My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2012-04-17_packet
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Housing Redevelopment Authority
>
Agendas and Packets
>
2012
>
2012-04-17_packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/19/2012 8:35:23 AM
Creation date
4/19/2012 8:35:17 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Housing Redevelopment Authority
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Agenda/Packet
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
4/17/2012
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
33
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
HRA Meeting <br />Minutes – Tuesday, February 21, 2012 <br />Page 3 <br />1 <br />The presentation provided with ensuing discussion Roseville-specific household distributions <br />2 <br />form 2003 – 2010; age demographic comparisons; the diverse age range for the Baby Boomer <br />3 <br />generation from ages 46 to 64 years old; increase in Generation Xer’s from 2005 to 2010; <br />4 <br />increasing resident diversity and people of color than typical in the past, particularly in the <br />5 <br />southeast and southern portions of Roseville, with obvious pockets popping up, creating a need <br />6 <br />to address programs and efforts to meet those specific needs. <br />7 <br />8 <br />Further discussion included types of housing and owner/renter demographics and trends; <br />9 <br />resident movement within and into and out of Roseville between 2009 and 2010; speculations <br />10 <br />in why Roseville is retaining more residents related to its urban-friendly development, <br />11 <br />construction of condominium housing stock in the past decade; and whether opportunities are <br />12 <br />being missed to increase the younger generation just entering the workplace and gravitating to <br />13 <br />inner-city Minneapolis or St. Paul housing to take advantage of entertainment and housing <br />14 <br />amenities that better fit their generation. <br />15 <br />16 <br />Additional discussion included changes in sing-family home values; availability of affordable <br />17 <br />housing values in Roseville; opinion of the ULI about the range of housing stock available in <br />18 <br />Roseville from upper end, move up and/or starter housing; as well as income level of Roseville <br />19 <br />residents; and typical dual earners required for households to afford housing and based on <br />20 <br />Roseville median home prices compared to the area’s median incomes and home prices. <br />21 <br />22 <br />Discussion continued related to meeting the needs and more active lifestyles and different <br />23 <br />concepts of retirement of the growing senior population in Roseville (e.g. accessibility, <br />24 <br />walkabiltiy, connectivity); the need to meet the needs for amenities for both younger residents <br />25 <br />at the inception of their careers as well as senior citizens; value of mixed use land use in <br />26 <br />meeting needs of a more active senior citizen demographic over the next ten (10) years by <br />27 <br />providing health care, medical space and other amenities integrated into those mixed uses to <br />28 <br />facilitate employment opportunities as well as retirement needs. <br />29 <br />30 <br />Ms. Kelsey noted the ever-increasing use of technological advances in integrating amenity <br />31 <br />packages into developments for Baby Boomers, some through single-detached communities <br />32 <br />equipped with electronic devices for monitoring lifestyle and medical needs to facilitate aging <br />33 <br />in place, and a corresponding reduction in nursing bed facilities due to that desire for aging in <br />34 <br />place. <br />35 <br />36 <br />Demographic presentation and discussion continued in addressing where Roseville residents <br />37 <br />worked based on 2009 labor force data estimates of half of its population working (15,056 <br />38 <br />working residents); averages age and salary of Roseville working residents; and where <br />39 <br />Roseville employees came from for the estimated 28,644 total jobs in Roseville; and types of <br />40 <br />jobs in Roseville, with the top three (3) categories (based on NAICS classifications) in the <br />41 <br />retail trade; professional, scientific and technical services; and administrative support and <br />42 <br />waste management; followed by food service and accommodation (hospitality industry). <br />43 <br />44 <br />Demographics from the 2009 census estimated Roseville jobs provided 30,140 employees <br />45 <br />coming into Roseville to work; 1,879 residents living and working in Roseville; 14,506 <br />46 <br />residents leaving Roseville each day to work elsewhere; and a 34,000 – 50,000 day-time <br />47 <br />population transition daily, indicating a need to structure services in the City of Roseville <br />48 <br />accordingly. <br />49 <br />50 <br />Based on 2010 census demographics, Mr. Trudgeon advised that Roseville’s population was <br />51 <br />33,660 residents with a median age of 42.1 years old; those under ten years old at 10.3%; and <br />52 <br />as previously noted, an increased diversity in ethnicity. <br />53 <br />54 <br />Mr. Trudgeon noted increases in those living alone in the community and within a wide range <br />55 <br />of ages; provided demographics of owner-occupied versus rental housing stock in Roseville; <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.