Falling Water CDP Tennessee Area Home Supply Charts

This page looks at a variety of Falling Water CDP Tennessee 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. Falling Water CDP depicts it has a housing units of 545 which is the second smallest as measured by housing units of all the other places in the local area.

Figure 2 illustrates the housing density in the Falling Water CDP housing market as measured by housing units per square land mile (includes single family homes, apartments, etc.) Falling Water CDP shows it has a housing density of 102.2 which is less than most other places in the area. The place with the highest housing density in the area is Middle Valley CDP which shows a density of 467.7 (approximately 4.6 times bigger). Comparing housing density to the United States average of 38.6, Falling Water CDP is approximately 2.6 times bigger. Also, measured against the state of Tennessee, housing density of 70.9, Falling Water CDP is 44.0% larger.

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.) Falling Water CDP depicts it has a renter percent of 18.0% which is the third most renter percent of all other places in the greater Falling Water CDP region. Figure 6 illustrates the total number of housing units that are occupied by owners. it has an owner percent of 82.0% which is less than most other places in the metropolitan area.

Falling Water CDP Tennessee Home Cost Charts

Looking at the housing data provided in Figure 7, the average Falling Water CDP home price is illustrated for this community and a useful analysis of affordable housing. Falling Water CDP shows it has a median home price of $207,400 which is in the center range of other places in the metro area. The place with the highest median home price in the area is Walden which depicts a home price of $396,000 (about twice as large). Figure 8 provides aggregate comparative data for the Falling Water CDP Tennessee metro area in terms of the median housing rental rate, apartment rent, etc. Falling Water CDP shows it has a rental rates of $893 which is in the middle range of other places in the surrounding region. The place with the highest rental rates in the area is Signal Mountain which shows a rental rates of $1,713 (about twice as large). Comparing rental rates to the United States average of $1,023, Falling Water CDP is about 14.6% smaller. Also, measured against the state of Tennessee, rental rates of $841, Falling Water CDP is 6.2% larger.

Figure 9 provides the frequency distribution of home prices for the area and is useful for understanding affordable housing fund. Falling Water CDP has the percentage of home price worth less than $50,000 the second smallest when sorted by home price worth less than $50,000 of all the other places in the local area at 1% of the total. Second, it has one of the largest proportions of home price worth between $100,000 to $200,000 at 36% of the total and is ranked #2. The only larger place being Middle Valley CDP with 61%. Third, it has the largest proportion of home price worth between $200,000 to $300,000 at 30% 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. Falling Water CDP shows it has a median ownership cost of $756 which is the second smallest as measured by median ownership cost of all the other places in the surrounding region. Figure 11 shows the median amount of cost as a percent of total household income for people who own homes in the Falling Water CDP metro area. it has a cost as a percent of household income of 17% which is the largest of all places in the greater Falling Water CDP 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. Falling Water CDP depicts it has a median home value as a percent of median worker earnings of 383% which is the second smallest when ranked by median home value as a percent of median worker earnings of all the other places in the metro 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.) Falling Water CDP shows it has a median housing cost of $1,407 which is in the center range of other places in the area. 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 $347 which is the second smallest in terms of median housing cost of all the other places in the local area.

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. Falling Water CDP has one of the largest proportions of owner cost less than $300 at 15% of the total and is ranked #2. The only larger place being Lone Oak CDP with 20%. Second, it has one of the largest proportions of owner cost between $300 and $500 at 31% of the total and is ranked #2. The only larger place being Mowbray Mountain CDP with 44%. Third, it has the smallest proportion of owner cost between $500 and $700 at 9% of the total. Also, it has the smallest proportion of owner cost between $700 and $1,000 at 7% of the total. In addition, it has the smallest proportion of owner cost between $1,500 and $2,000 at 4% of the total. Furthermore, it has the largest proportion of owner cost over $4,000 at 10% of the total and is ranked #1.

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.) Falling Water CDP shows it has a cost as a percent of household income of 18% 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 Mowbray Mountain CDP which shows a cost as a percent of household income of 24% (32.4% larger). 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. Falling Water CDP shows it has a cost as a percent of household income of 13% which is the highest of all places in the greater Falling Water CDP region.

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.) Falling Water CDP has the percentage of rent as a percent of income is less than 10 pct less than most other places in the metropolitan area at 5% of the total. Second, it has one of the largest proportions of rent as a percent of income is between 30pct to 40pct at 16% of the total and is ranked #2. The only larger place being Walden with 29%. Third, it has the second smallest in order of rent as a percent of income is less than 10 pct of all the other places in the local area in terms of rent as a percent of income is over 50pct at 7% of the total.

Figure 20 shows the total housing cost for both home owners and apartment community renters in the area. Falling Water CDP has the smallest proportion of housing cost between $500 and $700 at 9% of the total. Second, it has the smallest proportion of housing cost between $1,500 and $2,000 at 3% of the total. Third, it has the smallest proportion of housing cost between $2,000 and $2,500 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 $1,305 which is in the middle range of other places in the greater region. The place with the highest median real estate taxes paid in the area is Signal Mountain which shows a taxes paid of $3,185 (approximately 2.4 times bigger). Comparing median real estate taxes paid to the United States average of $2,375, Falling Water CDP is approximately half the size. Also, benchmarked against the state of Tennessee, median real estate taxes paid of $1,153, Falling Water CDP is 13.2% larger.

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

Figure 23 shows the rental rate distribution for this area. Falling Water CDP Tennessee has one of the largest proportions of rent between 750 and 1000 dollars at 32% of the total and is ranked #2. The only larger place being Middle Valley CDP with 36%. Second, it has the largest proportion of rent between $2,500 and $3,500 at 5% of the total and is ranked #1.

Falling Water CDP Tennessee Home Financing Charts

The analysis in Figure 25 shows the detailed distribution of owned homes by mortgage status. Falling Water CDP has one of the largest proportions of 2nd mortgage or heloc-not both at 14% of the total and is ranked #2. The only larger place being Fairmount CDP with 20%. Second, it has the largest proportion of 2nd mortgage at 10% of the total and is ranked #1. Third, it has the second smallest when ranked by with mortgage of all the other places in the area as measured by no 2nd mortgage and no heloc at 40% of the total. Also, it has one of the largest proportions of no mortgage at 45% of the total and is ranked #3. Only #2 Walden (48%), and #1 Mowbray Mountain CDP (65%) are larger.

Falling Water CDP Tennessee 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 3.4 which is the largest of all places in the greater Falling Water CDP region. Comparing family members per housing unit to the United States average of 3.3, Falling Water CDP is only about 3.3% larger. Also, versus the state of Tennessee, family members per housing unit of 3.2, Falling Water CDP is 7.8% larger.

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 6.3 which is less than most other places in the greater region. The place with the highest average number of rooms in a house in the area is Fairmount CDP which depicts an average number of rooms in a house of 7.9 (25.4% 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 1983 which is in the mid point range of other places in the metro area. The place with the highest year built in the area is Fairmount CDP which depicts a year built of 1991 ( 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 in 2014 or later at 6% of the total and is ranked #1. Second, it has the largest proportion of homes built between 2010 to 2013 at 12% of the total and is ranked #1. Third, it has the smallest proportion of homes built between 1990 to 1999 at 7% of the total. Also, it has less than most other places in the surrounding region in terms of homes built between 1960 to 1969 at 5% of the total. In addition, it has one of the largest proportions of homes built between 1950 to 1959 at 14% of the total and is ranked #2. The only larger place being Signal Mountain with 14%. Furthermore, it has the largest proportion of homes built between 1940 to 1949 at 10% of the total and is ranked #1. Next it has in the mid range of other places in the greater region as measured by homes built between 1939 or earlier at 4% 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. has the percentage of owner housing units the second smallest in order of owner-occupied housing units of all the other places in the local area at 414 of the total. Second, it has the second smallest as measured by owner-occupied housing units of all the other places in the greater region in order of renter housing units at 91 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 the largest proportion of one unit detached at 95% of the total and is ranked #1. Second, it has in the middle range of other places in the metro area as measured by mobile home at 3% of the total.

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 2014 or later at $468,400 of the total and is ranked #2. The only larger place being Walden with $1,281,300. Second, it has in the mid range of other places in the area in terms of value of homes built 2010 to 2013 at $286,400 of the total. Third, it has in the mid range of other places in the area when sorted by value of homes built 2000 to 2009 at $281,800 of the total. Also, it has in the mid point range of other places in the metropolitan area when ranked by value of homes built 1990 to 1999 at $201,900 of the total. In addition, it has less than most other places in the metro area when ranked by value of homes built 1980 to 1989 at $207,300 of the total. Furthermore, it has less than most other places in the greater region in order of value of homes built 1960 to 1969 at $106,300 of the total. Next it has one of the largest proportions of value of homes built 1950 to 1959 at $155,600 of the total and is ranked #3. Only #2 Signal Mountain ($277,200), and #1 Walden ($405,600) are larger. Additionally, it has in the middle range of other places in the surrounding region when ranked by value of homes built 1940 to 1949 at $101,300 of the total.

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 Falling Water CDP residents. it has a homeowner household size of 2.7 which is the third most of all other places in the local area. The place with the highest homeowner household size in the area is Fairmount CDP which shows a homeowner household size of 2.9 (only about 5.5% larger).

Figure 37 shows the household size for renters. Falling Water CDP shows it has a renter household size of 1.9 which is the smallest when sorted by renter household size of all the other places in the greater region. The place with the highest renter household size in the area is Lone Oak CDP which depicts a renter household sizes of 3.0 (52.3% 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 2015 to 2016 at 14% of the total and is ranked #3. Only #2 Mowbray Mountain CDP (16%), and #1 Lone Oak CDP (17%) are larger. Second, it has one of the largest proportions of owners moved in 2010 to 2014 at 38% of the total and is ranked #2. The only larger place being Fairmount CDP with 53%. Third, it has the second smallest when sorted by owners moved in 2017 or later of all the other places in the local area in terms of owners moved in 2000 to 2009 at 19% of the total. Also, it has the smallest proportion of owners moved in 1990 to 1999 at 10% of the total. Figure 39 shows the year that people who rent moved into the area. Falling Water CDP has one of the largest proportions of renters moved in 2015 to 2016 at 35% of the total and is ranked #2. The only larger place being Lone Oak CDP with 68%. Second, it has less than most other places in the local area as measured by renters moved in 2010 to 2014 at 27% of the total. Third, it has one of the largest proportions of renters moved in 2000 to 2009 at 28% of the total and is ranked #2. The only larger place being Fairmount CDP with 52%. Also, it has the largest proportion of renters moved in 1990 to 1999 at 11% 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 2008 which is the highest of all places in the greater Falling Water CDP region. Figure 41 compares the median year that renters moved into their home. Falling Water CDP depicts it has a median year that a renter moved in of 2011 which is less than most other places in the metro area.

Figure 42 shows the frequency distribution of various types of energy sources used for homes in the community. has the percentage of homes using natural gas less than most other places in the local area at 22% of the total. Second, it has in the middle range of other places in the metropolitan area when ranked by home using bottled, tank, or lp gas at 2% of the total. Third, it has one of the largest proportions of home using electricity at 75% of the total and is ranked #2. The only larger place being Lone Oak CDP with 75%. Also, it has the largest proportion of homes using kerosene or other fuel oils at 1% of the total and is ranked #1.