Laurel-Petersville CCD Kentucky Area Home Supply Charts

This page looks at a variety of Laurel-Petersville CCD Kentucky housing market data taken from the most recent 2019 American Community Survey census data. Housing units are structures such as a single family home, apartment community, mobile home park, public housing, etc. where a person or family live and live separately from other residents of the building. Figure 1 shows the total number of housing units for each city. Laurel-Petersville CCD depicts it has a housing units of 917 which is the third most housing units of all other places in the greater Laurel-Petersville CCD region.

Figure 2 illustrates the housing density in the Laurel-Petersville CCD housing market as measured by housing units per square land mile (includes single family homes, apartments, etc.) Laurel-Petersville CCD indicates it has a housing density of 5.5 which is the smallest when ranked by housing density of all the other places in the metro area. The place with the highest housing density in the area is Vanceburg which shows a density of 584.4 ( very much bigger). Comparing housing density to the United States average of 38.6, Laurel-Petersville CCD is approximately a sixth the size. Also, compared to the state of Kentucky, housing density of 50.1, Laurel-Petersville CCD is approximately a tenth the size.

In Figure 4, Laurel-Petersville CCD area change in the number of housing units and is a forward gauge (along with population change) for any potential housing shortage. Laurel-Petersville CCD shows it has a change in the housing units of -8.0% which is the second smallest in terms of change in the housing units of all the other places in the metro area. The place with the highest change in the housing units in the area is Olive Hill which depicts a housing units of 8.6% (6.7% larger). Comparing change in the housing units to the United States average of 4.9%, Laurel-Petersville CCD is 64.4% larger. Also, compared with the state of Kentucky, change in the housing units of 2.5%, Laurel-Petersville CCD is approximately 3.3 times bigger.

Figure 5 shows the percentage of rental property based on that they are occupied by renters as a percent of the total number of households in the community (including homes, apartments, etc.) Laurel-Petersville CCD depicts it has a renter percent of 19.8% which is the second smallest when sorted by renter percent of all the other places in the area. Figure 6 illustrates the total number of housing units that are occupied by owners. it has an owner percent of 80.2% which is the second most owner percent of all the places in the greater Laurel-Petersville CCD region.

Laurel-Petersville CCD Kentucky Home Cost Charts

Looking at the housing data provided in Figure 7, the average Laurel-Petersville CCD home price is illustrated for this community and a useful analysis of affordable housing. Laurel-Petersville CCD shows it has a median home price of $77,200 which is less than most other places in the greater region. The place with the highest median home price in the area is Morehead which shows a home price of $184,100 (approximately 2.4 times bigger). Figure 8 provides aggregate comparative data for the Laurel-Petersville CCD Kentucky metro area in terms of the median housing rental rate, apartment rent, etc. Laurel-Petersville CCD depicts it has a rental rates of $396 which is less than most other places in the metropolitan area. The place with the highest rental rates in the area is Morehead which shows a rental rates of $619 (56.3% larger). Comparing rental rates to the United States average of $1,023, Laurel-Petersville CCD is approximately a third the size. Also, in contrast to the state of Kentucky, rental rates of $741, Laurel-Petersville CCD is approximately half the size.

Figure 9 provides the frequency distribution of home prices for the area and is useful for understanding affordable housing fund. Laurel-Petersville CCD has one of the largest proportions of home price worth less than $50,000 at 43% of the total and is ranked #3. Only #2 Garrison CDP (43%), and #1 Vanceburg (46%) are larger. Second, it has the second smallest in terms of home price worth less than $50,000 of all the other places in the area as measured by home price worth between $50,000 to $100,000 at 24% of the total. Third, it has the largest proportion of home price worth between $400,000 to $500,000 at 7% of the total and is ranked #1.

Median owner costs for the real estate market are shown in Figure 10 and include the costs associated with any mortgage, utility expenses, insurance, and other miscellaneous costs. Laurel-Petersville CCD shows it has a median ownership cost of $362 which is the second smallest when ranked by median ownership cost of all the other places in the greater region. Figure 11 shows the median amount of cost as a percent of total household income for people who own homes in the Laurel-Petersville CCD metro area. it has a cost as a percent of household income of 15% which is less than most other places in the greater region. The next chart, Figure 12, provides a comparison chart of the median home cost as a percent of a median worker take home earnings and is thus a valuable measure of affordable housing. Laurel-Petersville CCD shows it has a median home value as a percent of median worker earnings of 223% which is the third most of all other places in the local area.

Figure 14 depicts the median cost of housing for owners with also have a mortgages (versus those who do not have a mortgage because mortgage cost is included.) Laurel-Petersville CCD depicts it has a median housing cost of $943 which is the third most of all other places in the greater region. Figure 15 is a chart that shows the median housing costs for owners who do not have mortgages (and therefore the cost of home ownership does not include mortgage cost.) it has a median housing cost of $271 which is the second smallest when ranked by median housing cost of all the other places in the greater region.

Figure 16 shows the distribution in total housing cost for owners of property (so not renters.) This cost includes mortgages, lines of credit interest, utilities, taxes, insurance, etc. Laurel-Petersville CCD has one of the largest proportions of owner cost less than $300 at 40% of the total and is ranked #2. The only larger place being Vanceburg with 51%. Second, it has the second smallest as measured by owner cost less than $300 of all the other places in the area as measured by owner cost between $500 and $700 at 6% of the total.

Next shown in Figure 17 is the housing cost as a percent of household income for people who own their homes and have a mortgages (thus the cost of financing the home is included.) Laurel-Petersville CCD shows it has a cost as a percent of household income of 17% which is the second smallest in order of cost as a percent of household income of all the other places in the local area. The place with the highest cost as a percent of household income in the area is Vanceburg which shows a cost as a percent of household income of 34% (about twice as large). Housing cost as a percent of household income for owners who do not have a mortgage is shown in Figure 18. This analysis can be useful for understanding the affordable housing for home ownership excluding any financing cost in the area shown. Laurel-Petersville CCD shows it has a cost as a percent of household income of 13% which is the third most cost as a percent of household income of all other places in the greater Laurel-Petersville CCD region. The place with the highest cost as a percent of household income in the area is Rome which indicates a cost as a percent of household income of 18% (32.6% larger).

Figure 19 looks at the cost of rent for rental property using the percent of total household income which is a valuable measure of financial health for the area. (The higher the proportion of rent payments to total household income is a sign of greater financial stress. Also, rent can be covered by rent assistance and rent assistance programs in the form of rent assistance.) Laurel-Petersville CCD has one of the largest proportions of rent as a percent of income is less than 10 pct at 3% of the total and is ranked #2. The only larger place being Vanceburg with 5%. Second, it has the second smallest when ranked by rent as a percent of income is less than 10 pct of all the other places in the local area when sorted by rent as a percent of income is between 10pct to 20pct at 5% of the total. Third, it has one of the largest proportions of rent as a percent of income is between 40pct to 50pct at 5% of the total and is ranked #3. Only #2 Vanceburg (7%), and #1 Flemingsburg (11%) are larger.

Figure 20 shows the total housing cost for both home owners and apartment community renters in the area. Laurel-Petersville CCD has the smallest proportion of housing cost between $500 and $700 at 5% of the total.

Figure 21 shows median amount of real estate taxes paid for home owners in the region. it has a median real estate taxes paid of $475 which is less than most other places in the local area. The place with the highest median real estate taxes paid in the area is Morehead which shows a taxes paid of $1,638 (approximately 3.4 times bigger). Comparing median real estate taxes paid to the United States average of $2,375, Laurel-Petersville CCD is approximately a fifth the size. Also, measured against the state of Kentucky, median real estate taxes paid of $1,166, Laurel-Petersville CCD is approximately half the size.

Figure 22 shows the percentage of renters who pay for utilities in Laurel-Petersville CCD Kentucky. This is calculated as the percent of renters who pay separately for utilities versus the people who have utilities included as part of amenities. Laurel-Petersville CCD has the largest proportion of pay extra for utilities at 100% of the total and is ranked #1.

Laurel-Petersville CCD Kentucky Home Financing Charts

The analysis in Figure 25 shows the detailed distribution of owned homes by mortgage status. Laurel-Petersville CCD has the percentage of with mortgage less than most other places in the local area at 32% of the total. Second, it has one of the largest proportions of no mortgage at 68% of the total and is ranked #3. Only #2 Garrison CDP (75%), and #1 Vanceburg (77%) are larger.

Figure 26 shows the proportion of houses with a mortgage versus those without a mortgage. Laurel-Petersville CCD has the percentage of houses with mortgages less than most other places in the area at 32% of the total. Second, it has one of the largest proportions of houses without mortgages at 68% of the total and is ranked #3. Only #2 Garrison CDP (75%), and #1 Vanceburg (77%) are larger.

Laurel-Petersville CCD Kentucky Home Characteristics Charts

Figure 28 shows the household size for families living in the area and it has a family members per housing unit of 3.1 which is in the mid range of other places in the area. The place with the highest family members per housing unit in the area is Garrison CDP which shows a family members per housing unit of 3.4 (8.6% larger). Comparing family members per housing unit to the United States average of 3.3, Laurel-Petersville CCD is about 7.2% smaller. Also, measured against the state of Kentucky, family members per housing unit of 3.1, Laurel-Petersville CCD is about the same size.

Figure 29 show the median number of rooms in a typical home for each location in this area. it has an average number of rooms in a house of 5.5 which is the second most of all the places in the local area. The place with the highest average number of rooms in a house in the area is Garrison CDP which depicts an average number of rooms in a house of 5.6 ( only slightly larger). Figure 30 shows, for the average house in each location, the median year that a house was built. This can be useful for understanding the relative age of one neighborhood versus another for a real estate investor. it has a year built of 1978 which is the third most year built of all other places in the greater Laurel-Petersville CCD region. The place with the highest year built in the area is Garrison CDP which shows a year built of 1992 ( about the same size).

Figure 31 looks at the distribution of housing units by the median age that the homes were built. it has the largest proportion of homes built between 2010 to 2013 at 4% of the total and is ranked #1. Second, it has one of the largest proportions of homes built between 2000 to 2009 at 17% of the total and is ranked #2. The only larger place being Garrison CDP with 29%. Third, it has the smallest proportion of homes built between 1980 to 1989 at 6% of the total. Also, it has the largest proportion of homes built between 1970 to 1979 at 26% of the total and is ranked #1. In addition, it has the second smallest in terms of homes built in 2014 or later of all the other places in the greater region in order of homes built between 1940 to 1949 at 0% of the total. Furthermore, it has less than most other places in the greater region as measured by homes built between 1939 or earlier at 7% of the total.

Figure 32 shows the difference in the number of housing units based on whether they are occupied by owners versus occupied by renters. it has one of the largest proportions of owner housing units at 591 of the total and is ranked #2. The only larger place being Morehead with 730. Second, it has less than most other places in the surrounding region when ranked by renter housing units at 146 of the total.

Figure 33 shows the difference in the number of housing units based on whether they are occupied by owners or renters. it has one of the largest proportions of mobile home at 29% of the total and is ranked #2. The only larger place being Rome with 36%.

Figure 34 shows the median value of homes broken down by the median year that the homes were built. it has one of the largest proportions of value of homes built 2000 to 2009 at $80,600 of the total and is ranked #2. The only larger place being Flemingsburg with $187,500. Second, it has in the mid point range of other places in the area in order of value of homes built 1990 to 1999 at $43,300 of the total. Third, it has one of the largest proportions of value of homes built 1960 to 1969 at $106,300 of the total and is ranked #3. Only #2 Flemingsburg ($156,700), and #1 Morehead ($342,500) are larger. Also, it has one of the largest proportions of value of homes built 1939 or earlier at $89,500 of the total and is ranked #3. Only #2 Olive Hill ($101,700), and #1 Morehead ($136,200) are larger.

The next two charts show both the average household size of homeowners versus the average household size of renters. Starting with Figure 36 we see the household size of homeowners for Laurel-Petersville CCD residents. it has a homeowner household size of 2.6 which is the second most homeowner household size of all the places in the greater Laurel-Petersville CCD region. The place with the highest homeowner household size in the area is Garrison CDP which depicts a homeowner household size of 2.6 ( only slightly larger).

Figure 37 shows the household size for renters. Laurel-Petersville CCD depicts it has a renter household size of 1.9 which is the second smallest in terms of renter household size of all the other places in the metro area. The place with the highest renter household size in the area is Flemingsburg which depicts a renter household sizes of 2.4 (27.6% larger). Figure 38 shows the year that people who own homes moved into this region. it has one of the largest proportions of owners moved in 1989 or earlier at 27% of the total and is ranked #2. The only larger place being Olive Hill with 32%. Figure 39 shows the year that people who rent moved into the area. Laurel-Petersville CCD has the percentage of renters moved in 2015 to 2016 the second smallest when sorted by renters moved in 2017 or later of all the other places in the metro area at 11% of the total. Second, it has the second smallest in terms of renters moved in 2017 or later of all the other places in the greater region when sorted by renters moved in 2010 to 2014 at 18% of the total. Third, it has the largest proportion of renters moved in 2000 to 2009 at 22% of the total and is ranked #1. Also, it has the largest proportion of renters moved in 1990 to 1999 at 12% of the total and is ranked #1. In addition, it has the largest proportion of renters moved in 1989 or earlier at 37% of the total and is ranked #1.

Figure 40 compares the median year that home owners moved into their home. it has a median year that a home owner moved in of 1999 which is the third most of all other places in the metropolitan area. Figure 41 compares the median year that renters moved into their home. Laurel-Petersville CCD shows it has a median year that a renter moved in of 2005 which is the second smallest in terms of median year that a renter moved in of all the other places in the local area.

Figure 42 shows the frequency distribution of various types of energy sources used for homes in the community. it has one of the largest proportions of home using bottled, tank, or lp gas at 19% of the total and is ranked #3. Only #2 Garrison CDP (19%), and #1 Rome (22%) are larger. Second, it has the largest proportion of homes using kerosene or other fuel oils at 1% of the total and is ranked #1. Third, it has the largest proportion of homes using coal or coke at 2% of the total and is ranked #1. Also, it has the largest proportion of homes using wood at 24% of the total and is ranked #1. In addition, it has the largest proportion of homes using some other fuel at 1% of the total and is ranked #1.