Waverly consultant finds demand for about 1,347 housing units through 2035; council urged to support moderate‑priced and senior housing

Consultant Joel Holman of Maxwell/Maxfield Research presented a housing needs analysis to the City Council of Waverly on Feb. 24, 2025, concluding the city has demand for about 1,347 housing units through 2035, with the largest shortfalls in affordable/subsidized senior housing and moderately priced for‑sale homes targeted at the local workforce.

The study, introduced by Connie Tolan, planning and development specialist for the City of Waverly, analyzed recent demographic and market trends, permit activity, resale and new‑construction prices, and rental inventories to estimate future demand. "The housing needs analysis is an important tool for the city," Tolan said, describing the report as a foundation for policy and incentive decisions. Holman summarized the market findings and recommended that the city prioritize support for moderately priced ownership housing and service‑enhanced senior housing while recognizing financing constraints for subsidized units.

Why it matters: Holman told the council that Waverly is experiencing a "barbell" of growth — a notable increase in the 75+ population and growth among younger adults in their mid‑20s to mid‑30s — creating demand for a range of housing types. He said turnover in existing moderately priced owner housing is constrained by high mortgage interest rates and that many jobs in Waverly are filled by commuters, which affects labor availability and employer recruitment.

Key findings and figures (as presented by Joel Holman): the study projects roughly 1,347 housing units of cumulative demand to 2035; the median resale single‑family price in 2024 was $245,500; the median price for new‑construction homes was reported just under $420,000; average market rents vary by property vintage (newer projects averaged about $1,363 per month while older projects averaged about $734); the typical one‑bedroom market rent was about $810 per month and a conservative new‑construction one‑bedroom estimate was $1,200 per month; market‑rate rental vacancy in larger properties surveyed was about 8% (above typical equilibrium), while identified income‑restricted affordable/subsidized properties were roughly 3–3.5% vacant in October; assisted‑living/service‑enhanced vacancies were cited near 17% (compared with an equilibrium benchmark of about 7%). Holman said the largest single components of demand were for for‑sale detached single‑family and townhome/twin/condo products, with a secondary need for market‑rate rental absorption by the late 2020s.

Holman and Tolan described financing and development constraints. Holman noted that affordable and subsidized rental housing typically requires Low‑Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) or other government funding and is difficult to finance; he also said the state's workforce housing tax credit program requires a recent housing needs analysis (generally within five years, with a preference toward three years). He emphasized that much of what the private market will build without city intervention will continue to be higher‑priced new construction, and recommended city policies and incentives to encourage moderate‑priced homes (targeted at or below $350,000 where feasible).

Council questions and discussion focused on causes and possible city responses. Council members asked about demographic drivers (Holman pointed to cohort bulges and longer‑term trends), the role of rising mortgage rates in limiting turnover of moderately priced owner homes, the commuting patterns of workers (about three‑quarters of jobs in town are filled by in‑commuters, with nearly 1,000 commuting from over 50 miles away), and building‑cost pressures. Holman and several council members discussed tools the city can use: zoning flexibility, tax increment financing or abatements, lowering development fees or infrastructure charges, land assembly, promoting accessory dwelling units (ADUs), and serving as a resource for first‑time homebuyer programs through agencies such as the Iowa Finance Authority (referred to in discussion as the Iowa Housing Finance Agency) and state programs. "If you can do things to reduce your development fees or infrastructure charges ... it brings down the cost of the total development," Holman said.

Not a formal action item: Council members debated whether to create a standing group to pursue housing options. One council member proposed forming a commission to work with Connie Tolan to develop and carry forward housing strategies; that suggestion received discussion but no formal vote during the study session. Tolan agreed to re‑circulate a link to the full Maxwell/Maxfield report to council members and staff.

What the report did not decide: The presentation did not include a city‑adopted policy or a binding commitment to fund specific projects. No ordinance, contract, or budget appropriation was adopted at the study session; the council did not take a final vote on housing policy. The study session record reflects discussion, staff follow‑up and suggested policy tools for future action, not a formal council decision to adopt a particular program.

Ending: Council members said they will continue the conversation in future meetings and explore targeted steps to encourage moderately priced for‑sale housing and address senior housing needs. Tolan said the full study is posted on the city's website and she would e‑mail a link to council members the following morning.