B:\POP&HOUS.SAM

POPULATION AND HOUSING ANALYSIS

POPULATION ANALYSIS

I. Population Trends

A community's population growth is a common yardstick used to measure many types of change a town has, and can expect to, experience over time. This section will examine the population trends of Walpole, as well as project the Town's population growth into the future in order to provide a basis for determining the manner in which growth should occur in the future, and the necessary level of community services that will be required. Knowledge of past and current population trends coupled with projecting population growth into the future allows a community to determine the approximate level of municipal services that will be needed to accommodate future growth and determine the housing goals of the community. The New Hampshire Office of Energy and Planning (OEP) has estimated the population of every incorporated municipality each year for many years, based on a statewide figure obtained from the United States Bureau of the Census. .

The decennial Census data dating back to 1930 are presented on the following page in Table #1. As can be seen from the table, Walpole's population has steadily increased from 1930 to 1980 at which time the population growth slowed down. From 1980 to 1990, the population increased by only 22 people. Walpole experienced a growth spurt between 1990 and 2000 during which time the population increased by 6.11 percent or 384 people.

The methodology used by OEP to break down the Census-generated statewide total for the annual population estimates has changed over the years, resulting in data, which cannot be compared, from year to year. Although the methodology used since 1980 has been basically the same, it relies on the town tax records to estimate the population. Fluctuations in these local records may account for the variations exhibited in the OEP population estimates. One favorable aspect of the OEP data is that they allow for a regional comparison of population estimates generated by using the same methodology.

Table #1:

POPULATION – 1930 to 2003

Year Population Percent Change

1930 2,287 ----

1940 2,400 4.94

1950 2,536 5.67

1960 2,825 11.40

1970 2,966 4.99

1980 3,188 7.48

1990 3,210 0.69

1991 3,208 -0.06

1992 3,206 -0.06

1993 3,246 1.25

1994 3,272 0.80

1995 3,275 0.09

1996 3,304 0.89

1997 3,341 1.12

1998 3,359 0.54

1999 3,387 0.83

2000 3,594 6.11

2001 3,623 0.81

2002 3,652 0.80

2003 3,674 0.60

Sources: US Bureau of the Census; NH Office of Energy & Planning

Graph #1:

DECENNIAL POPULATION 1930 - 2000

Source: US Bureau of the Census

Graph #2:

ANNUAL POPULATION ESTIMATES, 1991 - 2003

Sources: US Bureau of the Census; NH Office of Energy & Planning

The two graphs shown above illustrate differing rates of change for Walpole’s population: Graph #1, depicting decennial Census data, shows a gradual but steady increase in the population every 10 years; Graph #2, which depicts annual changes, also shows a gradual increase in population from 1992 to 1999. However, from 1991 to 1992 Walpole’s population decreased by 2, and increased significantly from 1999 to 2000. The population numbers in Graph #2 are all OEP estimates with the exception of 2000 which is from the decennial census.

OEP also develops population projections for all municipalities in the state. Presented below are the most recent projections of population from the year 2005 to 2025.

Table # 2:

POPULATION PROJECTIONS

Year Population % Chg

2005 3,770 ---

2010 3,950 4.8

2015 4,180 5.8

2020 4,380 4.8

2025 4,580 4.6

Source: OEP Municipal Population Projections, March 2003

These population projections are based on the town's historical share of the county's growth. The principal assumption with this method of projecting population is that the town's trend, relative to the county's trend, will remain about the same in the future. The projections indicate that Walpole’s rate of change in growth will be approximately a 5 percent increase every five years.

Demand for housing arises from population growth and changes in household characteristics. Population growth arises from both new residents moving into the community and births within the community. Other family dynamics also create demand for housing, including resident children growing and leaving their family home for independent living, divorce, families moving to new homes to match changes in their economic standing, and aging adults leaving family homes for housing to suit any variety of needs, such as smaller, more manageable properties, group living, or relief from property taxes. Accordingly, there is demand for housing of any and all types in every community: condominiums, group quarters, single-family detached, duplex, or manufactured housing (modular and mobile homes); rental or owner-occupied; new or old; and in any setting: town, village, or country road.

Walpole, unlike most of the towns in the area, had a negative natural increase in population - which means that over the past 24 years, more people died than were born: 717 births compared to 725 deaths. Twelve of the years had positive increases, and twelve had negative increases.

Table #3:

NATURAL INCREASE

Year Births Deaths Natural Increase

1980 36 33 3

1981 34 24 10

1982 51 32 19

1983 29 22 7

1984 35 37 -2

1985 51 41 10

1986 38 31 7

1987 46 36 10

1988 29 39 -10

1989 26 41 -15

1990 20 32 -12

1991 26 28 -2

1992 22 21 1

1993 26 19 7

1994 22 32 -10

1995 13 24 -11

1996 21 35 -14

1997 21 19 2

1998 29 31 -2

1999 18 26 -8

2000 33 24 9

2001 37 34 3

2002 30 34 -4

2003 24 30 -6

Totals 717 725 -8

Source: Walpole Annual Town Reports

Statistics gathered in the US Census show the role that in-migration plays in a town's population pattern, as well as some indication of the stability of the population. Table #4 describes the place of residence for Walpole citizens from 1980 to 2000.

Table #4:

PLACE OF RESIDENCE FIVE YEARS PREVIOUS TO THE CENSUS

1980 - 2000

% of % of % of

1980 Total 1990 Total 2000 Total % Change

============================================================

Same House 1,855 61% 1,610 50% 2,035 60% 9.7%

Different House, Same County 462 15% 839 26% 490 15% 6.1%

Different County in NH 110 4% 70 2% 203 6% 84.5%

Different State or Country 603 20% 489 15% 644 19% 6.8%

=================================================================

Source: US Census Bureau

The figures in the above table indicate that during the period 1975 to 1995 (five years previous to each census), the majority of Walpole's populace had been living in the same house in Town. Although the percentage has fluctuated during the twenty-year time frame, the majority of residents have been living in Walpole in the same house for at least five years. The greatest amount of change has come from people moving into Walpole from elsewhere in Cheshire County.

Also of importance when examining the demographic make-up of a population is a breakdown of the age structure. The US Census Bureau provides the most detailed breakdown available in that it describes a 0-5 (preschool) category, a school-age category (6-17), an 18-64 (work force) category, and a 65 and over category (senior citizens).

Table #5:

AGE STRUCTURE OF THE POPULATION: 1980 - 2000

1980 1990 2000

Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent =======================================================

Birth - 5 201 6% 219 7% 260 7%

6 - 17 669 21% 491 15% 641 18%

18 - 64 1,880 59% 1,943 61% 2,052 57%

65 and over 438 14% 557 17% 641 18%

=================================================================

Source: US Census Bureau

The previous table illustrates a growing population of elders, which is entirely consistent with the national trend. The three categories that cover from birth to 64 years of age have remained about the same since 1980. The most dramatic increase has occurred in the 65 and older category, which has increased by 46% between 1980 and 2000.

Also consistent with the above information is the median age of Walpole residents, as reported by the Census Bureau. According to the 1980 census, the median age of Walpole's population was 33.9 years of age. In the 1990 census, this figure jumped to 37.8 years of age, an addition of about four years and in 2000 the median age was 40.6, an addition of about three years over the 1990 Census.

II. Economic Characteristics of the Population

The US Census provides economic statistics as well, which are useful in further describing the population. The prevailing economy determines the rate of economic growth or contraction and with that the kinds of businesses, jobs and wages available and, ultimately, the profitability of home construction for developers and availability and affordability for renters and buyers. At the same time, the availability and affordability of homes can limit or support economic expansion. The economic characteristics consist of education, income, and poverty level; these data for Walpole's population from the years 1980, 1990 and 2000 are presented on the following pages.

Table #6:

LEVEL OF EDUCATION: 1980 - 2000

---- Count of people age 25 and over who: ----

1980 % 1990 % 2000 %

=================================================================

Did not finish high school 477 24% 281 12% 276 11%

Finished high school 779 39% 795 35% 796 32%

Had 1-3 years of college 329 16% 516 23% 636 26%

Had 4+ years of college 416 21% 677 30% 781 31%

=================================================================

Source: US Census Bureau

The above table indicates that Walpole's population is becoming increasingly more educated. During the ten-year time frame between 1980 and 1990, the percentage of the total population not finishing high school dropped by 12 percentage points and, by 2000 this figure decreased by 13 percentage points. At the same time, the percentage of the population finishing high school dropped between 1980 and 1990, although the actual number of persons in this category increased. Likewise, the numbers of people with college training rose over the decades, although the percentage points did not change significantly from 1990 to 2000.

Table #7:

MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME: 1980 -2000

1980 1990 2000 % Change ============================================================

Walpole $18,198 $35,379 $53,561 194.3%

Cheshire County $18,496 $36,556 $51,043 176.0%

New Hampshire $19,724 $42,628 $57,575 191.9%

============================================================

Source: US Census Bureau

Walpole's median family income has lagged behind the County average both in 1980 and in 1990, but not significantly. In 2000, Walpole’s median family income rose higher than Cheshire County but still lagged behind the State average. The State average is much higher; however, much of this can be attributed to the high median family incomes of the Manchester-Nashua area and the seacoast region. The median figures for the town, county and state have all risen dramatically between 1980 and 2000. Much of this increase is the reflection of two-person incomes and inflation, rather than any reflection of a significantly higher standard of living.

Poverty level statistics for Walpole, Cheshire County and the State are illustrated on the following table. The percent of families below poverty level has steadily decreased in Walpole since 1980. The same is true for Cheshire County as well as the State. In 2000, the percent of families in poverty status was about the same for Walpole, Cheshire County, and the State at 3.9%, 4.4%, and 4.3% respectively.

Table #8:

POVERTY STATUS OF FAMILIES: 1980 - 2000

% below poverty level # below poverty level

1980 1990 2000 1980 1990 2000

=================================================================

Walpole 8.5% 6.1% 3.9% 60 58 40

Cheshire County 10.0% 5.2% 4.4% 1,136 950 823

New Hampshire 8.5% 4.4% 4.3% 14,715 12,842 13,948

=================================================================

Source: US Census Bureau

III. Population - Regional Context

An analysis of population trends is not complete without an examination of regional trends, given that Walpole is part of the Southwest Region. An examination of regional population trends helps one to get the "big picture" in terms of where the community fits into the region as a whole. In the following section, Walpole will be compared to the population trends of both Cheshire County and the State, as well as to its sub-region, that is, the towns, which surround Walpole. The towns within Walpole's sub-region are Surry, Westmoreland, Alstead, Langdon, Charlestown in New Hampshire, and Rockingham (including Bellows Falls), Putney, and Westminster in Vermont.

Tables #9 and #10 below and on the following page present these data; they show that Rockingham, Vermont (which includes Bellows Falls) historically has been the largest population center within Walpole's sub-region. Charlestown is the second largest population center in the sub-region, followed by Walpole. It appears that Walpole's population growth has risen in a slow but steady manner since 1970, while the other towns of the sub-region have grown dramatically. Only Rockingham has had a fluctuating population trend.

Table #9:

REGIONAL AND STATE COMPARISON OF POPULATION

1970 1980 1990 2000

================================================================

Walpole 2,966 3,188 3,210 3,594

Alstead 1,185 1,461 1,721 1,944

Surry 507 656 667 673

Westmoreland 998 1,452 1,596 1,747

Langdon 337 437 580 586

Charlestown 3,274 4,417 4,630 4,749

Rockingham, Vt. 5,501 5,538 5,484 5,309

Putney, Vt. 1,727 1,850 2,352 2,634

Westminster, Vt. 1,875 2,493 3,026 3,210

Sub-Region total 18,370 21,492 23,266 24,446

Cheshire County 52,364 62,116 70,121 73,825

New Hampshire 737,579 920,475 1,109,252 1,235,786

================================================================

Sources: US Census Bureau

Windham Regional Planning Commission

Table #10:

ANNUAL PERCENT INCREASE IN POPULATION

% Change

1970-80 1980-90 1990-00 1970-00

================================================================

Walpole 0.8% 0.1% 1.2% 21.2%

Alstead 2.3% 1.8% 1.3% 64.1%

Surry 3.0% 0.2% 0.1% 32.7%

Westmoreland 4.6% 1.0% 0.9% 75.1%

Langdon 3.0% 3.3% 0.1% 73.9%

Charlestown 3.5% 0.5% 0.3% 45.1%

Rockingham, Vt. 0.1% -0.1% -0.3% -3.5%

Putney, Vt. 0.7% 2.7% 1.2% 52.5%

Westminster, Vt. 3.3% 2.1% 0.6% 71.2%

Sub-Regional Change: 1.7% 0.8% 0.5% 33.1%

Cheshire County 1.9% 1.3% 0.5% 41.0%

New Hampshire 2.5% 2.1% 1.1% 67.5%

=================================================================

Source: US Census Bureau

The tables indicate that, with the exception of Rockingham, Vermont which actually lost population, Walpole has had the lowest rate of growth for the communities within the sub-region since 1970. The towns of Westmoreland, Langdon, Alstead, and Westminster, Vermont have had the greatest growth from 1970 to 2000. Most of these towns experienced their greatest surge in population in the '70s, and have leveled off during the 1980s and 1990s. And, although the sub-region contains several towns from Vermont, it is clear that the sub-region has grown at a slower rate than both Cheshire County and the State since 1970. Within the sub-region, Walpole has grown at a much slower rate than Cheshire County and the State during the ‘70s and ‘80s. During the 1990s, Walpole’s growth mirrored that of the State which experienced about twice the growth of Cheshire County during the same time period.

The table below depicts the percentage of the total sub-regional population accounted for by each of the individual towns. The figures indicate that Walpole's percentage of the sub-region's population has remained relatively stable since 1970. Rockingham's percentage has steadily declined since that time, and now only makes up less than a quarter (21.7%) of the sub-region's total population, whereas in 1970 the town held about 30% of the total. The towns of Alstead, Charlestown, Putney, and Westminster have had significant population increases since 1970, thus their percentage of the sub-region's population has increased.

Table #11:

PERCENT OF SUB-REGIONAL POPULATION TOTAL

1970 1980 1990 2000

============================================================

Walpole 16.3% 14.8% 13.8% 14.7%

Alstead 6.4% 6.8% 7.4% 8.0%

Surry 2.8% 3.1% 2.9% 2.8%

Westmoreland 5.4% 6.8% 6.9% 7.1%

Langdon 1.8% 2.0% 2.5% 2.4%

Charlestown 17.8% 20.5% 20.0% 19.4%

Rockingham, Vt. 29.9% 25.8% 23.6% 21.7%

Putney, Vt. 9.4% 8.6% 10.1% 10.8%

Westminster, Vt. 10.2% 11.6% 13.0% 13.1%

=================================================================

Sources: US Census Bureau

Windham Regional Planning Commission

Graph #4:

PERCENTAGE OF SUBREGIONAL POPULATION, BY TOWN, 1970 - 2000

In 1980, Walpole's population density was 86.9 people per square mile. By 1990, this figure had increased to 87.5, and by 2000 this figure increased to 98.0 people per square mile. The density for the State in 2000 was considerably higher at 133.1, while the density of Cheshire County is close to Walpole at 100.3 people per square mile. In sum, it appears that Walpole's population, on the average, is getting older and better educated. This is in keeping with national population trends, which indicate that the nation as a whole is getting "older yet wiser". The large increases in the older age categories and the decreases in the birth to age 17 categories have serious implications for the Town's future planning effort; specifically, Walpole should start planning for the needs of a larger senior citizen population.

The economic statistics indicate that Walpole's median family income is slightly lower than the State average; however, it is slightly higher than Cheshire County according to the 2000 Census. The Town's median family income is about $4,000 less than the State average, although it should be noted that the State's major economic centers are located east of Cheshire County, in the Manchester-Nashua area and the seacoast.

Historically, Walpole has had a very stable population base, experiencing a slow and moderate population increase since 1970. With the exception of the 1990s, the Town has had a consistently lower level of growth than the other communities within its sub-region, as well as the County and the State. During the 1990s, its growth was consistent with that of the sub-region, the County, and the State. The current growth trends in the State of New Hampshire have affected Walpole as well as the rest of the Southwest Region. Now is an ideal time for Walpole to plan for its future; directing growth through a comprehensive planning effort, instead of reacting to growth pressures after the fact.

HOUSING ANALYSIS

I. Local Housing Stock

This section of the Master Plan examines and describes the Town's existing housing stock. Information regarding housing trends, types, and number of units has been obtained from the records of the US Census Bureau and the NH Office of Energy and Planning. Table #12 below lists the total housing units reported in the Census of 1990 and 2000, as well as the units added each year between and following a census. The yearly count is derived by OEP, based upon information solicited from every town regarding residential building activity. Note, therefore, that the annual counts are only estimates, and may not have accounted for demolitions.

As of December 2003, Walpole had a total of 1,641 housing units, according to the Census and the OEP estimates. This represents a 12% increase in the Town's housing stock since 1990. The average number of building permits issued each year since 1990 was 11.9. The greatest number of building permits issued was in 1999 during which 21 permits were issued.

The housing supply can be further broken down for analysis by housing type: single family, multi-family, condominium units, and manufactured housing (mobile homes). Consistent with the State and most other towns, Walpole's housing stock is comprised predominantly of single family residences. In 1990, 69.7% of the Town's housing stock was of the single-family variety. By 2000, this percentage had increased about five percentage points to 74.6% of the Town's housing stock. The percentage of multi-family units declined slightly from 224.8% in 1990 to 21.9% in 2000; and manufactured housing also declined in its share of the total housing stock, from 5.5% in 1990 to 3.5% in 2000.

II. Housing - Regional Context

As with the population data, Walpole's housing stock can be evaluated in terms of its place within the sub-region, as illustrated in the table following.

Table #13:

SUBREGIONAL HOUSING SUPPLY, 1990-2000

Units built Total Percentage of

Total Units between Units the sub-region

as of 1990 1990-00 as of 2000 1990 2000

============================================================

Walpole 1,465 127 1,592 14.3% 14.9%

Alstead 843 107 950 8.2% 8.9%

Surry 262 40 302 2.6% 2.8%

Westmoreland 573 45 618 5.6% 5.8%

Langdon 243 23 266 2.4% 2.5%

Charlestown 2,051 16 2,067 20.1% 19.4%

Rockingham, VT 2,476 -51 2,425 24.2% 22.7%

Putney, VT 1,016 33 1,049 9.9% 9.8%

Westminster, VT 1,294 118 1,412 12.7% 13.2%

Total 10,223 458 10,681 100% 100%

============================================================

Sources: US Census

Windham Regional Planning Commission, Brattleboro, Vt.

The Census figures show Walpole to account for about 15% of the total housing stock of the region in 2000; this represents a slight increase from the 14% figure of 1990. Not surprisingly, Rockingham and Charlestown, respectively, have the largest share of the regional housing supply, although they both lost a few percentage points between 1990 and 2000. Alstead, Langdon, and Surry slightly increased their share of the regional supply, yet they still represent a relatively small share of the total in absolute numbers.

A comparison of the proportion of single family, multi-family, and manufactured housing between Walpole and the other towns in the sub-region shows that Walpole's percentage of single family and multi-family housing is somewhat higher than that of the sub-region. In addition, Walpole has a much lower percentage of manufactured housing units, although the sub-regional average for manufactured housing may be somewhat slanted due to the numerous mobile home units in Charlestown and Putney, Westminster, and Rockingham, Vt.

Table #14:

HOUSING TYPES, WALPOLE AND SUBREGION - 2000

Manu-

Single % of Multi- % of factured % of Total

Family Total Family Total Housing Total Units

======================================================================

Walpole 1,187 74.6% 349 21.9% 56 3.5% 1,592

Alstead 743 78.2% 89 9.4% 109 11.5% 950

Surry 251 83.1% 12 4.0% 19 6.3% 302

Westmoreland 583 94.3% 27 4.4% 8 1.3% 618

Langdon 223 83.8% 7 2.6% 39 14.7% 266

Charlestown 1,084 52.4% 353 17.1% 630 30.5% 2,067

Rockingham, VT 1,183 48.8% 662 27.3% 167 6.9% 2,425

Putney, VT 726 69.2% 118 11.2% 143 13.6% 1,049

Westminster, VT 1,095 77.5% 49 3.5% 195 13.8% 1,412

Total 7,075 66.2% 1,666 15.6% 1,366 12.8% 10,681

======================================================================

Sources: US Census Bureau

Windham Regional Planning Commission

Data on family-oriented households and individual households is also available from the Census Bureau. According to the Census, Walpole had 937 family households (70.8% of the total #) and 386 non-family households (29.2% of the total#) in 1990. By 2000, the number of family households had declined slightly to 68% of the total number of households and the number of non-family households increased slightly to 31.8% of the total. This has been the State and national trend as well over the last few decades.

It should also be noted that Walpole's average household size has been in decline as well. This is also the case on the State and national level. Much of this can be attributed to the nation's increasing elderly population and the large number of single parent households.

The majority of Walpole's housing stock is owner-occupied. According to the 1970 Census, approximately 75% of the housing stock was owner-occupied and 25% was renter-occupied. In 1980, the percentage of owner-occupied housing had dropped to 72% and the share of renter-occupied housing had increased to 28%; these ratios stayed about the same through 1990 and 2000. Thus, it appears that the balance is shifting in the renter-occupied direction. At the same time, however, it should be noted that vacancies have fluctuated through time; in 1980, 7.9% of all units were vacant, by 1990 this figure had increased to 9.7%, and in 2000 this figure decreased to 6.4% which is lower than the number of vacancies in 1980. Most of the vacancies are found in the rental market and not in the owner-occupied market.

The cost of housing has skyrocketed over the years. In 1970, the median value of an owner occupied housing unit was $15,406; by 1980, it had increased to $41,800; by 1990, the median value of a home in Walpole was $110,800. Today, the average value of a home in Walpole is estimated at $118,400, and many sell for much more. The greatest increase in housing cost occurred during the 1980s (37.7%) followed closely by the 1970s (36.9%). The rental market has experienced a similar increase. The 1970 Census reported the median monthly rent in Walpole to be $89; by 1980, the median monthly rent had increased to $153; by 1990, the median monthly rent increased to $377. Today, the median monthly rent in Walpole is about $504.

In conclusion, the growth of a community's population and housing stock is tied very closely to its economy and to the regional, state and national economy as well. The combination of internal and external factors, both economic and social, will affect the future of Walpole in many ways. The key will be for the Town to plan ahead and help direct change, instead of letting change direct the Town.

III. Housing Needs Assessment

This section will examine Walpole's housing stock in terms of addressing the Town's existing and future housing needs and make future recommendations. On the issue of affordable housing, a regional housing study will be incorporated into this element, based upon the requirements set forth in State legislation.

In 1988 the NH State Legislature, through RSA 36:47, II, mandated that all regional planning commissions undertake a regional housing needs assessment for their region, the result of which is an indication as to whether the individual towns in the Southwest Region are providing housing for low and moderate income households. The Southwest Region Planning Commission completed Part I of the housing needs assessment in June 2003. This report entitled Southwest Region Housing Trends and Conditions presents 1) a brief discussion of housing as a community development issue, including an overview of housing-related information at the national, state, regional and municipal levels, and 2) an array of data and statistics relevant to housing and prevailing socioeconomic conditions in the Southwest Region. Part II of the regional housing needs assessment using the State’s new methodology was completed in January of 2005. This report entitled Southwest Region Housing Needs Study as well as Part I can be found at the following link: http://www.swrpc.org/.

Scope of Study

This study analyzes housing needs for the Southwest Region, and an estimate of future housing production needs for the Southwest Region. This assessment appends the report “Southwest Region housing, Trends and Conditions”.

Housing needs are typically discussed in terms of affordability and availability. This needs study uses data from the U.S. Census. Cost of housing for renters and owners is compared to prevailing incomes, or more specifically, the proportion of incomes being spent on housing, referred to as “cost burden,” hereafter. This cost comparison is studied for all income levels, but is particularly important for low-and-moderate-income households, i.e. households earning less than 80% of the median area income (MAI). In general, affordability is considered a problem if prevailing housing costs require households below 80% MAI to spend more than 30% of their annual income on housing rent or mortgage payments. Gaps between housing costs and ability of areas residents to pay are referred to as “cost burden”. Low- and moderate-income households and elderly-resident households are of special concern regarding housing costs.

The availability of housing is measured by vacancy rates of both renter and owner-occupied units. While there is no single convention about what percentage of an area’s housing units “should” be vacant and available for new occupants any given time, vacancy rates between 5% and 10% are considered favorable – to absorb changes in prevailing economic conditions and provide mobility for householders to change housing based on changing household economics.

Future housing demand is projected for the year 2010 using population and employment projections provided by State agencies. Projections assume no change from 2000 in the proportions among number of households, employment rates, commuter rates and household size.

Summary of Findings

Cost Burden

Rising incomes during the period allowed the total number of cost-burdened renter households to be slightly reduced between 1990 and 2000. In contrast, increasing home prices increased the number of cost-burdened homeowners slightly during the same period. Rental housing cost burden increased in all income groups below the 80% area median family income levels. A high percentage of family renter households (77%) had a high housing cost burden in 2000. The number of elderly homeowners (65 years+) with a high housing cost burden also increased during that period. However, the cost burden for non-elderly family owners slightly decreased during that decade.

In 2000, 3,357 renter households in the Southwest Region (32.3% of renters) spent 30% or more of their gross income for rent; 2,558 renters (24.6% of renters) paid rents that were 35% or more of their income; and 1,456 renters (14% of renters) paid 50% or more of their income on rent. Rental cost burdens rates state-wide were generally higher: 30%, 26% and 16%, respectively.

The numbers of households with high cost burdens were essentially the same in 2000 as in 1990 and accordingly, the percentage of households with a high housing cost burden declined. This change is attributed to the sharp decline in cost burdens for those households earning more than 100% of Area Median Family Income (AMFI).

The U.S. Census data show that the number of cost-burdened households increased among very low and low income renter households, those that earn less than 50% and 30% of AMFI, respectively. In 2000, 15% to 30% more owner households in income brackets below 100% AMFI spent at least 35% of their income on housing costs than in 1990. Nearly 75% of the renters and owners with high cost burdens are householders under the age of 65. The cost burden rates for these groups are higher in the Southwest Region than the statewide values.

Affordable housing needs are most acute among renters earning less than 50% of the area median family income. While high cost burdens affected a smaller proportion of households in 2000 than in 1990, the affordability problem appears concentrated among the lowest income groups in 2000. In 2000, 58% of the low and very low income renters had a housing cost burden of 30% or more of income (1990: 66%). Among all other renters, only 13.5% had this level of cost burden (1990: 18%). Similarly, among single family homeowners, 40% of the low and very low income group had a cost burden of 30% or more (1990: 60%). Only 19.9% among those with incomes above the low income threshold paid as much (1990: 13%).

Vacancy Rates

In the Southwest Region, net housing growth during the 1990-2000 period was primarily growth in homeownership housing. However, vacancy rates for owner-occupied units dropped from 2.3% in 1990 to 1.5% in 2000. The rental vacancy rate in the Southwest Region was 6.4% in 1990 and 3.8% in 2000. Vacant housing units for sale and rent in the Region declined by about one third between 1990 and 2000. The Southwest Region’s 3.8% rental vacancy rate in 2000 was among the lowest outside the urbanized areas of the state. In 2000, 38,305 housing units were available for year-round occupancy, which amounts to a net increase of 2,997 in total housing units during the 1990s. Of this total, there was a net increase of only 645 units in the rental housing inventory in the Region, as opposed to a net increase of 2,352 units in the ownership market. Today, both owner- and renter-occupied units are considered to be too low and to create am imbalance between competition for housing (and housing cost) and prevailing wages.

Future Demand / Production

Future demand for new housing is projected for the period 200 to 2010 using three approaches: 1) assuming that the Region will accrue a constant share of the state’s employment growth; 2) the Region accruing the same rate of employment growth that it experienced between 1990 and 2000; and 3) based on the NH Office of State Planning population projections. Production needs reflect household growth, correction of vacancy deficits, maintenance of vacancy allowances, and replacement of the housing stock that may be lost from demolition or disaster.

During the 1990s, in the Southwest Region private sector employment grew by 15.3% and the number of households by 10%. The assumption of the employment-based model is that, over the long term, housing needs will increase principally as a function of employment growth within the state. In the model, it is assumed that there is a constant relationship between employment and the number of resident workers. An annual employment growth rate of 1.6% is assumed, based on New Hampshire Employment Security job growth projections for the 2000 - 2010 period. Slight declines in household size, as well as the need to rectify existing vacancy deficits in the housing inventory are incorporated in the production model.

The Southwest Region will experience an average annual increase about 455 households between 2000 and 2010 if the NH Office of Energy and Planning population projections for the year 2010 are realized. In order to rectify existing vacancy deficits and maintain an adequate inventory of available units, while also replacing units lost from the inventory from demolition or disaster, about 546 units per year are needed between 2000 and 2010. Of this total, about 165 units of rental housing and 381 units of owner-occupied housing per year would be needed to maintain balanced tenure (owner/renter shares of households) at the 2000 level.

Note: Projections A and B are based on NH Employment Security data.

Projection C is based on NH Office of Energy and Planning data.

1. Total Number of Housing Units in the Southwest Region Projected for 2010

	Employment-Based, High	Employment-Based, Low	Population-Based
Owner	32,700	31,125	31,304
Renter	13,009	12,383	12,454
Total	45,709	43,507	43,758

2. Number of New Units Produced in the Southwest Region, 2000 through 2010

	Employment-Based, High	Employment-Based, Low	Population-Based
Owner	5,202	3,627	3,806
Renter	2,202	1,576	1,647
Total	7,404	5,202	5,453

3. Annual Production of New Units the Southwest Region, 2000 through 2010

	Employment-Based, High	Employment-Based, Low	Population-Based
Owner	520	362	381
Renter	202	158	165
Total	722	520	546

4. Subtotal: Number of New Units Produced in the Southwest Region, 2000 through

2010, for Residents working within Region

	Employment-Based, High	Employment-Based, Low	Population-Based
Owner	3,973	2,770	nc
Renter	1,682	1,203	nc
Total	5,655	3,973	nc

5. Subtotal: Annual Production of New Units in the Southwest Region, 2000 through

2010, for Residents working within Region

	Employment-Based, High	Employment-Based, Low	Population-Based
Owner	397	277	nc
Renter	168	120	nc
Total	565	397	nc

Clearly, Walpole cannot influence the regional economy to any great degree. The regional economy will, to a large extent, dictate where and how many "affordable" housing units will be built. The Planning Board realizes that the Town can, however, influence to some extent through its Zoning Ordinance, the cost of development by regulating densities, lot sizes, and allowances for mobile homes and multi-family units. Examination of the Walpole Zoning Ordinance reveals the following provisions that deal with housing issues:

1. Single and two-family units are allowed by right in the Residential A and B districts.

2. Multi-family units are allowed by special exception in the Residential A and B Districts.

3. Single and two-family units are allowed by right in the Commercial District.

4. Apartment buildings are allowed by right in the Commercial District.

5. Single and two-family units are allowed by right in the Rural/Agricultural District.

6. Manufactured housing is allowed on individual lots by right in the Rural/Agricultural District.

7. Single and two-family units are allowed by right in the Timberland District.

In summary, Walpole's zoning ordinance does permit a number of low and moderate income housing opportunities. Several strategies and techniques exist that a town can employ to further housing goals, such as the donation of land and/or infrastructure improvements for housing projects, and the support of subsidized housing through various state and/or federal program. The Town of Walpole has, in fact, participated in two federally-funded Community Development Block Grant projects, the result of which has been the renovation of 16 apartments for low and moderate-income residents in North Walpole, and the complete renovation and conversion of the old Drewsville Mansion into five low- and moderate-income apartments and a Headstart Center for pre-school children.

Local governments can also act as housing developers, under special circumstances, typically through municipal use of federal funds to create special- needs housing to serve the elderly and low-income families. The community may establish rent-assisted or rent-controlled housing, by working with public agencies such as the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and regional non-profit Community Action Program (CAP) agencies, or by establishing a municipal housing authority. Non-profit developers, such as CAP agencies and housing trusts may create rent-assisted or rent-controlled housing on their own, typically to address special needs groups.

Another technique available is Open Space Residential Development which, from a design perspective, provides for the clustering of dwellings on smaller lots in order to maintain open space on the remainder of the total parcel. One primary purpose of this technique is to preserve open space and a rural atmosphere, but a result of this type of development can be the provision of affordable housing, in that advantage can be taken of economies of scale through reduced road construction, etc. The voters of Walpole have not yet supported this option for their zoning ordinance; the Planning Board will, however, continue to monitor public opinion on this issue.

In conclusion, the Planning Board recommends that the various boards in Walpole review all of the existing land use regulations in terms of providing a variety of housing types, preserving the existing housing stock, and ensuring that new development fits into the existing community character. The Town might consider adopting an affordable housing policy in conjunction with a regional policy. This will give the Planning Board the framework for evaluating new residential development proposals in terms of the Town's existing and future housing needs.