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 2020 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 shows it has a Housing Units of 556 which is the second smallest in order of housing units of all the other places in the 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 depicts it has a Housing Density of 104.2 which is less than most other places in the surrounding region. The place with the highest housing density in the area is Middle Valley CDP which shows a density of 474.2 (approximately 4.5 times bigger). Comparing housing density to the United States average of 38.9, Falling Water CDP is approximately 2.7 times bigger. Also, compared with the state of Tennessee, housing density of 71.7, Falling Water CDP is 45.3% larger.

In Figure 4, Falling Water CDP area change in the number of housing units and is a forward gauge (along with population change) for any potential housing shortage. Falling Water CDP shows it has a Housing Unit Change of 2.0% which is the third most housing units of all other places in the greater Falling Water CDP region. The place with the highest change in the housing units in the area is Mowbray Mountain CDP which depicts a housing units of 17.5% ( very much bigger). Comparing change in the housing units to the United States average of 5.7%, Falling Water CDP is approximately a third the size. Also, compared with the state of Tennessee, change in the housing units of 5.4%, Falling Water CDP is approximately a third the size.

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 indicates it has a Renter Percent of 21.4% which is the second most renter percent of all the places in the greater Falling Water CDP region. Figure 6 illustrates the total number of housing units that are occupied by owners. it has a Owner Percent of 78.6% which is the second smallest in terms of owner percent of all the other places in the greater region.

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 Value of $238,400 which is in the mid range of other places in the surrounding region. The place with the highest median home price in the area is Walden which depicts a home price of $412,900 (73.2% larger). 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 Median Gross Rent of $917 which is in the mid range of other places in the local area. The place with the highest rental rates in the area is Signal Mountain which shows a rental rates of $1,938 (about twice as large). Comparing rental rates to the United States average of $1,062, Falling Water CDP is about 15.8% smaller. Also, versus the state of Tennessee, rental rates of $869, Falling Water CDP is only about 5.5% 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 one of the largest proportions of home price worth less than $50,000 at 10% of the total and is ranked #3. Only #2 Lone Oak CDP (14%), and #1 Mowbray Mountain CDP (22%) are larger.

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 depicts it has a Median Owner Cost of $750 which is the second smallest in order of 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 Owner Cost as % of HH Income of 16% which is the highest 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 Percent of Median Earnings of 316% which is the smallest in order of median home value as a percent of median worker earnings of all the 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.) Falling Water CDP depicts it has a Median Owner Costs-With Mortgage of $1,381 which is less than most other places in the metro 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 Owner Costs-Without Mortgage of $392 which is less than most 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 36% of the total and is ranked #2. The only larger place being Mowbray Mountain CDP with 43%. Second, it has the smallest proportion of owner cost between $500 and $700 at 7% of the total. Third, it has the smallest proportion of owner cost between $1,000 and $1,500 at 5% of the total. Also, it has the largest proportion of owner cost between $1,500 and $2,000 at 11% 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 depicts it has a % of Income Owner Costs-With Mortgage of 17% which is less than most 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 depicts a cost as a percent of household income of 22% (33.1% 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 % of Income Owner Costs-No Mortgage of 15% which is is the uppermost of the 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 one of the largest proportions of rent as a percent of income is less than 10 pct at 35% of the total and is ranked #2. The only larger place being Middle Valley CDP with 37%. Second, it has less than most other places in the metro area when sorted by rent as a percent of income is between 10pct to 20pct at 7% of the total. Third, it has less than most other places in the surrounding region when ranked by rent as a percent of income is between 40pct to 50pct at 5% 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 12% 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 $1,427 which is in the middle range of other places in the local area. The place with the highest median real estate taxes paid in the area is Walden which depicts a taxes paid of $3,140 (approximately 2.2 times bigger). Comparing median real estate taxes paid to the United States average of $2,471, Falling Water CDP is approximately half the size. Also, compared with the state of Tennessee, median real estate taxes paid of $1,190, Falling Water CDP is 19.9% larger.

Figure 23 shows the rental rate distribution for this area. Falling Water CDP Tennessee has one of the largest proportions of rent between 500 and 750 dollars at 28% of the total and is ranked #2. The only larger place being Middle Valley CDP with 38%. Second, it has the largest proportion of rent between $1,500 and $2,500 at 10% of the total and is ranked #1.

Falling Water CDP Tennessee Home Characteristics Charts

Figure 28 shows the household size for families living in the area and it has a Family size of 3.6 which is more than all other 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 8.4% larger. Also, in comparison with the state of Tennessee, family members per housing unit of 3.2, Falling Water CDP is 13.2% larger.

Figure 29 show the median number of rooms in a typical home for each location in this area. it has a Median Number of Rooms of 6.3 which is less than most other places in the metropolitan area. The place with the highest average number of rooms in a house in the area is Walden which shows 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 Median Year Built of 1983 which is in the mid point range of other places in the local area. The place with the highest year built in the area is Fairmount CDP which depicts 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 one of the largest proportions of homes built in 2014 or later at 6% of the total and is ranked #2. The only larger place being Fairmount CDP with 14%. Second, it has in the mid range of other places in the local area in terms of homes built between 2010 to 2013 at 12% of the total. Third, it has the smallest proportion of homes built between 2000 to 2009 at 5% of the total. Also, it has the largest proportion of homes built between 1950 to 1959 at 10% of the total and is ranked #1. In addition, it has in the intermediate range of other places in the greater region when sorted by homes built between 1940 to 1949 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 as measured by owner-occupied housing units of all the other places in the surrounding region at 102 of the total.

Figure 34 shows the median value of homes broken down by the median year that the homes were built. has the percentage of value of homes built 2014 or later in the mid range of other places in the local area at $375,000 of the total. Second, it has in the mid point range of other places in the greater region in order of value of homes built 2010 to 2013 at $333,300 of the total. Third, it has less than most other places in the greater region when sorted by value of homes built 1990 to 1999 at $205,600 of the total. Also, it has less than most other places in the local area as measured by value of homes built 1970 to 1979 at $109,400 of the total. In addition, it has one of the largest proportions of value of homes built 1960 to 1969 at $135,700 of the total and is ranked #3. Only #2 Signal Mountain ($270,100), and #1 Walden ($433,300) are larger. Furthermore, it has one of the largest proportions of value of homes built 1950 to 1959 at $104,900 of the total and is ranked #3. Only #2 Signal Mountain ($252,300), and #1 Walden ($275,000) are larger.

Figure 35 compares the total number of occupied housing units to vacant housing units. This analysis can be used to understand any housing shortage in the community. it has the largest proportion of occupied housing units at 14% of the total and is ranked #1.

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 Owner-Household Size of 2.6 which is less than most other places in the local area. The place with the highest homeowner household size in the area is Fairmount CDP which depicts a homeowner household size of 2.8 (6.4% larger).

Figure 37 shows the household size for renters. Falling Water CDP shows it has a Renter-Household Size of 2.8 which is in the intermediate range of other places in the greater region. The place with the highest renter household size in the area is Lone Oak CDP which shows a renter household sizes of 3.1 (11.0% 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 2017 or later at 22% of the total and is ranked #2. The only larger place being Mowbray Mountain CDP with 24%. Second, it has one of the largest proportions of owners moved in 2015 to 2016 at 33% of the total and is ranked #2. The only larger place being Fairmount CDP with 55%. Third, it has less than most other places in the surrounding region as measured by owners moved in 2010 to 2014 at 19% of the total. Also, it has the smallest proportion of owners moved in 2000 to 2009 at 10% of the total. Figure 39 shows the year that people who rent moved into the area. Falling Water CDP has the percentage of renters moved in 2017 or later in the mid range of other places in the metro area at 23% of the total. Second, it has the second smallest in order of renters moved in 2017 or later of all the other places in the local area in terms of renters moved in 2015 to 2016 at 7% of the total. Third, it has the largest proportion of renters moved in 2000 to 2009 at 7% of the total and is ranked #1.

Figure 40 compares the median year that home owners moved into their home. it has a Owner Median Year Moved In of 2010 which is the largest 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 Renter Median Year Moved In of 2012 which is the second smallest as measured by 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 72% of the total and is ranked #2. The only larger place being Lone Oak CDP with 78%.