be eliminated to remove a barrier to accessing the program. Staff does not
see a need to apply a criterion based on credit to first-generation buyers who qualify for a first
mortgage. In fact, it is contradictory to the purpose of the program since credit can also be an
equity issue. Historically marginalized communities have been disproportionately harmed by
credit score requirements when accessing loans.
Additionally, the State of Minnesota is rolling out a first-generation program. Program details
are not yet available, but the program is expected to match 10% of the purchase price up to
approximately $30,000 in assistance. The state’s program is currently expected to be funded for
the next three years. First-generation homebuyers purchasing a home in St. Louis Park will have
access to either the state’s first-generation program or the city’s first-generation program.
Homebuyers would not be able to combine, or stack, the first-generation programs; however,
buyers can pair first-generation programs with downpayment assistance programs to further
increase affordability.
Next steps: Staff will implement the changes to the AHTF immediately and work with the
Center for Energy and Environment (CEE) who administers the first-generation program to
implement the first-generation program changes.