Housing Needs Assessment
A report-style, data-driven snapshot for Colorado communities: housing stock, tenure, affordability, commuting, and demographic change. Powered by cached public datasets with live Census API fallbacks.
Screening tool only. Data snapshots are for early-stage community planning and site research using public Census, DOLA, and HUD datasets. They are not a certified housing needs study and do not substitute for a CHFA-required market analysis or formal due diligence.
Select a geography above to load housing data
Executive Snapshot
Affordability Gap by AMI Tier
—Renter households who need affordable rental units at each income band. Both card rows below count renter households (demand) — the first cumulative (≤ each AMI; includes everyone below), the second the non-overlapping cohort within each tier; neither row subtracts existing units. The separate Net of existing affordable supply box further down is the one that nets out rental units already priced affordable, to estimate how many still need to be built. Source: ACS B25118 renter-household income + B25063 gross rent against HUD 2025 income limits, with HUD CHAS as a county-level fallback. Owner households are excluded — the rental gap counts only households competing for rental units.
ACS 2020–2024 households under the unadjusted county 30% AMI cutoff; the CHAS tier table below uses HUD's size-adjusted limits and an older window, so its counts run lower. See methodology.
Renter households who need affordable rental units — cumulative (≤ this AMI; includes everyone below)
Households who need affordable rental units — within this tier (non-overlapping; 7 cells sum to ≤100%)
Need distribution across AMI bands — each band's share of the ≤100% total
Map
Boundary is fetched from Census TIGERweb and used as the base layer for additional overlays.
Local commitments & resources
Housing Authorities & Contacts
Colorado public housing authorities, CHFA partners, and local housing contacts for the selected geography.
LIHTC, QCT & DDA
HUD-designated overlays for the selected geography: LIHTC-funded affordable housing projects, Qualified Census Tracts (income/poverty threshold), and Difficult Development Areas (high-cost designation).
Recent failed LIHTC application attempts (last 5 years)
Source: data/policy/chfa-awards-historical.json (.notAwarded).
This array is a hand-curated qualitative sample, not a comprehensive LOI dataset —
absence here does not prove no sponsor applied. The authoritative per-round CHFA
LOI Reports (PDFs) carry every applicant + outcome but are not yet parsed into JSON.
HUD Fair Market Rents & Income Limits
FY2025 HUD Fair Market Rents by bedroom size and Income Limits by household size for the selected county. Source: HUD User.
FMR = maximum contract rent eligible for Housing Choice Voucher program subsidy. Income limits set affordability thresholds for LIHTC, HOME, and other programs.
▸ Why use HUD MTSP income limits?
CHFA does publish annual Multifamily Rent & Income Limits tables — the ones LIHTC compliance monitors use. They are derived from HUD's published Multifamily Tax Subsidy Project (MTSP) area median income (AMI) for each county using the same IRC §42 formula shown here:
LIHTC monthly rent ceiling = AMI4-person × tier% × 30% ÷ 12
- HUD MTSP is the upstream authoritative source. CHFA's tables are derived from HUD's published MTSP numbers using the same IRC Section 42 formula.
- HUD publishes machine-readable data (huduser.gov/datasets/il.html). CHFA publishes annual tables for compliance reference.
- Computing from MTSP makes the rent-ceiling formula visible while preserving CHFA's published tables as the binding application reference.
For CHFA application submissions: calculated limits should be checked against CHFA's published tables. If a discrepancy appears, CHFA's published tables are the binding reference — cross-check here before submitting.
Sources: HUD MTSP Income Limits FY2025 (huduser.gov/datasets/il.html); CHFA Multifamily Rent & Income Limits (chfainfo.com/rental-housing/asset-management/rent-income-limits); IRC §42(g)(2)(A) rent ceiling formula.
Rent triangulation — existing vs. asking
Three rent measurements side-by-side so you can see which figure applies to which question: underwriting (FMR), cost-burden math (ACS), or what a new tenant will actually pay (ZORI).
Housing stock by structure type
Existing housing stock by structure type (ACS).
Owner/renter shares
Owner and renter occupied housing shares (ACS).
Home value distribution
Owner-occupied housing units by reported value bracket (Census ACS DP04). The median alone hides the underlying skew — this distribution shows whether the market is thin at lower price points or top-heavy with $1M+ inventory.
Homeownership affordability
Annual household income required to buy the typical home (not rent it) under a 30-yr fixed mortgage at today's rate, holding the full monthly PITI payment — Principal & Interest, property Tax, Insurance, and PMI — to no more than 30% of gross income. Compare against the local median household income bar to see the gap.
How this is calculated
Rent burden distribution
Share of renter households by gross rent as a percent of income (ACS DP04 / GRAPI bins).
Households spending ≥30% of income on housing are considered cost-burdened; ≥50% severely burdened.
Age-stratified rent burden (ages 55–62 and 62+) is available in the HUD CHAS data shown in the adjacent panel. Select a county to view CHAS breakdown by AMI tier.
Cost burden by AMI tier (HUD CHAS) (county-approx)
Renter households by income tier (% of Area Median Income) showing not-burdened, moderately burdened (30–50% of income), and severely burdened (>50%) households. Source: HUD Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS).
Why only 4 tiers? HUD CHAS Table 9 publishes income at four bands only (≤30 / 31–50 / 51–80 / 81–100% AMI) — finer 10% increments aren't in the source dataset. For a 7-band breakdown of unit shortfall (renter households needing vs. units available at each tier), see the Affordability Gap by AMI Tier panel above, which derives renter-household counts from ACS B25118 × HUD income limits.
Counts here use HUD CHAS 2018–2022 with size-adjusted income limits (HAMFI); they run below the ACS-based demand headline, especially in student-heavy markets. See methodology.
Stacked bar chart showing renter households at each AMI income tier (≤30%, 31–50%, 51–80%, 81–100%) broken down by housing cost burden status.
—
Commuting: mode share
Travel mode split (ACS S0801).
Commuting: inflow & outflow (LEHD LODES)
Workplace-based flows: inflow = jobs located here filled by residents of other areas; outflow = residents working elsewhere; within = live+work here. At the statewide level, inflow/outflow values are suppressed because summing all county OD files double-counts inter-county commuters. Select a county for accurate commuting flows.
—
Household composition, occupation & labor force
How big are households here, what do people do for work, and how many residents are working-age non-workforce vs retirees? Place-level ACS values where available; the page falls back to the containing county when the place sample is too small.
Household type mix
Households grouped by structure: married couples, cohabiting couples, single parents with kids, residents living alone, and other (shared / roommate / multi-adult). Heavy single-parent and living-alone shares are the canonical 1- and 2-bedroom demand drivers; heavy married-couple share signals 3+ BR family-formation demand. (ACS DP02 — 2023 vintage does not publish 1-7+ person household-size bins; that distribution lives in detail table B11016.)
Occupation mix
Five top-level Census occupation categories as a share of civilian employed residents 16+. Useful for sizing the workforce-housing affordability target — service + production occupations tend to align with the 30-60% AMI band; management/professional skew higher.
Labor force status & retiree share
Employed, unemployed, and not-in-labor-force counts for residents 16+. The retiree breakout splits "Not in labor force" by age — residents 65+ who aren't in the workforce are very likely retired, while working-age (16–64) residents not in the workforce are a different planning problem (students, caregivers, discouraged workers, disability).
Race & ethnicity
Population share by race (each "alone" category — single-race respondents) and Hispanic/Latino ethnicity (which cross-cuts race in the Census schema). Place-level ACS where available; small places fall back to the containing county.
Educational attainment
Highest level of schooling completed for residents 25 and over. HS+ and Bachelor's+ rates are the standard benchmarks for workforce-housing planning — higher Bachelor's+ shares tend to skew rental demand toward 1-BR/studio "single professional" and early-family product, while lower shares concentrate demand in service-occupation rent bands (30–60% AMI).
Demographic projections: age pyramid & senior pressure (DOLA/SDO)
County-level single-year-of-age estimates/forecasts used to illustrate aging pressure and household formation dynamics. For municipal/CDP selections, this uses the containing county as context.
Age pyramid
Senior growth pressure
—
20-year outlook: population, migration, and housing needs (county context)
Uses Colorado State Demography Office county components-of-change forecasts (population + net migration) and a transparent household/headship conversion to estimate additional housing units needed over the next 20 years. For municipal/CDP selections, this uses the containing county.
Population: DOLA forecast vs historic-trend sensitivity
Housing need summary
Projection assumptions
Transparent HNA math: projected households = population × headship; total units required = households ÷ (1 − vacancy). The summary's net-new units subtract the current requirement and are not income-targeted affordable deficits. For municipalities/CDPs, projections scale from the containing county using current population share and recent relative growth.
—
—
Household Income Distribution
Distribution of households by income bracket — key indicator for affordable housing need stratification by AMI tier. Source: ACS DP03.
How Affordable Has Housing Become Over the Last 15 Years?
Rent, home prices, and income compared to 2009 — does housing pace incomes, or outpace them? Combines three publicly-available series at the county level. Sources: Census ACS 5-yr (2009, 2014, 2024); FHFA House Price Index (annual, FHFA HPI); DOLA State Demography Office 2024 mid-projection for population context.
Pace & Scale of New Housing Permits (Past 5 Years)
How many new housing units has the county permitted each year? Compares the permitting pace against the housing-needs gap to surface whether the local pipeline is keeping up with demand. Sources: Census Building Permits Survey 2020-2024; DOLA SDO 2024 for unit-need denominator; Up For Growth 2024 housing underproduction methodology for context framing.
Age of Housing Stock
Year housing units were built — older stock may have deferred maintenance needs; newer stock reflects recent production capacity. Source: ACS DP04.
Bedroom Mix
Unit mix by bedroom count — key indicator of whether existing stock meets household composition needs. Source: ACS DP04.
Owner Housing Cost Burden
Owner households by monthly housing costs as a percentage of household income. Costs exceeding 30% indicate a cost burden. Source: ACS DP04.
Current rental gap & affordability
Today's renter-household shortfall by income tier and cost burden — distinct from the 20-year production outlook in the projections section below.
Select a geography to view current rental gap analysis.
How this estimate combines cost burden, AMI gap, and projections
The estimate combines three signals: (1) current renter cost-burden counts by income tier, (2) AMI affordability gap counts (units affordable vs. households), and (3) forward DOLA-based household growth projections over the selected horizon.
These are integrated to show both the current unmet need and the future incremental units needed. Treat this as a planning-screening synthesis rather than a certified market study.
County-proxy caveat for place/CDP selections: when sub-county series are unavailable, county-level labor market and projection context is used as a proxy and scaled to the selected geography.
Special Needs Housing Analysis
Population segments with specific housing needs: seniors, persons with disabilities, families with children, and single-parent households. These groups are disproportionately represented among cost-burdened households. Source: ACS DP02/DP05.
Select a geography to view special needs analysis.
Scenario-based demographic projections
Read-only cohort-component projections under fixed low, baseline, and high growth scenarios, aligned with DLG HNA methodology. The comparison charts keep a shared observed base year and scale only the projected growth increment from DOLA-aligned assumptions. To model custom fertility, migration, or mortality assumptions, use the dedicated Scenario Builder → for the selected geography.
Moderate growth following recent historical trends.
Source: DOLA State Demography Office — Components of Change (current vintage). DOLA SDO
Population projection by scenario
Baseline plus growth-increment sensitivity bands from DOLA SYA data.
Selected scenario detail
Single-scenario population trend over the 10-year horizon.
Projected households over time
DOLA household formation forecast — drives housing unit demand calculations per DLG methodology.
Projected housing demand by affordability tier (renter households)
Estimated renter households by AMI tier over the 10-year horizon. Used to identify missing AMI tiers for LIHTC applications. Based on statewide CO income distributions (ACS CHAS).
—
Labor Market Context
Workplace-area employment estimates from LEHD LODES. Job totals, wage distribution, and top industries display when the LEHD WAC cache is populated; commuting flows are available now from the OD summary.
Wage Distribution
High / medium / low wage jobs by count (LEHD WAC CE01–CE03).
Top Industries by Employment
Top NAICS 2-digit sectors from LEHD WAC workplace jobs (CNS fields).
Commuting Flows & Methodology
Data source: LEHD LODES8 OD main (JT00) — all workers, all jobs. WAC (Workplace Area Characteristics) data provides job totals, wage bins, and NAICS sectors. LODES Technical Documentation · LODES8 Downloads
Wages vs Housing Affordability
What income do workers need to afford median rent, median home, and AMI-60% LIHTC units? How many local workers earn enough? Combines ACS median rent & home value with LEHD wage tier counts to show the affordability gap by worker type.
Economic Indicators
Employment trends, industry mix, and wage analysis for the selected geography. Data from LEHD LODES and BLS. Updates when county-level LEHD data is cached.
Colorado labour market & affordability
Employment Trend
Total employment over time for the selected area.
Wage-Band Job Trend
Jobs by LEHD WAC wage band over time (CE01–CE03).
Affordable Housing Compliance (HB 22-1093 / Prop 123)
Colorado's HB 22-1093 (Proposition 123, effective Jan 1, 2023) requires communities to track affordable housing progress. Jurisdictions must establish a baseline of 60% AMI rentals and commit to 3% annual growth. DOLA Prop 123 page
Baseline: 60% AMI Rentals
Select a geography to calculate the baseline.
3% Annual Growth Target
Baseline required before growth targets can be set.
Fast-Track Approval Eligibility
Select a geography to check eligibility.
Historical Compliance Tracking
Fast-Track Approval Timeline Calculator
Estimate permitting duration under HB 22-1093 fast-track vs. standard process. HB 22-1093
Compliance Checklist
Prop 123 (HB 22-1093) compliance steps for the selected jurisdiction. Checked items are saved locally by geography. DOLA guidance ↗
-
Why it matters: The baseline establishes the starting inventory from which the 3% annual growth target is measured. Accurate baseline data is required before a jurisdiction can commit to Prop 123. Source: ACS DP04 data shown in the Prop 123 panel above; verify against CHFA Gap Map.
-
Why it matters: The 3% annual growth commitment is a core Prop 123 requirement. Adoption signals to DOLA, CHFA, and developers that the jurisdiction supports affordable housing creation. Without adoption, the jurisdiction is ineligible for Prop 123 land grant and workforce housing funds. Reference: HB 22-1093, Section 3(1)(b).
-
Why it matters: A documented fast-track process is required for jurisdictions with populations ≥ 1,000 (municipalities) or ≥ 5,000 (counties). Fast-tracking reduces permitting delays by 50%+ and is a prerequisite to access DOLA land grant funds. See DOLA Prop 123 FAQ for approved process templates.
-
Why it matters: The annual DOLA notice is the formal on-record commitment that preserves eligibility for the current funding cycle. Missing the January 31 deadline disqualifies the jurisdiction from Prop 123 land grant and CDOH workforce housing funds for that year. File at the DOLA Commitment Filings Portal.
-
Why it matters: Annual reporting demonstrates accountability and validates the jurisdiction's progress. Failure to report may result in clawback of Prop 123 funds received and suspension of eligibility. Cross-reference with CHFA Resource Library for LIHTC project timelines that count toward the growth target.
Resources & Guidance
- Annual filing deadline: January 31 each year — File commitment notice with DOLA
- DOLA HB 22-1093 / Prop 123 Page — Official guidance, FAQ, and forms
- DOLA State Demography Office — Population forecasts and Regional Data Explorer used in projections above
- CDOH (Colorado Division of Housing) — State housing programs, vouchers, and funding streams
- CHFA Housing Affordability Gap Map — County-level gap analysis aligned with Prop 123 baseline
- CHFA Resource Library — Developer guides, LIHTC program resources, and QAP
- HB 22-1093 Full Text — Colorado General Assembly
- Eligible jurisdictions: Municipalities ≥ 1,000 population & counties ≥ 5,000 population (per HB 22-1093)
PMA Delineation & CHFA Requirements
All Primary Market Area tools — boundary delineation, CHFA requirements summary, workflow steps, and the CHFA PMA checklist — are consolidated on the Market Analysis & PMA page.
Go to PMA Delineation & CHFA Checklist →Projected Housing Need
Forward-looking estimates of unmet housing demand at 5, 10, and 20 years — across low, baseline, and high growth scenarios. Based on DOLA household projections and the current rental gap.
Select a geography above to generate projections.
Recommended AMI Distribution
Based on current income distribution and cost burden, the following AMI targeting mix is recommended for a new LIHTC project in this jurisdiction.
Select a geography above to generate AMI recommendation.
Renter need by bedroom count
How many renter households need a studio, 1BR, 2BR, 3BR, or 4BR+ unit — derived from ACS B25009 (tenure by household size) using the HUD "max 2 people per bedroom" occupancy standard. Feeds the Market Analysis concept recommendation so the suggested unit mix reflects local renter demand, not just an industry default per concept type.
What types of housing does the data support?
A data-driven look at which housing types this jurisdiction shows the strongest need for. Use alongside the Recommended AMI Distribution above and the Affordable Housing Pipeline LIHTC Readiness assessment — three views, same data, different jobs.
Select a geography above to compute the housing-type ranking.
Affordable Ownership Need
Screening estimateThis section helps identify where affordable homeownership may be part of the housing strategy. It does not replace the rental need analysis. It helps show whether a community may need a mix of LIHTC rental, deed-restricted ownership, shared-equity homes, or other permanently affordable ownership options.
Select a jurisdiction to load ownership indicators.
Neighborhood & Architectural Context
Understanding the built environment helps a LIHTC project serve both residents and the surrounding community. Design that fits the neighborhood's character and history builds trust and reduces opposition. Scope note: the character / form / era profile below is computed at the county level — sub-county variation (e.g. downtown vs. unincorporated valley) is not reflected. Use it as a regional baseline, then refine for the specific site.
Select a county geography above to load neighborhood context.
Housing Type Feasibility Analysis
Assesses local housing stock composition, building age trends, and market values to identify which housing types (single-family, townhome, garden-style, mid-rise) are most viable for new development. Combines Census ACS unit-type data with affordability metrics to project feasible construction types for LIHTC and workforce housing.
Select a geography above to load housing type analysis.
Colorado Market Conditions
Market conditions by region — from Bridge MLS data or Colorado Association of REALTORS (CAR) reports. Supports early-stage LIHTC site feasibility screening.
Loading rural market data…
Loading statewide data…
Data: Bridge Data Output public assessments & transactions · Updated weekly via GitHub Actions · Data Quality Dashboard
Housing Action Plan Checklist
Strategic actions commonly used to address documented housing needs. Checked items are saved locally by geography.
📦 Housing Supply Actions
💰 Affordability & Demand Actions
This action plan is based on best practices from Colorado housing needs assessments including those from the Colorado Division of Housing and CHFA. Progress is saved locally in the browser by geography. Local planning departments and CDOH publish implementation guidance.
Methodology & Data Sources
This section updates as you change geographies and as cached datasets become available. All sources link to the primary publisher.
Primary Data Sources
Data refreshes automatically via GitHub Actions. Full data sources inventory · Data freshness status