Population, Household and Housing Characteristics

Transcription

1 GENERAL POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS Population Using State Department of Finance official population counts as a basis, the Association of Bay Area Governments ( ABAG ) estimates the population in various jurisdictions of the nine-county Bay Area. Coupled with limited releases of the 2000 Census, the following chart shows that, between 1990 and 2000, Fremont had the largest numerical growth in population in the County, with about 30,000 people added to the City. The City of Alameda, in contrast, showed a loss of more than 1,700 people during this time period. The Unincorporated Areas of the County grew by almost 16,000 people. Countywide, the population grew by about 167,000 people. Population Growth in Alameda County, Alameda -1,720 Albany Berkeley Dublin 6,674 Emeryville 1,142 Fremont Hayward 28,687 30,074 Livermore 16,604 Newark 4,610 Oakland 27,242 Piedmont 350 Pleasanton San Leandro Union City 11,229 13,084 13,107 Unincorporated 15,750-5, ,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 Source: ABAG s Projections 2000 and 2000 Census Disaggregating the Unincorporated Areas of the County shows that the largest numerical increase in population took place in Castro Valley, which grew by 8,600 people between 1990 and 2000, followed by Cherryland/Fairview, Ashland and San Lorenzo, respectively. The remaining Unincorporated Areas showed a gain of about 900 people. It is interesting to note that the Unincorporated Area of Ashland grew by about as many people as did the City of Newark during this time period. Page 8

2 Population Growth in the Unincorporated Alameda County, Ashland 4,203 Castro Valley 8,629 Cherryland/Fairview 6,402 San Lorenzo 1,911 Remainder ,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 Source: ABAG s Projections 2002 The percentage growth change in the County shows a very different picture than the change in absolute numerical growth. The following chart shows that the largest percentage change in population in the County between 1990 and 2000 occurred in Dublin and Livermore, both of which grew about 29% over that time period. Fremont, which showed the largest numerical growth, had a somewhat higher than average percentage growth (17%). Oakland, with the third highest numerical growth figure, neared the bottom in terms of percentage growth. The Unincorporated Area as a whole grew by 13%. Percentage Population Growth, Alameda County Alameda Albany -2.3% 0.7% Berkeley Dublin 28.6% Emeryville 19.9% Fremont 17.3% Hayward 25.8% Livermore 29.3% Newark 12.2% Oakland 7.3% Piedmont 3.3% Pleasanton 25.9% San Leandro 16.5% Union City 24.4% Unincorporated 13.1% -5.0% 0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 30.0% 35.0% Source: ABAG s Projections 2002 Page 9

3 The population growth by percentage for the Unincorporated Areas of the County shows that Cherryland/Fairview grew by more than 30%, followed by Ashland (25%). Although the remainder areas grew by just 900 people, this represented a gain of almost 16%. Population Growth by Percentage in the Unincorporated Alameda County, Ashland 25.3% Castro Valley 17.7% Cherryland/Fairview 31.7% San Lorenzo 9.6% Remainder 15.8% 0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 30.0% 35.0% Source: ABAG s Projections 2002 Age Composition Like much of the Bay Area, Alameda County s population has been aging, as baby boomers move towards middle age. For example, the age cohort increased 63.6% by the year The age group also saw significant increases (37.9%), as did the 80+ age group (36.4%). The age group showed a significant drop for the period (-21.8%), which is consistent with the overall aging of the population. However, increases in the 0-9 and age ranges indicate that, even as the population generally ages, there has been a boost in the young population as well. Population by Age, Alameda County Age Cohort # % # % % Change , % 224, % 20.8% , % 198, % 24.5% , % 182, % -21.8% , % 244, % 0.6% , % 243, % 37.9% , % 170, % 63.6% , % 94, % 3.3% , % 69, % 15.8% , % 40, % 36.4% TOTAL 1,284, % 1,470, % 14.4% Source: California Department of Finance, 1999 Racial/Ethnic Composition According to California Department of Finance estimates, people of color populations in Alameda County grew from 46.4% of the total population in 1990 to 58.7% in The Page 10

4 fastest growing group included Hispanics, which grew 87.7% during this period (from 13.8% of the population to 22.9%). Asian/Pacific Islanders share in the County grew from 14.6% in 1990 to 20.9% in 2000, or nearly 62%. Whites, on the other hand, dropped from 53.4% to 40.9% during this same time period. This table shows that, by 2000, there was no single ethnic or racial majority. Racial Composition, Alameda County % Change Ethnicity # % # % African American 224, % 211, % -5.9% Asian/Pacific Islander 186, % 301, % 61.5% Hispanic 176, % 330, % 87.7% Native American 6, % 5, % -18.4% White 683, % 591, % -13.5% Other 2, % 4, % 93.5% TOTAL 1,279, % 1,443, % 12.9% Source: California Department of Finance, 1999 and 2000 Census Looking at the new Census data for the Unincorporated Areas, a number of interesting conclusions can be made. The following table shows that, for most ethnic categories, each of the areas in the unincorporated County experienced significant growth except in the category for Whites, which universally declined. For example, African Americans represented 12.8% of the population in Ashland in 1990, and grew to 19.6% of the population in 2000, representing a growth of 91.9% in absolute terms for African Americans over ten years. However, during this same time period, Ashland s White residents declined from 55.5% of the population to 26.9% of the population, representing a decline of 39.4% between 1990 and Asians also saw significant growth over the past ten years, especially in Ashland, Cherryland, Castro Valley and the Remainder areas of the County. The Hispanic population more than doubled in Ashland by 2000, while in the Remainder areas of the County Hispanics decreased in population by about 28%. Native Americans which have historically represented a small percentage of the population in the Unincorporated Areas of the County declined still further between 1990 and 2000 everywhere except Castro Valley, which experienced an increase of more than 10%. Page 11

5 Racial Composition by Area, Unincorporated Alameda County, Castro Valley Cherryland San Lorenzo Remainder Total Ethnicity Ashland Fairview African American % of total for area % 2.6% 5.6% 18.4% 1.3% 6.5% 5.8% % of total for area % 4.2% 9.5% 20.1% 2.7% 8.4% 8.4% Change % 80.9% 109.8% 12.8% 130.8% 30.0% 65.1% Asian/Pacific Islander % of total for area % 8.7% 6.0% 10.0% 10.1% 6.0% 8.7% % of total for area % 13.8% 9.2% 10.7% 15.6% 14.5% 13.8% Change % 80.7% 92.0% 10.5% 69.4% 139.0% 78.5% Hispanic % of total for area % 9.1% 26.5% 9.5% 15.6% 23.8% 15.1% % of total for area % 12.0% 41.7% 15.1% 24.7% 17.1% 21.0% Change % 50.9% 96.5% 65.3% 73.2% -28.3% 57.8% Native American % of total for area % 0.4% 1.1% 0.7% 0.6% 0.7% 0.7% % of total for area % 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% Change % 10.6% -47.5% -54.0% -17.1% -41.2% -22.7% White % of total for area % 79.1% 60.8% 61.2% 72.3% 62.5% 69.7% % of total for area % 65.6% 35.7% 48.8% 52.4% 55.3% 52.2% Change % -5.8% -26.9% -17.5% -20.6% -11.8% -15.2% Source: 1990 and 2000 Census Population Density Population density is the total number of people per square mile. A study of the limited 2000 Census data available (April, 2001) showed that, of the ten densest places in the Bay Area, five are in Alameda County. Of those, three are in the Unincorporated Areas of the County. The following table depicts this trend (Unincorporated Areas are in italics). Population Density, Selected Jurisdictions, 2000 Place Persons per Square Mile Rank Place Persons per Square Mile Rank San Francisco 16,634 1 Piedmont 6, Daly City 13,703 2 San Leandro 6, Cherryland 11,859 3 Emeryville 5, San Pablo 11,726 4 Castro Valley 3, East Palo Alto 11,585 5 Union City 3, Ashland 11,284 6 Fairview 3, Berkeley 9,823 7 Hayward 3, Albany 9,665 8 Livermore 3, Broadmoor 8,998 9 Newark 3, San Lorenzo 7, Pleasanton 2, Oakland 7, Fremont 2, Alameda 6, Dublin 2, Source: 2000 Census Page 12

6 GENERAL HOUSEHOLD CHARACTERISTICS Households and Household Size ABAG s Projections 2002 shows that there were 523,366 households 1 in Alameda County in 2000, an increase of 9.1% since The following table shows the growth rate in households by jurisdiction during this same period. The largest growth occurred in Dublin, with an increase in households of 37.1%. Emeryville, Livermore and Pleasanton also saw significant growth of more than 20%, while Albany saw a reduction in the number of households (-2.5%). Household Growth in Alameda County, Jurisdiction Growth Rate Alameda 29,078 30,226 1, % Albany 7,192 7, % Berkeley 43,453 44,955 1, % Dublin 6,802 9,325 2, % Emeryville 3,227 3, % Fremont 60,198 68,237 8, % Hayward 40,071 44,804 4, % Livermore 20,643 26,123 5, % Newark 12,015 12, % Oakland 144, ,790 6, % Piedmont 3,755 3, % Pleasanton 18,489 23,311 4, % San Leandro 29,128 30,642 1, % Union City 15,701 18,642 2, % Unincorporated 45,245 48,529 3, % TOTAL 479, ,366 43, % Source: ABAG s Projections 2002 In the Unincorporated Areas, the number of households grew overall by about 13%, with the remainder areas showing the largest increase (34.9%). Cherryland/Fairview also saw significant growth in the number of households (21.1%), while San Lorenzo s and Ashland s growth in households was less than the Unincorporated Areas as a whole (2.2% and 7.5%, respectively). Household Growth in Unincorporated Alameda County, Place Growth Rate Ashland 6,722 7, % Castro Valley 19,118 21,606 2, % Cherryland/Fairview 7,447 9,022 1, % San Lorenzo 7,341 7, % Remainder 1,687 2, % TOTAL 2 42,315 47,627 5, % Source: ABAG s Projections 2002 Household size is an important indicator to track because it helps identify whether more or fewer people are living together in housing. When the number of persons per 1 The definition of a household includes all persons, whether related or unrelated, who reside in a housing unit. 2 Because of the varying ways demographics are calculated among different indicators, the totals for the Unincorporated Areas of the County many not correlate directly between tables showing all jurisdictions in the County and tables showing the disaggregated places in the Unincorporated Areas. Page 13

7 household rises, it can be an indicator of increased fertility rates, people doubling up in order to cut housing costs, or the influx of immigrant families, many who have large or extended families. The following table shows that household sizes have grown considerably in some areas between 1990 and 2000, while other areas have shown reductions in household sizes. The largest increases in household size occurred in San Leandro (10.3%) and Hayward (12.0%). Dublin experienced the greatest reduction in household size, at 7.3%. Countywide, the increase was about 5%. Source: ABAG s Projections 2002 Household Sizes by Jurisdiction, Alameda County, Jurisdiction % Change Alameda % Albany % Berkeley % Dublin % Emeryville % Fremont % Hayward % Livermore % Newark % Oakland % Piedmont % Pleasanton % San Leandro % Union City % COUNTYWIDE % Within the Unincorporated Areas, Ashland s increase in average household size was about 17%, with Castro Valley experiencing an increase of 8.7%. The remaining Unincorporated Areas saw an increase of just 0.7%. Household Sizes, Unincorporated Alameda County, Place % Change Ashland % Castro Valley % Cherryland/Fairview % San Lorenzo % Remainder % COUNTYWIDE % Source: ABAG s Projections 2002 In 2000, 48.5% of the County s households were renters, while the remaining 51.5% were owners. This represented a significant increase in the percentage of householders who were renters over the previous ten years. The vast majority of this change could be attributed to increasing renter rates in Emeryville, where the percentage of renters increased from 62% in 1990 to 90% in Overall, the Unincorporated Areas of the County had an above average homeownership rate, at 61.4%. Page 14

8 Tenure by Jurisdiction, Alameda County, 2000 Source: 2000 Census Jurisdiction Renters Owners Alameda 56.6% 43.4% Albany 55.3% 44.7% Berkeley 61.8% 38.2% Dublin 36.6% 63.4% Emeryville 89.9% 10.1% Fremont 37.4% 62.6% Hayward 51.3% 48.7% Livermore 29.0% 71.0% Newark 31.4% 68.6% Oakland 62.5% 37.5% Piedmont 9.5% 90.5% Pleasanton 28.1% 71.9% San Leandro 42.3% 57.7% Union City 31.7% 68.3% Unincorporated 38.6% 61.4% TOTAL 48.5% 51.5% The Unincorporated Areas saw a higher percentage of owned housing than the County as a whole, but within individual areas of the unincorporated portions a great deal of variation existed in For example, Castro Valley and San Lorenzo are predominantly comprised of ownership housing, whereas a majority of housing in Ashland are rented. The following table depicts these statistics. Tenure by Place, Unincorporated Alameda County, 2000 Source: 2000 Census Place Renters Owners Ashland 67.0% 33.0% Castro Valley 32.2% 67.8% Cherryland/Fairview 48.2% 51.8% San Lorenzo 21.2% 78.8% Remainder 36.1% 63.9% TOTAL 38.6% 61.4% GENERAL HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS Total Housing Units The California Department of Finance estimates that in 2000 there were 536,495 housing units in the County, an increase of 6.4% in total housing units since Increases in the number of housing units within cities may be a combination of newly constructed units and annexations of land with existing housing stock. The following table shows that, between 1990 and 1999, there were about 1,200 units from the Unincorporated Areas of the County that were annexed by various cities. Hayward had the largest number of added units, with nearly 1,000 units annexed from surrounding areas. Page 15

9 Housing Units Annexed from Unincorporated Areas to Incorporated Jurisdictions, 1990 to 1999 Housing Jurisdiction Units Hayward 982 Livermore 175 Pleasanton 45 TOTAL 1,202 Source: Alameda County Community Development Agency, 2001 In terms of overall growth in the number of housing units, the City of Dublin had the largest increase (37.3%) between 1990 and 2000, followed by Pleasanton (22.3%). The cities of Emeryville and Livermore also increased their housing stocks by more than 20% since The largest numerical increases, however, occurred in the Cities of Fremont, Livermore and Pleasanton. The Unincorporated Areas of the County increased about 5%. The following table shows the State s projection of growth in total housing units by jurisdiction during the period from 1990 to Total Housing Units by Jurisdiction, Alameda County, Jurisdiction # Change % Change Alameda 30,520 31,852 1, % Albany 7,468 7, % Berkeley 45,735 46, % Dublin 6,992 9,597 2, % Emeryville 3,640 4, % Fremont 62,400 69,616 7, % Hayward 42,168 44,991 2, % Livermore 21,489 26,130 4, % Newark 12,284 13, % Oakland 154, , % Piedmont 3,848 3, % Pleasanton 19,361 23,678 4, % San Leandro 30,189 31,272 1, % Union City 16,259 19,042 2, % Unincorporated 47,019 49,407 2, % TOTAL 504, ,495 32, % Note: Annexations from County to City account for part of the increase in some cities. Within the Unincorporated Areas of the County, Castro Valley saw the greatest numerical increase in housing units between 1990 and 2000 (1,732 units), while Fairview experienced the largest percentage increase, at 31.1%. The unincorporated remainder areas saw a drop of about 1,200 units, which corresponds with the number of units annexed by incorporated jurisdictions from the Unincorporated Areas. The following table illustrates these changes. Page 16

10 Total Housing Units by Place, Unincorporated Alameda County, Place # Change % Change Ashland 7,061 7, % Castro Valley 19,682 21,414 1, % Cherryland 4,585 4, % Fairview 3,206 4, % San Lorenzo 7,471 7, % Remainder 4,971 3,778-1, % TOTAL 46,976 49,062 2, % Vacancy Rate REALFACTS, an information clearinghouse in the Bay Area, conducts studies of apartment buildings with more than 40 units to illustrate the change in housing costs, vacancy rates, and the like. REALFACTS research on vacancy rates in Alameda County since 1995 shows that, although rates were extremely low in 2000, they have since rebounded substantially. Rental Housing Vacancy Rates, Alameda County, % 6.1% 5.0% 4.0% 4.0% 3.4% 3.7% 3.4% 4.3% 3.0% 2.0% 2.4% 1.5% 1.0% Source: REALFACTS, 2002 Housing Types Local jurisdictions differ in the kind of housing units that have been developed over time. For example, some cities have large numbers of single family housing, while others are rich in multifamily units. As of 2000, the State estimates that 39.2% of the County s housing stock consists of multifamily housing units, 53.2% of the housing stock consists of detached single family homes and 6.4% are attached single family homes. Other housing types include mobile homes (1.3%). The individual jurisdictions are as follows: Page 17

11 Housing Type By Alameda County Jurisdiction, 2000 Single Multifamily Mobile Total Family 2-4 Units 5+ Units Homes Alameda 31,852 15,736 5,797 10, % 18.2% 32.3% 0.1% Albany 7,493 3, , % 10.5% 36.4% 0.0% Berkeley 46,285 20,754 9,561 15, % 20.7% 34.5% 0.0% Dublin 9,597 6, , % 2.1% 30.4% 0.3% Emeryville 4, , % 11.9% 66.5% 0.1% Fremont 69,616 48,539 2,054 18, % 3.0% 26.2% 1.1% Hayward 44,991 25,316 3,108 14,281 2, % 6.9% 31.7% 5.1% Livermore 26,130 20,626 1,001 4, % 3.8% 15.4% 1.9% Newark 13,152 10, , % 5.0% 16.0% 0.1% Oakland 155,676 73,567 29,271 52, % 18.8% 33.8% 0.1% Piedmont 3,866 3, % 1.3% 1.1% 0.0% Pleasanton 23,678 18,218 1,068 3, % 4.5% 16.8% 1.8% San Leandro 31,272 20,591 1,935 7, % 6.2% 25.2% 2.8% Union City 19,042 14,258 1,092 2, % 5.7% 14.5% 4.9% Unincorporated 49,407 36,357 3,360 8, % 6.8% 17.8% 1.8% TOTAL 536, ,478 60, ,584 6, % 11.3% 27.9% 1.3% Disaggregating the data according to various places in the Unincorporated Areas of the County shows that some areas, like Fairview, are largely composed of single-family dwellings, while others areas such as Ashland have a significant number of multifamily units. The following table shows these trends. Page 18

12 Housing Type By Unincorporated Areas, Alameda County, 2000 Single Multifamily Mobile Place Total Family 2-4 Units 5+ Units Homes Ashland 7,295 3, , % 11.0% 39.4% 2.6% Castro Valley 21,414 16,262 1,197 3, % 5.6% 16.7% 1.8% Cherryland 4,810 2, , % 14.8% 24.5% 1.2% Fairview 4,203 3, % 3.9% 3.1% 0.1% San Lorenzo 7,562 6, % 1.7% 6.8% 0.7% Unincorporated 3,778 2, Remainder 77.4% 8.8% 8.7% 5.1% TOTAL 49,062 36,250 3,338 8, % 6.8% 17.5% 1.8% Along with the Unincorporated Areas of the County, the incorporated jurisdictions have a percentage share of the overall housing stock for the County. The following chart shows that, of the total number of multifamily units in Alameda County, Oakland has the largest share (39.0%). Unincorporated areas have a relatively small share of the multifamily units (5.8%), as do San Leandro and Alameda. Other Cities Combined includes Albany, Dublin, Emeryville, Livermore, Newark, Piedmont, Pleasanton and Union City, each with less than 3% of the total share of multifamily units. Percentage Share of Total Multifamily Housing, Alameda County, 2000 SAN LEANDRO 4.7% OTHER CITIES COMBINED 12.8% OAKLAND 39.0% UNINC. 5.8% ALAMEDA 7.7% BERKELEY 12.1% FREMONT 9.7% HAYWARD 8.3% Page 19

13 Looking at the same data for the disaggregated places in the Unincorporated Areas, the following picture emerges. Although Castro Valley contains almost 40% of the Unincorporated Area s multifamily units, Ashland also has a significantly high percentage of the units, with nearly 31% of the total. The following chart illustrates these percentages. Percentage Share of Total Multifamily Housing, Unincorporated Alameda County, 2000 Cherryland 15.8% San Lorenzo 5.4% Fairview 2.4% Remainder 5.5% Ashland 30.9% Castro Valley 39.9% In terms of single-family units, Oakland has again the largest percentage share of Countywide units. However, both the Unincorporated Areas and Fremont have a much larger percentage of single-family units than multifamily units. The following chart shows these differences. Percentage Share of Total Single Family Housing, Alameda County, 2000 SAN LEANDRO 6.8% PLEASANTON 6.0% UNINCORPORATED 12.1% BERKELEY 6.9% FREMONT 16.1% HAYWARD 8.4% OTHER CITIES COMBINED 12.4% LIVERMORE 6.8% OAKLAND 24.4% Page 20

14 Within the Unincorporated Areas, Castro Valley again has the largest percentage share of the single-family units. The following chart shows that San Lorenzo also represents a significant share of the single-family units, with almost 19% of the total number of units for the Unincorporated Areas. Percentage Share of Total Single Family Housing, Unincorporated Alameda County, 2000 San Lorenzo 18.9% Remainder 8.1% Ashland 9.4% Fairview 10.8% Cherryland 7.9% Castro Valley 44.9% Condition of Housing Stock In determining the condition of the existing housing stock and the need for its preservation and improvement, the 1990 Census information is not sufficient, because the Census defined unsound buildings as those without plumbing or without kitchens. The Census therefore does not provide the level of specificity needed to accurately gauge the housing rehabilitation needs of the community. ABAG notes that the number of substandard units can be estimated from a field survey or sampling, from knowledgeable builders, from nonprofit housing organizations or redevelopment agencies. An estimate of the maximum number of units needing rehabilitation can also be derived from other Census measures such as percentage of units built before In general, the housing stock in the County and its Unincorporated Areas is in good condition. As buildings age or are not well maintained, an increasing number of units may need rehabilitation or may need to be replaced. The County has reviewed the Census data regarding age of housing stock for assistance in determining the number of units in need of rehabilitation or replacement. Most of the housing stock is relatively new; the median year built for owner occupied units was 1959, while the median year for renter-occupied units was The following table shows the distribution of units by age according to the 1990 Census. Page 21

15 Age of Housing Stock, Alameda County, 1990 Owner Occupied Renter Occupied Vacant Total Year Built # % # % # % # % 1980 to March, , % 34, % 5, % 77, % 1970 to , % 37, % 3, % 80, % 1960 to , % 45, % 3, % 91, % 1950 to , % 33, % 3, % 83, % 1940 to , % 25, % 2, % 59, % 1939 or earlier 58, % 46, % 6, % 112, % TOTAL 255, % 224, % 24, % 504, % Units needing to be rehabilitated 59, % Units that can be repaired 56, % Units that must be replaced 2, % Source: 1990 Census Using the assumption that in each age category, an increasing percentage of units are in need of rehabilitation as the stock ages, the County estimates 59,230 units (about 12% of the total number of units in 1990) are in need of rehabilitation throughout Alameda County. Of this figure, about 95% can be repaired (56,270 units) while 5% must be replaced (2,960 units). With respect to the Unincorporated Areas of the County, the vast majority of units were built after Using the same assumptions as above, it is estimated that about 4,630 units (about 10% of the housing stock in the Unincorporated Areas) is in need of rehabilitation, based on 1990 figures, of which 4,400 units can be repaired and 230 units need to be replaced. Age of Housing Stock, Unincorporated Alameda County, 1990 Owner Occupied Renter Occupied Vacant Total Year Built # % # % # % # % 1980 to March, , % 3, % % 6, % 1970 to , % 2, % % 5, % 1960 to , % 3, % % 7, % 1950 to , % 4, % % 15, % 1940 to , % 2, % % 9, % 1939 or earlier 1, % % % 2, % TOTAL 27, % 17, % 1, % 46, % Units needing to be rehabilitated 4, % Units that can be repaired 4, % Units that must be replaced % Source: 1990 Census Page 22