Enid Housing Study 2015

Enid Area Housing Demand Study 2015 Update
1
ENID AREA HOUSING DEMAND STUDY
2015 UPDATE

2
ENID AREA HOUSING DEMAND STUDY
2015 UPDATE
Prepared for:
The Enid Regional Development Alliance
2020 Willow Run Suite 135
Enid, Oklahoma 73703
July 14, 2015
Prepared by:
CDS Market Research
1001 S. Dairy Ashford, Suite 450
Houston, TX 77077
(713) 465-8866
www.cdsmr.com

3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
A Message from the Enid Regional Development Alliance ...............................................................................6
Executive Summary........................................................................................................................................7
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................9
The Purpose of this Study.....................................................................................................................................................9
Study Area Description.......................................................................................................................................................10
History of the Area .............................................................................................................................................................10
Cherokee Strip and the Great Land Run......................................................................................................................10
Oil Booms and the 20th
Century ..................................................................................................................................11
Enid Today, More than Oil...........................................................................................................................................12
Demographic Analysis..................................................................................................................................13
Population and Households................................................................................................................................................13
Population and Age ............................................................................................................................................................15
Educational Attainment and School Enrollment ................................................................................................................16
Income Trends....................................................................................................................................................................18
Housing Characteristics and Trends ...................................................................................................................................20
Housing Type Trends ...................................................................................................................................................20
Age of Existing Housing ...............................................................................................................................................21
Housing Occupancy Trends .........................................................................................................................................21
Housing Value Trends..................................................................................................................................................22
Employment Trends ...........................................................................................................................................................23
Employment Rates and Labor Force Gains..................................................................................................................23
Wage and Employment Trends by Industry ................................................................................................................25
The Diverse Local Economy.........................................................................................................................................25
The Potential Impact of Lower Crude Oil Prices..........................................................................................................27
Garfield County Employment Projections ...................................................................................................................28
Housing Market Trends – Single Family For-Sale Homes................................................................................29
Existing Home Market ........................................................................................................................................................30
Sales Price Trends........................................................................................................................................................30
Days on Market ...........................................................................................................................................................31
Housing Supply and Inventory.....................................................................................................................................32
Recent Residential Construction Trends.............................................................................................................................32
Residential Building Permits........................................................................................................................................32
Available Residential Lots............................................................................................................................................35
Single Family Construction Costs.................................................................................................................................36
Enid Area Housing Task Force .....................................................................................................................................37
Housing Market Trends – Multifamily Rentals...............................................................................................39
Existing Multifamily Units...................................................................................................................................................39
Market Rate vs Affordable Housing (Income Restricted / Subsidized)........................................................................42
Existing Multifamily Supply and Demand....................................................................................................................42
New Development..............................................................................................................................................................43
Housing Market Trends – Single Family Rentals ............................................................................................45
Discussion Group Summaries .......................................................................................................................48
Local Employers..................................................................................................................................................................48
Home Builders and Developers ..........................................................................................................................................49
Residential Realtors............................................................................................................................................................49
Local Government Officials.................................................................................................................................................50
Enid Area Housing Survey.............................................................................................................................51
Understanding the Data .....................................................................................................................................................51
Profile of Participants .........................................................................................................................................................52

4
Housing Characteristics, Needs, and Preferences ..............................................................................................................56
Housing Demand Analysis ............................................................................................................................62
Historical Inputs..................................................................................................................................................................62
Analysis and Projections.....................................................................................................................................................63
Notable Assumptions ..................................................................................................................................................63
Final Results.................................................................................................................................................................64
Conclusions and Recommendations..............................................................................................................65
Market Demand and Opportunities ...................................................................................................................................65
Rental Market..............................................................................................................................................................65
Single Family For-Sale Market .....................................................................................................................................67
Recommendations to Encourage Additional Housing Development .................................................................................69
Appendix A: Employee Survey Instrument ....................................................................................................71
FIGURES
Figure 1: Map of Enid City and Garfield County ........................................................................................................................10
Figure 2: Historic Images of the Great Land Run, Early Enid City, and a Mural on Randolph Ave.............................................11
Figure 3: Views of Enid City .......................................................................................................................................................12
Figure 4: Enid and Garfield County Historic Population Growth ...............................................................................................13
Figure 5: The 2014 Fireball Run in Enid .....................................................................................................................................14
Figure 6: Percent of Population by Age, 2015 ...........................................................................................................................15
Figure 7: Household Income Trends, 2000 to 2015...................................................................................................................18
Figure 8: New Luxury Home Development in Unincorporated Garfield County .......................................................................19
Figure 9: Housing Values, 2015..................................................................................................................................................22
Figure 10: Unemployment Rates, 2010 to March 2015.............................................................................................................23
Figure 11: Garfield County Monthly Employment and Labor Force Gains, 2013 to March 2015..............................................24
Figure 12: Size, Growth, and Location Quotient of Industries in Garfield County, 3Q 2014 .....................................................26
Figure 13: Garfield County Oil and Gas Employment and the Price of Crude Oil, 2004 to 2015...............................................27
Figure 14: Garfield County Employment; Historical and Projected ...........................................................................................28
Figure 15: Image of Autry Technology Center ...........................................................................................................................28
Figure 16: Images of Single Family Residential Homes in Enid and Garfield County.................................................................29
Figure 17: Residential Median Sales Price, 2011 to 2015..........................................................................................................30
Figure 18: Enid Area Residential Average Sales Price, 2011 to 2015.........................................................................................30
Figure 19: Enid Area Residential Closed Unit Sales, 2011 to 2015 ............................................................................................30
Figure 20: Enid Area Residential Median Asked Price to Sold Price Percentage, 2011 to 2015................................................31
Figure 21: Enid Area Residential Median Days on Market, 2011 to 2015 .................................................................................31
Figure 22: Enid Area Residential Median Days on Market, Annual Average 2011 to 2014.......................................................31
Figure 23: Housing Supply Measured in Months of Inventory, 2011 to 2015...........................................................................32
Figure 24: Garfield Residential Building Permits and Net New Residents, 2004 to 2014..........................................................33
Figure 25: Net New Residents per Single Family Building Permit Issued, 2004 to 2014 ...........................................................34
Figure 26: Summary of Net New Residents per Single Family Building Permit Issued ..............................................................34
Figure 27: Enid City Annual Lots Added and Building Permits Issued, 2004 to 2014 ................................................................35
Figure 28: Images of New Home Construction in the Enid Area ...............................................................................................38
Figure 29: Enid Area Existing Multifamily Complexes................................................................................................................39
Figure 30: Images of Multifamily Complexes in the Enid Area ..................................................................................................41

5
Figure 31: Rental Occupancy Rates in Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, and Tulsa, 2010 to 2015 ....................................................42
Figure 32: Images of Tuscana Apartments ................................................................................................................................43
Figure 33: Images of the Clay Hall Apartments..........................................................................................................................44
Figure 34: Rendering of the Building Design for the Esplanade at Stonebridge Apartments....................................................44
Figure 35: Enid Area Sample of Currently Advertised Single Family Rentals.............................................................................45
Figure 36: Images of Currently Advertised Single Family Rentals in the Enid Area...................................................................47
Figure 37: Focus Group Meetings Took Place at the New Enid Event Center and Convention Hall..........................................48
Figure 38: The Enid Area Housing Survey Online and Paper Format.........................................................................................51
Figure 39: Northern Oklahoma College Enid Campus ...............................................................................................................55
Figure 40: A View of Newly Constructed Entry Level Homes in the Enid Area..........................................................................61
TABLES
Table 1: Population and Households, 2000 to 2015..................................................................................................................13
Table 2: Population by Age, 2000 to 2015.................................................................................................................................15
Table 3: Garfield County Education Attainment, 2000 to 2015.................................................................................................16
Table 4: School Enrollment and Performance in Garfield County, 2012 to 2015......................................................................16
Table 5: Household Income Trends, 2000 to 2015 ....................................................................................................................18
Table 6: Housing Type Trends, 2000 to 2015.............................................................................................................................20
Table 7: Age of Existing Housing Stock, 2000 to 2015 ...............................................................................................................21
Table 8: Housing Occupancy Trends, 2000 to 2015...................................................................................................................21
Table 9: Housing Value Trends, 2000 to 2015 ...........................................................................................................................22
Table 10: Unemployment Rates, 2010 to March 2015..............................................................................................................23
Table 11: Garfield County Monthly Employment and Labor Force Gains, 2013 to March 2015...............................................24
Table 12: Wage and Employment Trends by Industries Tracked in Garfield County, 2010 to 2014 .........................................25
Table 13: Net New Residents per Single Family Building Permit Issued, 2004 to 2014.............................................................33
Table 14: Enid City Residential Plat / Lot Survey, 2004 to 2014 ................................................................................................35
Table 15: Enid Area Additional Cost of New Home Construction..............................................................................................37
Table 16: Enid Area Existing Multifamily Complexes, 2015.......................................................................................................40
Table 17: Enid Area Sample of Currently Advertised Single Family Rentals ..............................................................................45
Table 18: Garfield County Historical Household and Housing Statistics....................................................................................62
Table 19: Garfield County Total Housing Unit and Vacancy Estimates......................................................................................62
Table 20: Historical Vacancy Rates in the State and the Nation................................................................................................63
Table 21: Housing Demand Estimates and Projections .............................................................................................................63
Table 22: Total Housing Unit Estimates and Projections ...........................................................................................................63
Table 23: Projection of Additional Housing ...............................................................................................................................64

6
A MESSAGE FROM THE ENID REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT ALLIANCE
It was July of 2013 when the first “Enid Area Housing Demand Study“, sponsored by the
ERDA, was published. Since that time, a multitude of housing projects have been
planned and started in an attempt to fill the gaps identified. Developers, builders, and
lenders from across the country are investing in our community to address shortfalls
that this study illuminated. This is one of the best investments the ERDA has made in
Enid, and a new study (this document) has been prepared to provide a current update.
Enid’s recent progress does not stop with the housing market. We have also been
working with Koch Industries, who has plans to invest one billion (with a “B”) dollars in
infrastructure and plant improvements in their Enid facility. These improvements will
increase plant capacity, and employment, while freeing up 5 million gallons of
water/day for public consumption.
These are just a couple of the recent high profile successes for Enid and the ERDA, but I
can assure you there were many more. While this year may be a banner year for the
ERDA, rest assured there are many great things still on the horizon. It is a great time to
be in Enid, Oklahoma.
I would like to thank all of our members for their
continued support. We are all looking forward
to a very prosperous year!
Yours Truly,
Jimmy Stallings
Chairman – ERDA Board of Directors

7
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Introduction, page 8
CDS Market Research (CDS) was hired by the Enid Regional Development Alliance (ERDA) to complete a housing
study—updating a previous housing study completed in 2013. This study begins with a statement of purpose
and a brief history of the area. Not unlike many places in this country, the early history of Enid and Garfield
County was defined by periods of economic success followed by recession. This boom and bust pattern was
based on a few key economic activities, particularly oil and gas. Today, Garfield County’s economy is much more
diverse.
Demographic Analysis, page 12
Except for one period of significant decline in the 1980’s, Enid and Garfield County have seen consistent growth.
The population and household figures estimated for 2015 represent an all-time high for the area. The
demographic and economic trends are positive with local unemployment remaining lower than the State and
National levels despite recent layoffs in the oil and gas industry. It is anticipated that employment gains in
Garfield County will continue into the near future at a modest rate.
Housing Market Trends – Single Family For-Sale Homes, page 28
Healthy economic conditions have led to an increased demand for owner occupied housing in the Enid area. As a
result, the last four years have seen the median home sales price go up tens of thousands of dollars. A
constrained supply of new housing units has also had a significant influence on the market. From 2010 to 2014,
Garfield County added only 354 new housing units (252 single family, 104 multifamily) while adding and
estimated 3,937 new residents. This equates to roughly one housing unit for every 11.1 new residents. Over the
same period the state of Oklahoma has done a much better job meeting market demand, averaging one housing
unit for every 2.6 residents (basically one per household).
Housing Market Trends – Multifamily Rentals, page 38
The multifamily rental market has also seen significant demand pressures. CDS completed an extensive survey
covering all multifamily complexes in the Enid area, a total of 2,224 units. This survey found that occupancy
rates are at 97% on average—which is high compared to other areas. Several complexes reported being 100%
full with a waiting list, and are still getting multiple calls a day.
Housing Market Trends – Single Family Rentals, page 44
Those who manage single family rentals also report strong demand, with occupancy rates at or near 100%. This
has led to higher rental prices which reportedly range from $200 to $500 higher than what they were in 2010. In
the previous housing study completed two years ago, it was mentioned that supply was so tight that many
tenants were reportedly renting below their means and settling for lower quality. Apparently this is still an issue.
It has also been reported that some households who normally rent housing separately have chosen to jointly
rent single family homes due to lack of available options.
Discussion Group Summaries, page 47
As part of this study, ERDA arranged four different discussion groups to assist CDS in gathering information and
feedback from the community. These groups included local employers, home builders and developers, realtors,

8
and local government officials. The information gathered from these discussions corroborated the findings and
recommendations of this study. They also highlighted the challenges and possible solutions related to the local
housing shortage.
Enid Area Housing Survey, page 47
In order to get the perspective of average residents, a County wide survey was conducted reaching 504
respondents. The responses to this survey provide helpful insight into the needs and preferences of area
residents. One question asked residents about their most recent home renting or buying experience. According
to the results, it is getting harder to find housing that meets the needs and budgets of local households—
another signal that the market is constrained.
Housing Demand Analysis, page 61
CDS has estimated that the housing market in the Enid area could readily absorb 613 additional units over the
next two years. Demand for this new housing is expected to come from two sources, job growth and latent
demand. It is anticipated that total employment in Garfield County will increase by 818 jobs by 2017. This is
based on the 1.4% annual average growth rate experienced from 2010 to 2015. Given the uncertainty related to
lower crude oil prices, this projection should be considered slightly optimistic, but not unrealistic. Although new
oil and gas jobs made up a large portion of the local employment gains from 2010 to 2015, this occurred during
a period of overall financial turbulence. With an improving national economy, the Enid area is poised to do
well—especially considering its role and a regional hub of commerce for northwestern Oklahoma. In addition,
the current overall vacancy rate in the Enid area is estimated to be 6.8%, which is roughly half of the observed
rate for the state and nation. A vacancy rate this low creates housing scarcity and begins to limit the area’s
ability to grow. This vacancy rate reflects latent, or pent-up, demand that is just as important as demand created
from job growth.
Conclusions and Recommendations, page 64
In the final section of this study, CDS reviews the findings and makes several recommendations which are aimed
at improving conditions in the housing market. These recommendations not only discuss incentivizing home
building, but more importantly, focus on encouraging better communication and data exchange so that the
market can be driven by timely and accurate information rather than outdated perceptions.

9
INTRODUCTION
The Enid Regional Development Alliance (ERDA) is a non-profit (501c6) organization established to assure the
economic prosperity of Enid, Oklahoma and the surrounding area. ERDA is funded by local business memberships as
well as the City of Enid and the Garfield County Industrial Authority. Working with residents, business owners, and
local government officials, ERDA represents a public / private partnership aimed at promoting the area’s successes
while highlighting issues in need of attention.
One of ERDA’s top priorities has been to increase local employment. A
major challenge to this priority—particularly in recent years—has been the
reportedly insufficient supply of new housing. Those concerned believe
the problem has become acute enough that it may be limiting long term
economic growth by constricting the ability of existing and prospective
employers to expand and recruit their labor force in the Enid area. In
response to this concern, ERDA hired CDS Market Research (CDS)—an
expert in the housing industry—to examine the local residential market and
provide insight.
In 2013, ERDA published the “Enid Area Housing Demand Study,” which contained the initial findings and
suggestions by CDS. This study was well received by the public—particularly by those involved in the development,
construction, and selling of new residential units in the Enid area. After two years of time and still recognizing a need
for additional housing, ERDA has again hired CDS to update its assessment of the housing market.
The Purpose of this Study
This study is an update of the 2013 study and contains the most recent research, findings, analysis, and suggestions
for improvement related to the housing market in the Enid area. As in the previous study, the focus of this study
centers on the following questions:
 Is the Enid-area economy generating demand for additional housing development?
 What are the market conditions regarding the existing local supply of
single family and multifamily housing?
 What are the types, quantities, and price ranges of new housing that are
most needed in the Enid area?
 What conditions or forces are preventing new supply from being added
to the local housing market?
 What actions and strategies can the Enid community take to help increase
new single family and multifamily residential development?
This study mostly follows the format of the previous study, updating the various
tables, charts, and figures with the most recent information available. As with the
previous study, this required a considerable amount of participation from local
business and government staff, for which CDS is grateful.

10
Study Area Description
This study examines two main geographies, Enid City and Garfield County, with Garfield County being
considered the market area which captures the vast majority of economic activity relevant to the Enid area
housing market. For comparison purposes, several of the tables in this study also include data for the entire
state of Oklahoma, and in some places, the United States as a whole.
Figure 1: Map of Enid City and Garfield County
Source: CDS Market Research
History of the Area
Cherokee Strip and the Great Land Run
In the nineteenth century, the United States government resettled American Indian tribes from all parts of the
country into Indian Territory. By treaty, the northern portion of what is now Oklahoma was given to the
Cherokee Nation as an outlet to hunting grounds in the west. Officially called the Cherokee Outlet, the region
became widely known as the Cherokee Strip. Following the Civil War, the government purchased the land and

11
opened the area for settlement. On Sept. 16, 1893, the Great Land Run began. By horse, train, wagon and on
foot more than 100,000 land-hungry pioneers raced for 40,000 homesteads and the valuable town lots of what
is now northwest Oklahoma.
Figure 2: Historic Images of the Great Land Run, Early Enid City, and a Mural on Randolph Ave
Source: Oklahoma Historical Society, CDS Market Research (Mural located on Randolph Avenue near 2nd
Street in Downtown Enid)
Once settlers found their land, they then had to stake their claim at one of four land offices throughout the
Outlet, one of them was located in what is now known as Enid. After the land opening, approximately two
thousand residents remained to begin building the town. The first three years were drought years, and Enid
grew slowly. When the drought broke, the town began to prosper, its fortunes tied to the surrounding
agricultural community. Enid was selected as the county seat when Garfield County was initially organized as
“O” County in 1893 (the original designation).
Oil Booms and the 20th Century
Bolstered by a decade of good weather and crop harvests, Enid and Garfield County prospered. Having
established itself as regional trade center and rail hub by 1907 statehood, Enid had grown to a population of
10,087, the fourth largest in Oklahoma. The discovery of the Garber-Covington Oil Field east of town in 1916
was Enid's next milestone, making oil production and refinement a major portion of the local economy, adding
jobs and population. Unfortunately the boom time did not last as the Great Depression gripped Enid during the
1930s. Extremely depressed wheat and oil prices and a severe drought crippled the local economy, although the
industrial base and trade center status stayed relatively intact.
With the advent of World War II the U.S. Army located one of its basic flying schools at Enid. Constructed in
wheat pastures south of town, the Air Corps Basic Flying School of Enid, Oklahoma, opened in November 1941.
In 1949 the base was renamed Vance Air Force Base to honor local Medal of Honor recipient Leon R. Vance, Jr.,
who died in 1944. The location of this base in Enid had a significant impact on the local economy, and remains
one of the area’s largest employers to this day.

12
The post-World War II years brought modest but steady growth to Enid. The City’s population grew to 38,859 by
1960, spurred by expanding oil and gas activity in the region, the success of the portable drilling rig
manufacturing industry, and the emergence of Enid as a major inland grain storage terminal center. Steady
growth continued in the 1970s resulting from another major oil boom. However, an oil bust soon followed in the
early 1980s, and Enid suffered a second major economic crisis which resulted in the City and County’s first
significant intercensal population decline—a loss of roughly 10% of residents from 1980 to 1990.
Enid Today, More than Oil
Despite the decline of the 80’s, Enid's traditional role as a trade center for the region eventually led to revived
growth. Although a portion of Enid’s economy is still dependent on the fortunes of the oil and gas industry, that
portion is relatively small compared to the combined economic impact associated with food processing, medical
services, light manufacturing, agriculture, financial services, and a wide range of businesses associated with
supporting the surrounding communities located in northwestern Oklahoma.1
Figure 3: Views of Enid City
Source: Enid Regional Development Alliance, Enid News & Eagle, CDS Market Research
1 This history has beenadaptedfrom the Oklahoma HistoricalSociety,as presentedonthe VisitEnid.org website.

13
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
Understanding the demographic trends for the area is an important element in assessing the market demand for
new housing. Past, present and future demographic figures were collected and estimated by utilizing data from
the following sources: US Census, American Community Survey, Nielsen/Claritas 2015 Estimates – PCensus for
ArcView (hereafter referred to as “PCensus”), Bureau of Labor Statistics, Oklahoma Employment Security
Commission, Garfield County Assessor’s Office, Enid City Code Department, and primary research completed
CDS Market Research.
Population and Households
The table below provides population and household counts for 2000 and 2010, as well as estimates for 2015.
The chart which follows displays the population counts, as well as historic counts from 1900 to 1990. As can be
seen, population in the 20th
century grew steadily until the oil bust of the 1980s. In the 90s population growth
resumed, although at a more moderate pace than in previous decades. The population and household figures
estimated for 2015 represent an all-time high for the area.
Table 1: Population and Households, 2000 to 2015
Population 2000 Census 2010 Census 2015 Estimate ↑ '00-'15 AAGR '00-'10 AAGR '10-'15
Enid City 47,070 49,379 51,864 4,794 0.48% 0.99%
Garfield County 57,812 60,580 63,462 5,650 0.47% 0.93%
Oklahoma 3,450,654 3,751,351 3,898,675 448,021 0.84% 0.77%
United States 281,421,942 308,745,538 319,459,991 38,038,049 0.93% 0.68%
Households 2000 Census 2010 Census 2015 Estimate ↑ '00-'15 AAGR '00-'10 AAGR '10-'15
Enid City 19,071 19,767 20,820 1,749 0.36% 1.04%
Garfield County 23,175 24,175 25,371 2,196 0.42% 0.97%
Oklahoma 1,342,293 1,460,450 1,520,327 178,034 0.85% 0.81%
United States 105,480,131 116,716,292 121,099,157 15,619,026 1.02% 0.74%
AAGR = Annual Average Growth Rate ((FV/PV)^(1/n)) – 1)
Source: US Census, American Community Survey, Nielsen/Claritas 2015 Estimates – PCensus for ArcView (hereafter referred to as PCensus)
Figure 4: Enid and Garfield County Historic Population Growth
Source: US Census
0K
10K
20K
30K
40K
50K
60K
1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2015

14
The table presented also provides annual average growth rates for the periods of 2000 to 2010 and 2010 to
2015. As can be seen, Enid and Garfield County grew at a rate slower than the state and the nation from 2000 to
2010. However, from 2010 to 2015, Enid and Garfield County grew at a slightly faster rate. This increase is
related to the rise in crude oil prices over the last decade, which added new local jobs in the oil and gas industry
as well as other closely related and supporting industries (as demonstrated later in this section).
The recent sharp drop in crude oil prices in early 2015 has created some concern over the short term health of
the Enid area local economy—no doubt reminding some residents of the oil bust of the 1980s. However, after
reviewing the historic population data for the City and County, it is clear that the population growth related to
the most recent oil boom—and therefore the threat of an impending oil bust—is significantly lower than that
experienced in the 1970s and 1980s. This is directly related to the fact that the local oil and gas industry makes
up a smaller portion of the overall economic activity in the Enid Area today than in the early 1980s at the height
of the last boom.
Figure 5: The 2014 Fireball Run in Enid
Source: VisitEnid.org

15
Population and Age
The following table contains a breakdown of the 2000 and 2015 populations for Enid and Garfield County by age
range. Total population, median age, and the percentage change from 2000 to 2015 are also presented. The
accompanying chart displays the 2015 percentage of total for slightly adapted age ranges, and includes data for
the Oklahoma and the nation. Noteworthy observations include the following:
 Age 55 to 64 grew the most with a 50.9% increase in Enid and a 48.5% increase in Garfield County
 Age 25 to 34 grew the second most with a 26.7% increase in Enid and a 23.3% increase in Garfield County;
this is significant because this age group (Gen Y) is typically the highest for first time homebuyers2
 Age 35 to 44 experienced the most loss with a 15.6% decrease in Enid and a 17.7% decrease in the County
Table 2: Population by Age, 2000 to 2015
Population By Age
City of Enid Garfield County
2000 2015 % ↑ 2000 2015 % ↑
Total Population 47,070 51,864 10.2% 57,812 63,462 9.8%
Age 0 to 4 3,222 3,913 21.4% 3,876 4,644 19.8%
Age 5 to 9 3,193 3,854 20.7% 3,900 4,590 17.7%
Age 10 to 14 3,172 3,563 12.3% 4,037 4,336 7.4%
Age 15 to 17 2,110 1,949 -7.6% 2,669 2,428 -9.0%
Age 18 to 20 1,926 1,902 -1.2% 2,332 2,365 1.4%
Age 21 to 24 2,492 2,668 7.1% 2,945 3,321 12.8%
Age 25 to 34 5,819 7,375 26.7% 6,989 8,614 23.3%
Age 35 to 44 7,101 5,995 -15.6% 8,818 7,259 -17.7%
Age 45 to 54 6,034 6,051 0.3% 7,528 7,705 2.4%
Age 55 to 64 4,283 6,461 50.9% 5,457 8,106 48.5%
Age 65 to 74 3,758 4,220 12.3% 4,591 5,378 17.1%
Age 75 to 84 2,770 2,635 -4.9% 3,298 3,214 -2.5%
Age 85 and over 1,190 1,278 7.4% 1,372 1,502 9.5%
Median Age 37.3 36.2 -2.9% 37.5 38.6 3.0%
Source: US Census, American Community Survey, PCensus
Figure 6: Percent of Population by Age, 2015
2 2014 NationalAssociationof Realtors Home Buyer andSeller Generational Trends
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
0-4 5-14 15-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75-84 85+
Enid Garfield County Oklahoma USA

16
Educational Attainment and School Enrollment
The following tables provide information regarding educational attainment, school enrollment, and school
performance in Garfield County. The first table provides educational attainment numbers and has a column
which denotes each category’s share of the total population (aged 25 and older). The last column in this table
contains the percent increase from the 2000 number to the 2015 number. Noteworthy observations include the
following:
 Educational attainment in Garfield County has increased significantly from 2000 to 2015, with a 14.7%
increase in the total number of high school graduates and a 20.4% increase in the total number of those
with a bachelor’s degree or higher
 The largest change was with those who earned an associate’s degree , followed closely by those who earned
a bachelor’s degree—which in 2015 makes up 20.4% of the population over 25 years old, or 8,981
individuals
 The number of individuals with a graduate or professional degree increased by 7.4%, or 187, to a total of
2,712 individuals in 2015
Table 3: Garfield County Education Attainment, 2000 to 2015
Educational Attainment
2000 2015 Estimate
% ↑
'00 - '15Number Share % Number Share %
Population 25 Years and Older 38,053 100.0% 41,778 100.0% 9.8%
Less than 9th Grade 2,057 5.4% 1,674 4.0% -18.6%
Some High School, No Diploma 4,699 12.3% 4,205 10.1% -10.5%
High School Graduate (or GED) 13,557 35.6% 15,235 36.5% 12.4%
Some College, No Degree 8,449 22.2% 9,321 22.3% 10.3%
Associate Degree 1,830 4.8% 2,362 5.7% 29.1%
Bachelor's Degree 4,936 13.0% 6,269 15.0% 27.0%
Graduate or Professional Degree 2,525 6.6% 2,712 6.5% 7.4%
High School Graduate or Higher 31,297 82.2% 35,899 85.9% 14.7%
Bachelor's Degree or Higher 7,461 19.6% 8,981 21.5% 20.4%
Table 4: School Enrollment and Performance in Garfield County, 2012 to 2015
School Name School District Type*
Enrollment
12-'13 13-'14 14-'15 2 Yr ↑
Chisholm ES Chisholm Elementary 443 463 503 13.5%
Chisholm HS Chisholm High School 262 288 296 13.0%
Chisholm MS Chisholm Middle 219 224 241 10.0%
Covington-Douglas ES Covington-Douglas Elementary 193 196 185 -4.1%
Covington-Douglas HS Covington-Douglas High School 78 82 87 11.5%

17
School Name School District Type*
Enrollment
12-'13 13-'14 14-'15 2 Yr ↑
Drummond ES Drummond Elementary 230 235 224 -2.6%
Drummond HS Drummond High School 92 98 92 0.0%
Adams ES Enid Elementary 358 386 345 -3.6%
Carver E.C. Center Enid Pre-K Only - - 141 -
Coolidge ES Enid Elementary 560 541 517 -7.7%
Dewitt Waller MS Enid Middle 577 612 657 13.9%
Eisenhower ES Enid Elementary 154 151 160 3.9%
Emerson MS Enid Middle 433 408 417 -3.7%
Enid HS Enid High School 1,815 1,840 1,868 2.9%
Garfield ES Enid Elementary 594 660 709 19.4%
Glenwood ES Enid Elementary 484 475 495 2.3%
Hayes ES Enid Elementary 361 361 340 -5.8%
Hoover ES Enid Elementary 305 320 336 10.2%
Longfellow MS Enid Middle 401 463 490 22.2%
McKinley ES Enid Elementary 343 312 292 -14.9%
Monroe ES Enid Elementary 445 458 418 -6.1%
Prairie View ES Enid Elementary 375 485 517 37.9%
Taft ES Enid Elementary 343 386 349 1.7%
Garber ES Garber Elementary 268 248 264 -1.5%
Garber HS Garber High School 110 107 114 3.6%
Kremlin-Hillsdale ES Kremlin-Hillsdale Elementary 237 227 217 -8.4%
Kremlin-Hillsdale HS Kremlin-Hillsdale High School 92 87 86 -6.5%
Pioneer-P.V. ES Pioneer-P.V. Elementary 324 326 308 -4.9%
Pioneer-P.V. HS Pioneer-P.V. High School 142 157 150 5.6%
Pioneer-P.V. JHS Pioneer-P.V. Junior High 87 94 78 -10.3%
Waukomis ES Waukomis Elementary 248 257 290 16.9%
Waukomis HS Waukomis High School 91 103 106 16.5%
Total 10,664 11,050 11,292 5.9%
Source: Oklahoma Department of Education
*Note: Elementary = Pre-K to 5th, MS = 6th - 8th, HS = 9th - 12th
The previous table provides enrollment and performance data as calculated and determined by the Oklahoma
Department of Education. This table includes all public schools located within Garfield County, which has seen
total enrollment figures county-wide increase by 5.9% (628 students) from the ‘12-’13 school year to the ’14-’15
(current) school year. The Chisolm School District is the fastest growing district in the County, adding 116
students in two years and growing by 12.6%. The Enid School District added the largest total number of students
in the County, adding 503 students and growing by 6.7%. Within Garfield County there were multiple schools
that lost enrollment over the two year period measured.

18
Income Trends
The following charts and table reveal the income trends for Enid, Garfield County, and Oklahoma. Incomes in
each geography are increasing on average at a rate faster than inflation. The inflation adjusted median
household income has risen 4.6% in Enid, 5.7% in Garfield County, and 1.6% for Oklahoma from 2000 to 2015.
The $75,000 to $99,999 household income group saw the largest increase in Enid and Garfield County, roughly
doubling the share of the residents earning that amount, going from 6.3% and 6.4% of the population to 12.5%
and 13.3 % of the population, respectively. Household incomes in the ranges above $100,000 have also grown
considerably, doubling or tripling their share of the population.
Figure 7: Household Income Trends, 2000 to 2015
Table 5: Household Income Trends, 2000 to 2015
Location Enid City Garfield County Oklahoma
Year 2000 2015 ↑ 2000 2015 ↑ 2000 2015 ↑
Total Households 19,091 20,820 9.1% 23,220 25,371 9.3% 1,343,504 1,520,327 13.2%
Less than $15,000 21.1% 11.1% -10.0% 20.1% 10.6% -9.5% 20.7% 14.1% -6.6%
$15,000 to $24,999 16.8% 11.6% -5.3% 16.6% 11.1% -5.5% 16.3% 12.1% -4.2%
$25,000 to $34,999 16.4% 13.5% -2.9% 16.5% 13.0% -3.5% 15.0% 11.7% -3.3%
$35,000 to $49,999 18.7% 17.9% -0.8% 19.3% 17.6% -1.7% 17.1% 15.1% -2.0%
$50,000 to $74,999 15.5% 18.0% 2.5% 16.1% 18.3% 2.2% 17.0% 18.5% 1.5%
$75,000 to $99,999 6.3% 12.5% 6.2% 6.4% 13.3% 6.9% 7.3% 11.4% 4.2%
$100,000 to $124,999 2.3% 6.6% 4.3% 2.3% 7.0% 4.7% 3.0% 7.0% 4.0%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
>15K 15-25K 25-35K 35-50K 50-75K 75-100K 100-125K 125-150K 150-200K 200-250K 250-500K >500K
Enid City Garfield County Oklahoma
-10%
-7%
-4%
-1%
2%
5%
8%
>15K 15-25K 25-35K 35-50K 50-75K 75-100K 100-125K 125-150K 150-200K 200-250K 250-500K >500K
% of Households, 2015
% ↑ 2000 to 2015

19
Location Enid City Garfield County Oklahoma
Year 2000 2015 ↑ 2000 2015 ↑ 2000 2015 ↑
$125,000 to $149,999 1.1% 3.2% 2.1% 1.1% 3.4% 2.3% 1.3% 3.8% 2.5%
$150,000 to $199,999 0.8% 2.7% 2.0% 0.7% 2.8% 2.1% 1.1% 3.2% 2.1%
$200,000 to $249,999 0.5% 1.1% 0.6% 0.5% 1.2% 0.7% 0.6% 1.2% 0.6%
$250,000 to $499,999 0.4% 1.3% 0.9% 0.4% 1.3% 0.9% 0.5% 1.4% 0.9%
$500,000 or more 0.2% 0.5% 0.4% 0.1% 0.5% 0.4% 0.2% 0.5% 0.3%
Median HH Income $32,416 $46,607 43.8% $33,097 $48,059 45.2% $33,692 $47,049 39.6%
Inflation Adjusted Median $44,539 $46,607 4.6% $45,475 $48,059 5.7% $46,292 $47,049 1.6%
Average HH Income $41,871 $63,173 50.9% $42,048 $64,468 53.3% $44,455 $63,390 42.6%
Inflation Adjusted Avg $57,563 $63,173 9.7% $57,806 $64,468 11.5% $61,116 $63,390 3.7%
* Note: Inflation adjustment is based on Bureau of Labor Statistics CPI Inflation Calculator ($1 in 2015 = $0.73 in 2015)
Figure 8: New Luxury Home Development in Unincorporated Garfield County

20
Housing Characteristics and Trends
The following tables and figures present information regarding the housing characteristics and trends in Enid
and Garfield County. The majority of this information is derived from the US Census and the American
Community Survey, and in some cases is self-reported data. While this can generate minor anomalies (such as
are present in the data on age of housing stock or housing values), the information presented in this section still
provides a valuable overview of the housing situation in the area. One important note to make is that the total
housing unit number used in this section is an estimate. Later in this study, more accurate numbers related to
permit activity will be reviewed.
Housing Type Trends
The following table contains a census of the type and number of housing units in Enid and Garfield County. This
data comes from the 2000 and 2010 Census as well as Census based estimates for 2015. Notable observations
include the following:
 Census based numbers for total Housing units in Garfield County are estimated to have increased by 7.6%
(or 1,986 units) over this fifteen year period. As presented earlier, this is related to an increase in population
in Garfield County over the same period estimated at 5,650.
 Single family detached units make up the vast majority of all housing types in both Enid and Garfield County,
accounting for over 80% of the housing stock in both geographies. When combined with single family
attached units (such as townhomes), single family homes account for roughly 85% of the housing stock.
 Of the 1,986 units estimated to have been added from 2000 to 2015 in Garfield County, Enid accounts for
82% (or 1,634 units) of the growth.
 The increase in single family detached homes accounts for the largest increase by number in Garfield County
from 2000 to 2015, at 1,180 new units.
 Housing units in large multifamily complexes, mobile homes, and duplexes saw large increases by
percentage change, though they are still few in number when compared with single family detached units.
Table 6: Housing Type Trends, 2000 to 2015
Location Enid % Garfield County %
Year 2000 2015 ↑ 2000 2015 ↑
Total Housing Units 21,372 23,006 7.6% 26,047 28,033 7.6%
1 Unit Attached 504 2.4% 597 2.6% 18.5% 605 2.3% 677 2.4% 11.9%
1 Unit Detached 17,767 83.1% 18,696 81.3% 5.2% 21,771 83.6% 22,951 81.9% 5.4%
2 Units 555 2.6% 718 3.1% 29.4% 583 2.2% 755 2.7% 29.5%
3 to 19 Units 1,276 6.0% 1,450 6.3% 13.6% 1,358 5.2% 1,585 5.7% 16.7%
20 to 49 Units 380 1.8% 327 1.4% -13.9% 386 1.5% 341 1.2% -11.7%
50 or More Units 290 1.4% 408 1.8% 40.7% 294 1.1% 430 1.5% 46.3%
Mobile Home or Trailer 553 2.6% 807 3.5% 45.9% 981 3.8% 1,289 4.6% 31.4%
Boat, RV, Van, etc. 47 0.2% 3 0.0% -93.6% 69 0.3% 5 0.0% -92.8%

21
Age of Existing Housing
The following table contains a 2015 estimate of the age of the existing housing stock in Enid, Garfield County,
and Oklahoma. Notable observations include the following:
 2,967 units are estimated to have been built after the year 2000 in Garfield County. This compares to the
1,986 units estimated to have been added since 2000 in the previous table. This can be explained by the
tendency of respondents surveyed to underestimate the age of their dwelling, particularly if they are
renters.
 The profile of Enid and Garfield County is similar to the state of Oklahoma, except that far fewer homes are
estimated to have been built locally during the 80s, 90s, and 00s.
Table 7: Age of Existing Housing Stock, 2000 to 2015
2015 Estimate Enid Garfield County Oklahoma
Total Housing Units 23,006 28,033 1,732,484
Built 2010 or later 1,074 4.7% 1,300 4.6% 83,624 4.8%
Built 2000 to 2009 1,287 5.6% 1,667 6.0% 227,905 13.2%
Built 1990 to 1999 1,170 5.1% 1,554 5.5% 198,558 11.5%
Built 1980 to 1989 2,865 12.5% 3,498 12.5% 262,184 15.1%
Built 1970 to 1979 5,090 22.1% 6,275 22.4% 334,158 19.3%
Built 1960 to 1969 3,492 15.2% 4,166 14.9% 205,146 11.8%
Built 1950 to 1959 3,115 13.5% 3,461 12.4% 183,749 10.6%
Built 1940 to 1949 2,145 9.3% 2,416 8.6% 95,721 5.5%
Built 1939 or Earlier 2,768 12.0% 3,696 13.2% 141,439 8.2%
Housing Occupancy Trends
The following table provides 2000 Census counts and 2015 estimates for housing occupancy in Enid and Garfield
County. The main observation to note is that overall occupancy is estimated to have increased, with a moderate
increase in the portion of homes that are renter occupied.
Table 8: Housing Occupancy Trends, 2000 to 2015
Location Enid % Garfield County %
Year 2000 2015 ↑ 2000 2015 ↑
Total Housing Units 21,372 23,006 7.6% 26,047 28,033 7.6%
Occupied Housing Units 19,071 89.2% 20,820 90.5% 9.2% 23,175 89.0% 25,371 90.5% 9.5%
Owner Occupied 13,017 60.9% 13,531 58.8% 3.9% 16,291 62.5% 17,103 61.0% 5.0%
Renter Occupied 6,054 28.3% 7,289 31.7% 20.4% 6,884 26.4% 8,268 29.5% 20.1%

22
Housing Value Trends
The following table and chart display owner occupied housing units grouped into self-reported value ranges for
Enid, Garfield County, and Oklahoma. As can be seen, housing values have increased dramatically in all
geographies from 2000 to 2015. When adjusted for inflation, the median value increase is still significant—at
around 12% for Enid and Garfield County, and at roughly 28% for Oklahoma.
Table 9: Housing Value Trends, 2000 to 2015
Location Enid Garfield County Oklahoma
Year 2000 2015 ↑ 2000 2015 ↑ 2000 2015 ↑
Owner-Occupied Housing 13,017 13,531 3.9% 16,291 17,103 5.0% 918,174 1,022,814 11.4%
Less than $60K 50.8% 25.7% -25.1% 50.9% 25.6% -25.3% 43.0% 18.5% -24.6%
$60K to $80K 18.2% 13.1% -5.1% 17.4% 13.5% -3.8% 17.3% 9.4% -7.8%
$80K to $100K 12.0% 11.4% -0.6% 12.2% 11.2% -1.0% 14.2% 11.0% -3.2%
$100K to $150K 11.0% 21.3% 10.3% 11.5% 20.8% 9.3% 14.8% 22.1% 7.2%
$150K to $200K 4.8% 11.3% 6.5% 4.6% 11.5% 6.8% 5.5% 16.2% 10.6%
$200K to $300K 2.0% 9.3% 7.3% 2.1% 9.3% 7.2% 3.3% 13.1% 9.8%
$300K to $400K 0.9% 4.7% 3.7% 0.9% 4.8% 3.9% 0.9% 4.8% 3.9%
$400K to $500K 0.0% 1.8% 1.8% 0.0% 2.0% 1.9% 0.4% 2.1% 1.7%
$500K to $750K 0.2% 1.0% 0.8% 0.2% 1.0% 0.8% 0.3% 1.6% 1.3%
$750K to $1,000K 0.0% 0.3% 0.3% 0.0% 0.3% 0.3% 0.1% 0.6% 0.5%
$1,000K or more 0.0% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.2% 0.7% 0.5%
Median Value $59,261 $91,563 54.5% $59,125 $91,100 54.1% $68,082 $119,546 75.6%
Inflation Adjusted* $81,470 $91,563 12.4% $81,283 $91,100 12.1% $93,597 $119,546 27.7%
* Note: Inflation adjustment is based on Bureau of Labor Statistics CPI Inflation Calculator
Figure 9: Housing Values, 2015
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
< $60K $60K-$80K $80K-$100K $100K-$150K $150K-$200K $200K-$300K $300K-$400K $400K-$500K $500K-$750K $750K-$1,000K > $1,000K
Enid Garfield County Oklahoma

23
Employment Trends
In most locations, local employment is a key indicator used in determining the demand for housing in a
community, as well as the principal driver of population and household growth. The information in this section
provides general and detailed employment statistics for the Enid area.
Employment Rates and Labor Force Gains
The table below displays unemployment rates for Garfield County, Oklahoma, and the United States from 2010
to March of 2015. Unemployment rates are calculated by subtracting the number of people in the labor force by
the number of people employed, and dividing that figure by the labor force number. According to the BLS, the
unemployed are defined as all persons who had no employment during the reference period, were available for
work, except for temporary illness, and had made specific efforts to find employment.
Table 10: Unemployment Rates, 2010 to March 2015
Time Period Garfield County Oklahoma United States
2010 5.5% 6.8% 9.6%
2011 4.4% 5.9% 8.9%
2012 4.1% 5.3% 8.1%
2013 4.2% 5.3% 7.4%
January 2014 4.1% 5.6% 6.6%
February 2014 4.1% 5.0% 6.7%
March 2014 3.7% 4.9% 6.6%
April 2014 3.0% 4.8% 6.2%
May 2014 3.6% 4.7% 6.3%
June 2014 3.8% 4.6% 6.1%
July 2014 3.7% 4.5% 6.2%
August 2014 3.5% 4.4% 6.1%
September 2014 3.5% 4.3% 5.9%
October 2014 3.4% 4.2% 5.7%
November 2014 3.2% 4.1% 5.8%
December 2014 3.2% 4.0% 5.6%
January 2015 3.5% 3.9% 5.7%
February 2015 3.5% 3.9% 5.5%
March 2015 3.1% 3.9% 5.5%
Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics, LAUS; County numbers are not seasonally adjusted
Note: March numbers are preliminary
Figure 10: Unemployment Rates, 2010 to March 2015
Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics, LAUS; County numbers are not seasonally adjusted
3%
5%
7%
9%
11%
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 March 2015
Garfield County Oklahoma United States

24
The overall unemployment rate for Garfield County has remained lower than the State and nation for some
time. While this is good news and speaks to the economic health of the Enid area, it does not give a clear picture
of the size or potential of the local labor force. The table and chart below do provide this information. The table
has three sections, the top left is 2013 data, the top right is 2014 data, and the bottom section contains the data
available for 2015. Each section shows the size and gains for employment and the labor force. The chart depicts
this data graphically. As can be seen, the number of individuals in Garfield County who are employed and in the
labor force has stayed relatively steady for 2013 and 2014. For 2015 the numbers show an increase from
previous years—despite layoffs in the oil and gas related industries associated with the falling price of crude oil.
While this is a good sign, the full effect of lower crude oil prices on the region will remain an uncertainty for
several more months.
Table 11: Garfield County Monthly Employment and Labor Force Gains, 2013 to March 2015
2013 Employed Monthly ↑ Labor Force Monthly ↑ 2014 Employed Monthly ↑ Labor Force Monthly ↑
Jan 28,253 - 29,542 - Jan 27,542 -187 28,724 -143
Feb 28,056 -197 29,298 -244 Feb 27,580 38 28,769 45
Mar 28,243 187 29,388 90 Mar 28,105 525 29,186 417
Apr 28,523 280 29,613 225 Apr 28,270 165 29,158 -28
May 28,559 36 29,835 222 May 28,422 152 29,485 327
Jun 28,887 328 30,304 469 Jun 28,808 386 29,949 464
Jul 28,679 -208 29,964 -340 Jul 28,777 -31 29,873 -76
Aug 28,169 -510 29,380 -584 Aug 28,652 -125 29,693 -180
Sep 28,164 -5 29,404 24 Sep 28,393 -259 29,416 -277
Oct 27,644 -520 28,906 -498 Oct 28,276 -117 29,285 -131
Nov 27,777 133 28,919 13 Nov 28,234 -42 29,176 -109
Dec 27,729 -48 28,867 -52 Dec 28,116 -118 29,031 -145
2015 Employed Monthly ↑ Labor Force Monthly ↑
Jan 28,395 279 29,436 405
Feb 28,883 488 29,936 500
Mar 29,408 525 30,355 419
Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics, LAUS; County numbers are not seasonally adjusted; March numbers are preliminary
Figure 11: Garfield County Monthly Employment and Labor Force Gains, 2013 to March 2015
Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics, LAUS; County numbers are not seasonally adjusted; March numbers are preliminary
27,250
27,750
28,250
28,750
29,250
29,750
30,250
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2013 Labor Force 2014 Labor Force 2015 Labor Force 2013 Employed 2014 Employed 2015 Employed

25
Wage and Employment Trends by Industry
The following table takes a closer look at the employment figures for Garfield County, with data on each tracked
NAICS coded industry sector—comparing 3rd
quarter (3Q) 2010 data with 3Q 2014 data to examine the most
recent data available. It should be noted that the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages, the source for
this data, does not include all jobs in Garfield County—which explains the discrepancy of a few thousand jobs
between the totals shown here and the totals in the previous table.
Table 12: Wage and Employment Trends by Industries Tracked in Garfield County, 2010 to 2014
NAICS Industry
Employment Average Annual Wages
3Q 2010 3Q 2014 % ↑ 3Q 2010 3Q 2014 % ↑
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing, and Hunting 118 126 6.8% $27,776 $31,813 14.5%
Mining (Including Oil & Gas Extraction) 1,006 2,283 126.9% $93,108 $91,009 -2.3%
Utilities 205 255 24.2% $74,843 $74,179 -0.9%
Construction 1,026 1,466 42.8% $40,958 $51,079 24.7%
Manufacture 2,872 2,639 -8.1% $54,053 $39,984 -26.0%
Wholesale Trade 1,054 1,511 43.4% $42,204 $61,105 44.8%
Retail Trade 3,119 3,389 8.7% $25,423 $27,716 9.0%
Transportation and Warehousing 791 1,004 26.9% $45,919 $48,525 5.7%
Information 292 275 -5.8% $33,411 $34,632 3.7%
Finance and Insurance 753 729 -3.2% $41,673 $52,300 25.5%
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 336 314 -6.5% $33,734 $36,201 7.3%
Professional, Scientific and Technical Services 1,477 1,429 -3.2% $51,693 $58,179 12.5%
Management of Companies and Enterprises ND ND ND ND ND ND
Administrative and Support and Waste Mgt. 1,553 1,387 -10.7% $22,160 $24,087 8.7%
Educational Services 1,552 1,706 9.9% $18,840 $21,446 13.8%
Health Care and Social Assistance 3,958 3,414 -13.8% $38,041 $39,741 4.5%
Arts, Entertainment and Recreation 397 440 10.8% $14,707 $16,341 11.1%
Accommodation and Food Services 1,852 2,283 23.3% $13,977 $14,331 2.5%
Other Services (except Public Administration) 605 564 -6.7% $26,234 $31,428 19.8%
Public Administration 1,837 1,416 -22.9% $38,656 $49,708 28.6%
TOTAL / AVERAGE 24,804 26,631 7.4% $37,550 $42,131 12.2%
Source: Oklahoma Employment Security Commission, Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages
Note: ND = Not discolsed; 2010 wages have been adjusted for inflation
As can be seen, there are several large and growing industries in Garfield County. While the mining industry
(which includes oil and gas extraction) has more than doubled in recent years, it still only made up around 8.5%
of the jobs tracked in this data set (even less of actual total employment) as of 3Q 2014. The following two
sections provide additional perspective on the diversity of the local economy and the potential impact of low oil
prices.
The Diverse Local Economy
Garfield County has a diverse mix of current employers across several different types of industries. Some of the
major employers include Vance Air Force Base, AdvancePierre Foods, Koch Nitrogen Company, CSC, Integris Bass
Baptist Health Center, Enid Board of Education, St. Mary’s Regional Medical Center, the City of Enid, Marsau

26
Enterprises, and Walmart. There are also several mid to small sized employers which have a significant impact of
the local economy. The following figure utilizes the data presented previously to illustrate the diversity and
trends of the local economy. Each bubble corresponds with a tracked industry in Garfield County. The size
(diameter) of the bubble represents the proportionate number of employees in that industry. The location of
the bubble along the y-axis represents the Location Quotient of that industry in Garfield County, as compared
with the state of Oklahoma. The location of the bubble along the x-axis represents the percentage that the
industry has added or lost jobs locally in the last four years.
Figure 12: Size, Growth, and Location Quotient of Industries in Garfield County, 3Q 2014
Source: CDS Market Research utilizing data from the Oklahoma Employment Security Commission, Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages
A word on Location Quotients (LQ): this number compares the relative concentration of an industry in a local
economy with the average concentration seen at a higher level—in this case, the state of Oklahoma. For

27
example, the Wholesale Trade industry in Garfield County has an LQ of 1.4, indicating that the local economy
has 40% more jobs per capita in that industry than witnessed at the state level. An LQ of 1.0 indicates parity, and
an LQ below 1.0 indicates a below average proportion of jobs. A high location quotient in a specific industry may
translate into a competitive advantage in that industry for the local economy. Economic development
opportunities may exist for additional growth because of the presence of an existing skilled labor pool or other
resources such as suppliers, facilities or transportation hubs in the region. An LQ less than 1.0 may indicate an
opportunity to develop businesses in the area to better meet local demand.
Combining all of this data into one chart—size of local industries, growth of local industries, and the Location
Quotient—makes it easier to assess the health and direction of the local economy. This chart demonstrates that
the Enid area and Garfield County are not dependent on any one industry and have multiple industries which
are strong and growing, or represent opportunities for economic development. This chart also demonstrates
how important Garfield County is as a regional hub of economic activity for northwestern Oklahoma.
The Potential Impact of Lower Crude Oil Prices
There has been much concern in Garfield County over the recent drop in crude oil prices and the potential
impact this may have on the local economy, despite the fact that the mining / oil and gas industry in Garfield
County accounted for less than 8% of total employment in 3Q 2014. Still, there is justification for some concern
as the local mining / oil and gas industry does have a considerably higher average wage, and affects other
industries through both direct and indirect purchases (by businesses and employees).
The chart below displays the monthly averages for the price of crude oil and for Garfield County employment in
the mining / oil and gas industry. Industry specific employment data ends at September of 2014, and although
total employment and labor force figures for Garfield County have so far been positive for early 2015, anecdotal
evidence from the community suggests that there have been modest layoffs related to mining / oil and gas.
Figure 13: Garfield County Oil and Gas Employment and the Price of Crude Oil, 2004 to 2015
Source: US Energy Information Administration; BLS Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages
How many mining / oil and gas jobs will be lost? That is a difficult question to answer, and one which will require
more time to fully measure. However, the good news is that the Enid area is more diverse than ever, and that so
far other industries have reportedly been able to absorb many of the oil and gas layoffs.
$0
$20
$40
$60
$80
$100
$120
$140
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Garfield County Mining Employment (Including Oil and Gas Extraction) Montly Average $/Barrel Price

28
Garfield County Employment Projections
From 2010 to 2015, employment in Garfield County has increased by roughly two thousand jobs, resulting in an
annual average growth rate estimated at 1.4%. Over the same period, Oklahoma’s annual average growth rate
for employment has been estimated at 1.2%, and the nation at 1.6% (annual average growth rates were
calculated using the total employment annual averages for 2010 and 2015, year to date). For the purpose of
determining future housing demand, total employment figures have been projected into the short term future.
As can be seen in the following chart, total employment in Garfield County is expected to continue to grow at
1.4% annually, increasing by roughly 800 jobs (from the 2015 average) over the next two years.
Figure 14: Garfield County Employment; Historical and Projected
Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics, CDS Market Research
Given the uncertainty related to lower crude oil prices, this projection should be considered slightly optimistic,
but not unrealistic. Although new oil and gas jobs made up a large portion of the local employment gains from
2010 to 2015, this occurred during a period of overall financial turbulence. With an improving national economy,
the Enid area is poised to do well—especially considering its role as a regional hub of commerce for
northwestern Oklahoma. While there have so far been moderate layoffs in the oil and gas industry, several
other industries in Garfield County are still growing and seeking new employees. According to job listing sites
such as Indeed and Monster, there are currently over 600 jobs in the Enid area which have been posted within
the last 30 days. The Autry Technology Center, which periodically surveys area employers, reports a similar level
economic health. According to their most recent survey covering twenty seven local employers and 10,000
employees, there are over 100 immediate openings at a third of the companies. In addition, over 75% of the
companies report that they will have openings within the next six to eighteen months.
Figure 15: Image of Autry Technology Center
Source: Enid News and Eagle
26,000
27,000
28,000
29,000
30,000
Jan-10 Jul-10 Jan-11 Jul-11 Jan-12 Jul-12 Jan-13 Jul-13 Jan-14 Jul-14 Jan-15 Jul-15 Jan-16 Jul-16 Jan-17 Jul-17
Actual Employment Trend / Projection

29
HOUSING MARKET TRENDS – SINGLE FAMILY FOR-SALE HOMES
As presented previously, single family detached units make up the vast majority of all housing types in both Enid
and Garfield County, accounting for over 80% of the housing stock in both geographies. When combined with
single family attached units (such as townhomes), single family homes account for roughly 85% of the housing
stock. This equals an estimated 19,293 single family homes in End and Garfield County. These homes vary in size
and price, from older and smaller tract homes in Enid’s historically working class neighborhoods, to large and
multi-million dollar custom homes in unincorporated Garfield County.
This section examines the latest market trends for single family homes in Enid and Garfield County, looking
specifically at local real estate sales statistics, new home construction and permit activity, and local market costs
associated with increasing the housing supply.
Figure 16: Images of Single Family Residential Homes in Enid and Garfield County
Source: CDS Market Research, Google Street View, Enid Metro Association of Realtors

30
Existing Home Market
The following sections contain single family residential home sale data for the bulk of Garfield County over the
last few years. This data provides insight into local real estate market trends. The source for the majority of this
data was the multiple listing service of the Enid Metro Association of Realtors, Inc.
Sales Price Trends
The following three charts depict the median sales price, average sales price, and sale volume for each month
from March 2011 to March 2015. As can be seen, the sales price is trending upward year over year for the Enid
area. The first chart compares the median sales price of the Enid area to Oklahoma, clearly showing that the
local median price is increasing at a rate faster than the state, with higher peaks in recent months. This would
indicate an increase in demand over previous years. The last chart shows that sales volume has increased only
slightly despite the price increases, suggesting that supply is constrained.
Figure 17: Residential Median Sales Price, 2011 to 2015
Source: Enid Metro Association of Realtors, Zillow
Figure 18: Enid Area Residential Average Sales Price, 2011 to 2015
Source: Enid Metro Association of Realtors
Figure 19: Enid Area Residential Closed Unit Sales, 2011 to 2015
$80K
$100K
$120K
$140K
$160K
Jan-11 Jul-11 Jan-12 Jul-12 Jan-13 Jul-13 Jan-14 Jul-14 Jan-15
Oklahoma Enid Area
$90K
$110K
$130K
$150K
$170K
30
50
70
90
110

31
The following chart displays the median asked price to sold price ratio from March 2011 to March 2015. Tracking
this ratio provides insight into the level of demand and overall competition in the market, indicating the room
buyers have to negotiate on prices. Over the past several years, this ratio in the Enid area has trended upwards,
once again demonstrating that the local single family housing market is experiencing an increase in demand.
Figure 20: Enid Area Residential Median Asked Price to Sold Price Percentage, 2011 to 2015
Days on Market
The Days on Market (DOM) calculation is another helpful metric commonly used in the real estate industry to
evaluate the relative magnitude of demand. In the Enid area the DOM has dropped significantly in the last few
years. The annual average DOM in 2011 was 96.4 days. In 2014 the DOM dropped to 63.5, representing a 34%
decline. The average so far for 2015 (which includes January to March) is 66.0, which is in line with 2014
numbers over the same period.
Figure 21: Enid Area Residential Median Days on Market, 2011 to 2015
Figure 22: Enid Area Residential Median Days on Market, Annual Average 2011 to 2014
Source: Enid Metro Association of Realtors; Note: 2011 does not include January or February, and 2015 includes January to March
95.5%
96.0%
96.5%
97.0%
97.5%
98.0%
98.5%
50
70
90
110
130
60
70
80
90
100
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

32
Housing Supply and Inventory
Realtor’s use the term “months of supply” to describe the inventory of homes on the market. Simply put,
months of supply is the number of months it would take for the current inventory to sell out if sales continued at
the current rate and no new inventory was added. The chart below displays the months of supply for single
family residential properties in the Enid area, calculated two ways. The dark blue line calculates the Enid area
months of supply by dividing the end of month inventory by the average monthly sales over the prior twelve
months. The light blue line calculates the Enid area months of supply by dividing the end of month inventory by
the current month’s sales. The tan line calculates the US months of supply by dividing the end of month
inventory by the current month’s sales.
Figure 23: Housing Supply Measured in Months of Inventory, 2011 to 2015
Source: Enid Metro Association of Realtors, US Census Bureau / Federal Reserve Bank
As can be seen, the single family residential housing supply in the Enid area was relatively in line with national
figures for 2011. However, starting in 2012 the Enid area’s supply began to decrease and diverge from the
national figure. This trend continued throughout 2013, 2014, and into 2015. Currently, the months of supply in
the Enid area is just below four months, roughly a month and a half lower than the national figure. Generally, a
supply greater than seven months is considered a buyers’ market, between five to seven months is a balanced
market, and less than five months is a sellers’ market. The single family residential housing market in the Enid
area is clearly a sellers’ market, and has been for the last couple years.
Recent Residential Construction Trends
In the Enid area there are currently seven certified home builders and nineteen registered home builders listed
with the Enid Home Builders Association. The information in this section examines the recent residential permit
and construction activity taking place in the Enid area by these and other builders.
Residential Building Permits
Experience has shown that residential building permit activity essentially equates to new houing unit
construction. The following chart displays annual single family and multifamily residential building permit
activity for new unit construction in the Enid area from 2004 to 2014, as well as the estimated annual net new
2
4
6
8
10
Jan 2011 Jul 2011 Jan 2012 Jul 2012 Jan 2013 Jul 2013 Jan 2014 Jul 2014 Jan 2015
US Monthly Inventory ÷ Monthly Sales
Enid Area Monthly Inventory ÷ Monthly Sales
Enid Area Monthly Inventory ÷ 12 Mo. Prior Sales Avg.

33
residents (natural increase and in-migration minus natural decrease and out-migration). Multifamily units were
added in only two years; 48 in 2008 (Roosevelt Park Apartments) and 102 (Tuscana Apartments) in 2011.
Figure 24: Garfield Residential Building Permits and Net New Residents, 2004 to 2014
Source: Enid City Community Development, CDS Market Research, Local area developers and builders; Note: Permits are for new unit construction
As can be seen, increased residential building permit activity seems to generally follow population growth, but
not in every year. For a better understanding of whether or not enough housing units are being built in the Enid
area, the following table compares Enid City and Garfield County with the state of Oklahoma. For each
geography there is a ten year history of total permit activity (single family and multifamily), estimated net new
residents, and the ratio between the two.
Table 13: Net New Residents per Single Family Building Permit Issued, 2004 to 2014
Year
New
Residents
Residential
Building
Permits
New
Residents
per Permit
New
Residents
Residential
Building
Permits
New
Residents
per Permit
New
Residents
Residential
Building
Permits
New
Residents
per Permit
2004 35 24 1.5 20 89 0.2 20,300 17,068 1.2
2005 -138 26 -5.3 -229 74 -3.1 23,400 18,362 1.3
2006 173 93 1.9 205 97 2.1 45,500 15,840 2.9
2007 229 76 3.0 289 92 3.1 40,200 14,730 2.7
2008 494 124 4.0 619 124 5.0 34,700 10,502 3.3
2009 703 35 20.1 875 39 22.4 48,600 8,753 5.6
'04-'09 1,496 378 4.0 1,779 515 3.5 212,700 85,255 2.5
2010 1,411 71 19.9 1,805 74 24.4 33,751 8,140 4.1
2011 19 121 0.2 -138 128 -1.1 35,149 8,782 4.0
2012 465 27 17.2 603 29 20.8 30,600 11,930 2.6
2013 862 52 16.6 1,069 54 19.8 33,468 13,583 2.5
2014 570 62 9.2 598 69 8.7 27,483 14,357 1.9
'10-'14 3,327 333 10.0 3,937 354 11.1 160,451 56,792 2.8
'04-'14 4,823 711 6.8 5,716 869 6.6 373,151 142,047 2.6
Source: US Census, Enid City Code Administration Department, PCensus, CDS Market Research
Notes: Permits are for new unit construction; Garfield County numbers include Enid; Garfield County does not issue building permits, numbers are based
on estimated new housing units added
-300
200
700
1,200
1,700
2,200
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
NewResidents/Population
BuildingPermits
Residential Building Permits
Net New Residents

34
The following chart depicts the ratio displayed in the previous table. This ratio was calculated by dividing the
number of estimated net new residents each year by the number of new construction building permits issued
annually. A higher number means that fewer building permits are being issued per capita (of net new residents),
suggesting that new homes are not being built in sufficient numbers.
Figure 25: Net New Residents per Building Permit Issued, 2004 to 2014
Note: Net new residents = the net increase (or decrease) of population from the previous to current year; Permits are for new unit construction
The numbers of permits for Oklahoma are a total for all jurisdictions, and have been as high as 18,362 in 2005
and as low as 8,140 in 2010. While this is a considerable variation, it corresponds closely to the rise and fall of
the number of estimated new residents or population added each year to the state. The result is a ratio of new
residents to residential building permits that has stayed fairly constant, averaging 2.6 over the last decade.
Interestingly enough, that number is fairly close to the average persons per household for the state (estimated
at 2.5). This suggests that on average the housing market in Oklahoma is aiming for roughly one new home for
every one new household added. For Enid and Garfield County, the ratio of net new residents per building
permit is higher and has a larger variation. In a smaller market such as the Enid area, this is to be expected. The
number of estimated new residents added annually in the Enid area has varied widely, with a couple of years
even experiencing a loss in population. The result is a more challenging local housing market, where builders,
developers, lenders, and investors can find it difficult to accurately gauge demand and determine the safe
amount of financial risk.
Figure 26: Summary of Net New Residents per Single Family Building Permit Issued
Note: Net new residents = the net increase (or decrease) of population from the previous to current year; Permits are for new unit construction
-10.0
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Enid City
Garfield County
Oklahoma
More new homes needed
New homes may not be needed
0.0
2.5
5.0
7.5
10.0
12.5
2004 to 2009 2010 to 2014 2004 to 2014

35
Despite this challenge, the data in this section (as well as the data provided throughout this report) should
demonstrate that there is significant long term demand in the Enid area to justify an increased number of new
residential housing units. From 20010 to 2014, Enid and Garfield County have averaged 10.0 and 11.1 new
residents per residential building permit. With an average persons per household estimated at 2.4, that means
for every four households that were added to the Enid area over the last five years, only one new housing unit
was constructed.
Due to this lack of supply, there is a considerable amount of pent-up demand—which has affected (and will
continue to affect) the area’s ability to grow. Indeed, employers interviewed for this study have reported that
employees and potential employees have been lost due to the inability to find housing that met their needs
and/or budget.
Available Residential Lots
Residential lots are essentially real estate properties that are considered residential in nature, usually because of
zoning designations. Residential lots are often created when a larger piece of property is subdivided into smaller
pieces of property. For this to occur in the City of Enid, an application for plat approval must be submitted to the
planning commission. The following chart displays the number of lots created each year from this process, from
2004 to 2014. Single family building permits issued in Enid during this time period is also displayed. The table in
this section provides more detail on these lots, such as the associated plat and how many lots remain available.
Figure 27: Enid City Annual Lots Added and Building Permits Issued, 2004 to 2014
Source: Enid City Community Development, CDS Market Research, local area developers and builders
Table 14: Enid City Residential Plat / Lot Survey, 2004 to 2014
Plat Name Year Approved Blocks Lots Built Available
Wilderness Cove 2004 Blocks 9-12 31 9 22
Willow West 4th 2005 Blocks 6-7 6 5 1
Wilderness Cove 2005 Blocks 13-14 23 15 8
Willow West 4th 2005 Block 8 2 1 1
Heritage Garden Court (Heritage Hills B 45) 2006 Block 1 12 10 2
Pheasant Run Golf Community 2006 Blocks 22-24 25 22 3
Feightner 1st Addition 2006 Block 1 11 4 7
Hearthstone Farms 2006 Block 1 20 6 14
El Paseo 2006 N/A 16 13 3
0
50
100
150
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Annual Lots Added
New Residential Building Permits

36
Plat Name Year Approved Blocks Lots Built Available
Feightner 1st Addition 2006 Block 2 9 2 7
Chisholm Creek Village 2006 Blocks 6-9 30 27 3
Wilderness Cove 2006 Block 15 10 10 0
Pioneer Trail 2nd 2007 N/A 2 0 2
Belle Crossing 2007 Blocks 1-4 17 6 11
Feightner 2nd 2007 Blocks 1-2 11 3 8
Skyview Estates 2007 Blocks 7-9 17 15 2
Wilderness Cove 2nd 2008 Blocks 1-4 48 31 17
Heritage Hills 2008 Block 46 23 11 12
Feightner 2nd 2008 Replat Blocks 1-2 5 1 4
NewGrange 2011 Block 1 4 2 2
No Residential Plats 2012 N/A 0 0 0
Stonebridge Village 2014 N/A 25 0 25
Tara Estates 2014 Blocks 4-5-6 31 9 22
Total 568 268 300
Source: Enid City Community Development, CDS Market Research, Local area developers and builders
The preceding table provides a helpful estimate of the number of lots currently available, and corresponds
closely to the number of total available lots estimated by Enid area home builders and developers. This table
does not include lots that were created from plat approvals before 2004, or lots that were not subdivided. So far
for 2015, the City is not reporting any new plat approvals. Enid area home builders and developers estimate that
of these total available lots, around 100 are finished are ready for immediate home construction. Depending on
the size, location, and neighborhood amenities, finished lots have a sale price which currently varies from
approximately $30,000 to $70,000.
Single Family Construction Costs
The previous housing study discussed the difference in single family construction costs for homebuilders in Enid
compared to other areas. This remains a challenge, and continues to add to the cost and price of new homes.
The following table provides a breakdown of these costs. Local developers and homebuilders provided several
examples comparing Enid to Oklahoma City, Edmond, Norman, Tulsa and Wichita, Kansas. The result is that on
average a 2,000 square foot home constructed in the Enid area costs an estimated ten to fifteen percent more,

37
totaling more than $20,000. Much of this additional cost is passed on to the prospective homebuyer, making it
particularly challenging to profitably build homes under $150,000. There is a significant amount of demand for
new homes in this price range in the Enid area, especially from first time homebuyers or those with more
moderate incomes.
Table 15: Enid Area Additional Cost of New Home Construction
Category
Approximate Difference per SqFt
(Compared to other nearby metro areas)
Difference per 2,000 SqFt home
Plumbing $3.00 $6,000
Electrical $1.25 $2,500
Concrete $0.25 $500
Flatwork $0.25 $500
Roofing $0.25 $500
Brick $1.25 $2,500
Framers $1.00 $2,000
HVAC (Heating and Cooling) $1.50 $3,000
Painters $1.00 $2,000
Other Trades / Materials $0.50 $1,000
Totals $10.25 $20,500
Source: CDS Market Research, Local area developers and builders
Some of the reasons for this cost difference include the following:
 With the Enid subcontractor community there is a large demand from the energy sector for skilled labor
causing a shortage of workers and a surplus of demand. This imbalance in supply and demand has led to an
overall increase in labor dollars per square foot for residential construction.
 Enid is limited to three main suppliers of building materials within a 50 mile radius. Only one of the local
vendors is a large chain supplier. This lack of competition for suppliers may increase the cost of materials.
 Enid City code inspections seem to be unjustifiably stringent, or inconsistently applied, leading to larger
compliance costs for builders and subcontractors. For example, the City requires more rebar in the in the
slab instead of allowing for other more cost effective slab strengthening strategies. In addition, inspections
and the approval process often feel combative and lengthy, unnecessarily slowing the construction
schedule.
 While not directly a component of construction costs, there were many references to challenges with
financing, specifically citing that flaws in the appraisal process were detrimental towards securing more
favorable financing terms.
Enid Area Housing Task Force
Following the previous housing study when several of these issues were first identified, ERDA put together a
housing task force with the goal of identifying opportunities to increase the number of competitive priced

38
subcontractors and suppliers in Enid. They identified several ways that local government could make a positive
impact on the issue, including the following:
 Increase statewide and national awareness of subcontractor opportunities in Enid, OK.
 Decrease the amount of inspections in excess of what is required by state code to remove the burden of
inconsistency in contractor expectations compared to other markets. These issues could also be address
through the adoption of a local contractor’s forum with the city code department as seen in other markets
such as Oklahoma City’s monthly contractor meeting.
 Promote skills training through Autry Technology Center to increase the amount of entry level subcontractor
workforce. One possible way this can be accomplished through current or retired contractors teaming with
Autry Technology Center to provide additional trainers opportunities for lacking skills.
 Incentivize subcontractors to relocate to or add branches in Enid.
 Promote Enid to additional suppliers such as Home Depot, Probuild, and Stillwater Building Center to
increase competition among suppliers and improve builder discount opportunities within the community.
Figure 28: Images of New Home Construction in the Enid Area

39
HOUSING MARKET TRENDS – MULTIFAMILY RENTALS
According to the Census related housing type estimates presented earlier in this report, there are 2,903
multifamily units in Enid and 3,111 in Garfield County. Through an extensive recent survey conducted by CDS,
thirty four multifamily complexes were identified in the Enid area accounting for 2,224 units. The discrepancy
between this number and the estimated number for the County is likely related to the large number of duplexes
and other small multifamily structures that were not included in the survey presented in this section.
Existing Multifamily Units
The figure below is a map of the thirty four complexes identified in the survey presented in this section. As can
be seen, these complexes are located throughout Enid, and somewhat concentrated near commercial areas. The
table which follows contains information for each one of these complexes.
Figure 29: Enid Area Existing Multifamily Complexes

40
Table 16: Enid Area Existing Multifamily Complexes, 2015
Map # Complex Address Built Occupied Units SqFt Range Avg $/SqFt Price
Market Rate Housing
1 Colonial Plaza 613 S. Hayes 1960 95% 16 606-1,050 $0.83 $600-700
2 Edgewood Arms 1700 Mosher Drive 1963 100% 77 550-1,250 $0.60 $350-700
3 Fountain Lake 2225 Fountain Lake Ave 1980 100% 60 675-1,350 $0.81 $635-905
4 Hunter's Hills 2501 Hunters Hill Drive 1975 100% 91 700-900 $0.92 $675-795
5 Indian Oaks 1111 South Oakwood 1980 100% 165 425-1,000 $0.88 $485-625
6 La Fonda 1228 E Broadway Ave 1965 100% 37 700-800 $0.83 $600-650
7 Lakeside 1907 E Broadway 1970 100% 23 700-700 $0.86 $600-600
8 Le Chateau 4101 South La Mesa Dr. 1985 90% 72 675-940 $0.75 $530-680
9 Leona Mitchell (New View) 1726 Leona Mitchell Blvd 1968 75% 76 600-1,000 $1.03 $700-900
10 Mosher Drive 1901 Mosher Drive 1960 95% 28 840-840 $0.68 $575-575
11 Oakwood West 4810 Spring Ridge Rd 1980 100% 108 300-1,250 $0.82 $325-690
12 Randolph (Kingsbury) 707 W Randolph Ave 1960 90% 40 580-1,000 $0.84 $575-690
13 Randolph Corner 1101 E Randolph 1970 100% 14 700-700 $0.86 $600-600
14 Sandpiper 408 North Oakwood Rd 1975 95% 112 679-1,060 $0.71 $530-680
15 Seven Pines 4004 Village Drive 1982 100% 76 800-900 $0.68 $575-575
16 Sharswood 1201 E Broadway 1920 100% 13 600-750 $0.95 $625-650
17 Sunridge 4121 S Van Buren Enid 1985 100% 130 940-1,450 $0.76 $780-990
18 The Peppers (Pimientos) 1510 E Broadway 1920 100% 14 600-750 $0.92 $625-600
19 The Timbers 3002 North Cleveland 1985 100% 38 900-1,200 $0.60 $575-675
20 Tuscana 5506 West Chestnut 2011 100% 102 693-1,202 $1.02 $750-1,150
21 Winchester West 1001 S Oakwood Rd 1973 100% 121 300-1,250 $0.74 $290-650
Subtotal / Average 1977 97% 1,413 857 $0.81 $695
Market Rate Senior Housing
22 Burgundy * 1600 W Willow Rd 1985 100% 58 560-922 $2.21 $1,370-1,815
23 Golden Oaks * 5800 North Oakwood Rd 1989 85% 132 600-2,000 $1.69 $1,250-2,600
24 The Commons (Apts) * 3706 King Street 2003 100% 40 500-1,019 $3.03 $1,505-3,100
25 The Commons (Townh.) * 3706 King Street 2003 100% 35 1,400-2,100 $1.07 $1,690-1,960
Subtotal / Average 1992 93% 265 1,156 $1.92 $2,223
Affordable Housing (Income Restricted / Subsidized)
26 Cherokee Terrace 619 E Maine Ave 1938 100% 80 650-850 $0.83 $487-770
27 Civitan Homes * 1314 N Garland Road 1970 100% 46 550-500 $0.65 $340-340
28 Clay Hall * 311 Lakeview Drive 1941 99% 30 850-1,162 $0.42 $385-460
29 La Mesa Point * 4202 S La Mesa Drive 1980 95% 47 600-600 $0.83 $500-500
30 Meadows Point * 1225 S Cleveland St 1983 93% 98 576-576 $0.87 $500-500
31 Pheasant Run 6102 Chestnut Ave 2000 100% 96 692-1,000 $0.67 $495-615
32 Pine Manor 1011 South 30th Street 1980 95% 50 700-1,200 $0.68 $494-782
33 Rolling Meadows 3225 Randolph Ave 1985 98% 51 800-1,500 $0.72 $596-1,056
34 Roosevelt Park 831 Oklahoma Ave 2008 100% 48 690-1,000 $0.57 $410-540
Subtotal / Average 1978 98% 546 782 $0.72 $566
Grand Total / Average 1979 97% 2,224 874 $0.92 $806
Notes: * = Senior Housing (excludes assisted living facilities); $/SqFt values for affordable housing are averaged; Occupancy numbers exclude units that are
being renovated and not currently available on the market

41
The preceding table contains information on the thirty four identified complexes in the Enid area. This
information was collected by interviewing property managers and property owners, or by collecting information
advertised online or in marketing materials.
According to the information collected, the average occupancy rate for multifamily complexes in the Enid area is
97%. This compares with 98% estimated by the 2013 housing study—which was a less complete survey
identifying only 1,613 units and not providing information on all complexes. The 2015 estimated average rental
price per unit for market rate housing (excluding senior housing) is $695—which represents a wide range.
According to interviews with property managers, in the last two years many market rates units have gone up
around $50, which represents a 14% increase from the market rate average.
Figure 30: Images of Multifamily Complexes in the Enid Area
Source: Google Street View, CDS Market Research

42
Market Rate vs Affordable Housing (Income Restricted / Subsidized)
As can be seen, the survey of existing multifamily complexes contains two main types: market rate housing and
affordable housing. Market rate housing refers to multifamily housing that was constructed with 100% private
dollars. Affordable housing is a term which includes several types of housing such as income restricted housing,
rent subsidized housing, supportive housing, public housing, and others. Like regular market rate housing, most
of the affordable housing that is developed today is privately built and owned, either by non-profit organizations
or private businesses and corporations. These organizations use a combination of private funding and public
subsidies—often in the form of tax credits and/or special loans—to construct new apartments that are
affordable for low and moderate income families. These apartments are typically regulated by state and/or
Federal agencies that determine the rent amount and designate certain occupancy standards, including the
eligible income ranges of renters.
Existing Multifamily Supply and Demand
Of the 2,224 multifamily units surveyed in the Enid area, roughly 97% are currently occupied. According to
quarterly data provided by the US Census, the occupancy rate for Enid is roughly two percentage points higher
than Oklahoma City, and five percentage points higher than Oklahoma.
Figure 31: Rental Occupancy Rates in Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, and Tulsa, 2010 to 2015
Source: US Census Housing Vacancies and Homeownership Survey
As can be seen in the figure above, occupancy rates for Oklahoma and the two major metro areas in the state
have fluctuated over the last few years. However, in the Enid area demand for multifamily units has remained
constant. The survey completed two years ago in the previous housing study estimated an occupancy rate of
98%. From then until now, property owners and managers in Enid have reported that demand for units has been
consistently high. Other observations of the multifamily rental market in the Enid area include the following:
 The larger multifamily properties are spread out across the city, with the highest concentration of larger
complexes located in the west and northwest regions of town.
 The average dollar per square foot ($/SqFt) rental price for market rate units is currently $0.92. When senior
apartments are excluded, $/SqFt rental price is $0.81. That compares with $0.72 for affordable housing
units.
 At many of the complexes occupancy rates remain close to 100%, with long-term vacancies generally only
occurring due to renovations or repairs.
 Several of those interviewed have reported vacancies created by oil and gas employees who have been laid
off and left the area. However, so far nearly all these vacancies have been immediately re-occupied.
80%
85%
90%
95%
Jan-10 Jul-10 Jan-11 Jul-11 Jan-12 Jul-12 Jan-13 Jul-13 Jan-14 Jul-14 Jan-15
Oklahoma State Oklahoma City Metro Area Tulsa Metro Area

Enid Housing Study 2015

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Featured

Featured (20)

Enid Housing Study 2015