Laserfiche WebLink
, <br /> Considering the community' s high proportion of single family <br /> y <br /> residential , it is now quite apparent that the Village is on <br /> its way to fast becoming a more urban settlement and one that <br /> will be demanding more and more urban services in the future. <br /> The average value of the owner-occupied housing units has been <br /> fast becoming comparable to other areas of the Metropolitan <br /> area . In 1970 , the old Village of Hugo had a low dollar <br /> average of $17 ,818 per housing unit , while Oneka averaged <br /> $23 ,269 . (The 1970 average values for Washington County and <br /> the seven county Metropolitan area were $22 ,760 and $23 ,849 <br /> respectively. ) When Hugo and Oneka are combined it conveys a <br /> low average , but it is encouraging to note that through July <br /> the average value of 1972 housing permits issued was $24 ,822 , <br /> indicating a definite increase in housing values and ultimately <br /> better housing . <br /> The condition of the housing stock i n Hugo seems to be very <br /> extreme . New, quality housing is being constructed in the <br /> Bald Eagle Lake area , while some of the non-farm housing in <br /> the rural areas borders on dilapidation . The 1960 Census <br /> indicated that 9 . 5% of the housing was unsound* in Hugo , <br /> while 15 . 1% was unsound in Oneka . These percentages are pro- <br /> bably lower today because of the recent house building boom , <br /> but it should be recognized that many of the structures <br /> considered as unsound in 1960 are still scattered around the <br /> rural areas of the Village. <br /> * Deteriorated or Dilapidated <br /> Although there is no data in the 1970 Census of Housing <br /> comparable to the 1960 data in the area of structural soundness , <br /> the following table indicates some of the more pertinent 1970 <br /> housing condition data : <br /> 1970 HOUSING CONDITION DATA <br /> Hugo Oneka Washington 7 County <br /> County Metro Area <br /> Percent of Units <br /> Overcrowded* 11 .6% 19 .8% 11 . 5% 6 .8% <br /> Number of Persons <br /> Living in Overcrowded <br /> Conditions 166 673 16 ,916 257 ,219 <br /> Percent of Units <br /> Lacking one or More <br /> Plumbing Facilities 4 . 2% 6. 5% 3.0% 3 .4% <br /> (continued) <br /> 7 <br />