Chapter 2: Town Center Market Considerations
The Town of Suamico is at a critical point in its history. The area is being "discovered" by new residents as a quality rural residential haven – with a small town feel, but also easily accessible to the economic activity of the greater-Green Bay area. The original downtown settlement area, along the Suamico River and CTH HS, is in a prime condition for redevelopment. New developers are approaching the Town with an interest in establishing new businesses and residential areas.
The Town of Suamico is utilizing this Town Center Plan as a tool to define and direct growth within the Town Center area. It is imperative that the Town pursue market measures of success that can be used to shape and evaluate programs. It is suggested these measures include:
An increase in the number of shoppers and other visitors to Suamico;
An increase in spending by visitors;
An increase in the number and profitability of businesses in the Town Center; and
Additional shopping and service businesses for the benefit of residents as well as visitors.Accurately measuring these objectives over time will require coordination with the local business community.
This section of the Town Center Plan provides market considerations for development within the Town Center. This is not a formal market study. Rather, this section provides a general overview of the market area the Town Center will serve. The Town may pursue a detailed market study at a future date for one or all of the concept areas within the Town Center. A formal market study would provide detailed, specific information about business-sector needs. It would also likely update the data available from the 2000 U.S. Census, with respect to income characteristics and employment characteristics within the customer base.
Market Issues Identification
In order to effectively analyze the Town Center market, it is first necessary to identify the particular market challenges businesses located in this area will face. What follows is a summary of the three major issues facing the Suamico Town Center:
Issue: Limited Choices
The Town Center offers a limited supply of shopping, eating and entertainment choices. As a result, Suamico residents travel to Howard and other nearby communities for needed goods and services. Likewise, motorists passing through the area on USH 41/141 choose to exit at other locations, where more services are available to meet their needs.
Issue 2: Location
The Town of Suamico is less than 20 minutes from Green Bay. As a result, many motorists will simply wait to exit until they arrive at Green Bay where additional choices are available. The Town has an opportunity to provide additional choices and market itself as a less-crowded alternative for motorist services than the exits in Green Bay. The Town does not want to see other exits in the immediate vicinity capitalize on this opportunity.
Issue 3: Highway Visibility
Though the highway bisects through the Town Center, not all areas of the Town Center are visible from the highway. In some areas, this is a blessing. For example, the residential development along Veterans Avenue is more appealing without distracting highway views and noises. However, other areas within the Town Center benefit from the potential customers the highway can bring to the area.
Obviously, the area in the immediate vicinity of the CTH B/USH 41/141 exit benefits from highway frontage. This exposure puts a great deal of pressure on the properties in this area to cater to the needs of passing motorists. The challenge for the Town is to ensure that development in this area also serves the needs of local residents. Furthermore, development in this area should not have a negative impact on adjacent residential areas (i.e. noise, odors, traffic) and said development should be attractive (i.e. attractive signage and lighting) to make a positive impact on first-time visitors.
Areas along CTH HS and the Suamico River would also benefit from highway exposure as an opportunity to bring motorists into the area. Some features (i.e. water tower) are visible year-round. During the winter months, when the leaves are off the trees, the Vickery Village area is also visible. However, given its setback from the highway and dense tree cover, this area does not enjoy year-round highway visibility. Without this highway frontage, the following actions must be pursued to promote the historic downtown area:
1) Marketing must occur along the highway (i.e. signage) to advertise the historic downtown area along CTH HS and the Suamico River
2) Development visible from Velp Avenue should have a similar character as the historic areas along CTH HS and the Suamico River. This will help to welcome people to the area.
3) The Town should provide directional signage for motorists who exit from US 41/141 searching for the historic "downtown" area.
Target Market Area
The Suamico Town Center has a complicated Target Market Area (See definition in box at right). This is largely due to the influence of motorists passing along the USH 41/141 corridor. The decision these motorists make to pull-off the highway depends on their origin point and final destination.
The USH 41/141 and CTH B exit in the Suamico Town Center is approximately:
6 miles south of the next exit to the north on USH 41/141 (CTH S);
11 miles south of the split of USH 41 and USH 141;
1 mile north of CTH J (Harbor Lights) exit;
3 miles north of the CTH J (Lineville Road) exit; and
6 miles north of the first of several exits to the greater Green Bay Area.These mileage markers are significant because they represent potential destination points and potential locations for competitive businesses. The Suamico Town Center will only be able to compete with these locations by providing several choices of easily accessible, quality services.
Marketing along the USH 41/141 corridor may help to draw passing motorists into the area. However, it must be clearly understand that marketing should not include tall, illuminated highway signage or a proliferation of billboards along the USH 41/141 corridor. These advertising techniques will destroy the character that makes the Town of Suamico a beautiful community. Rather, the Town will encourage WisDOT to provide highway service signage that will identify all major services (by company) available at the CTH B exit. Likewise, the Town may approve up to 2 billboards (one in each direction) to collectively advertise the CTH B exit and historic downtown area as a desirable location to stop for services and recreation. Said billboards may carry the logos of local business establishments. These logos may change regularly. This signage strategy is preferred to the proliferation of billboards for each business along the USH 41/141 corridor in the Town of Suamico.
Beyond the highway corridor, businesses serving the local market have a very different TMA. This market is much smaller than the highway TMA. Local businesses will cater to residents of the Town of Suamico and beyond. The local business TMA can be defined as Census Tract 202. This area encompasses all of the Town of Suamico and some additional areas to the west. (In 1990, Census Tract 202 was identical to the Town of Suamico municipal boundaries.) Residents within this area have a choice of traveling to the Suamico Town Center or the Village of Howard to obtain needed goods and services. Therefore, Howard is the primary competitor to the Suamico Town Center for this market. The map on the following page illustrates the boundaries of Census Tract 202.
Demographic Characteristics
The purpose of this section is to identify potential customer characteristics within the TMA. The focus of this analysis is the TMA for the local businesses serving resident needs, not the highway TMA. To put this local business TMA (Census Tract 202) into context, comparison information is provided for the Town of Suamico, Village of Howard, City of Green Bay and Brown County. The Town of Suamico is completely within the TMA (Census Tract 202). The Village of Howard is the nearest competitor market. The Brown County information provides an interesting context for understanding the data within a larger regional setting.
Table 1 provides a numerical breakdown of the population change over the last decade. It is important to note again here that in 1990, Census Tract 202 and the Town of Suamico occupied the same area. What is interesting to note from the table is the very significant population growth experienced in the Census Tract 202 (TMA) over the last 10 years. The percent change is more than double the growth experienced in the Village of Howard, almost five times (5x) the growth experienced in Brown County, and more than thirteen times (13x) the growth of Green Bay over the same period. This data clearly indicates that the population of the TMA is significant and growing.
|
TABLE 1: Population |
|||
|
Location |
1990 Population |
2000 Population |
Difference 1990 – 2000 |
|
Census Tract 202 |
5,214 |
9,484 |
81.9% |
|
Town of Suamico |
5,214 |
8,686 |
66.6% |
|
Village of Howard |
9,874 |
13,546 |
37.2% |
|
City of Green Bay |
96,466 |
102,313 |
6.1% |
|
Brown County |
194,594 |
226,778 |
16.5% |
Source: 1990 and 2000 U.S. Census
Age is an important factor to consider because personal expenditures change as an individual ages. For instance, drug stores and assisted care services flourish in areas with a large elderly population. Accordingly, drug stores often do well in communities with a larger number of people over the age of 65. Additionally, realizing and catering to the needs of an aging population can also be beneficial to any retailer. Similarly, toy stores, day care centers, and stores with baby care items are successful in areas with many children and infants. Clothing store and fast food restaurants thrive in retail areas that contain a large concentration of adolescents. Theatres serve a broad section of the population; however, specialized entertainment and recreation options can target certain age segments.
Table 2 looks at the age segments of the population. This information is valuable for understanding needed and desired services in the area. From the table it is apparent that:
ü
The TMA has a higher percentage of residents below age 18 than the Village of Howard, City of Green Bay and Brown County. This information reflects the growing number of families moving to the area. Likewise, this information outlines a particular local market.ü
The TMA has far fewer residents over the age of 65 than the Village of Howard, City of Green Bay, or Brown County. In fact, as a percentage, the TMA has less than half as many residents over the age of 65 as the county.ü
The TMA has a larger share of its population between the ages of 45 to 54 and 55 to 59 compared to Howard, Green Bay, and Brown County. As this population ages, the share of residents over the age of 65 living in the TMA will also increase.ü
Reflecting the high concentration of families in the area, the largest segment of the population in the TMA is between the ages of 25 and 44. This can be partially attributed to the fact that this is the largest category in the table (spanning 19 years). However, the share of the population in the TMA in this age group is larger than the comparable age groups for the Village of Howard, City of Green Bay and Brown County.The median age of a resident in the TMA is slightly higher than the other areas compared in the table. Again, this reflects the significant share of the population between the ages of 25 and 44.
|
TABLE 2: Age Distribution |
|||||
|
Age Group |
Census Tract 202 |
Town of Suamico |
Village of Howard |
City of Green Bay |
Brown County |
|
Under 5 years |
699 (7.4%) |
656 (7.6%) |
982 (7.2%) |
7,359 (7.2%) |
15,653 (6.9%) |
|
5 to 9 years |
756 (8.0%) |
704 (8.1%) |
1,095 (8.1%) |
7,254 (7.1%) |
16,686 (7.4% |
|
10 to 14 years |
836 (8.8%) |
763 (8.8%) |
1,058 (7.8%) |
7,168 (7.0%) |
16,801 (7.4%) |
|
15 to 19 years |
714 (4.5%) |
645 (7.4%) |
946 (7.0%) |
7,492 (7.3%) |
17,012 (7.5%) |
|
20 to 24 years |
335 (3.5%) |
306 (3.5%) |
850 (6.3%) |
8,632 (8.4%) |
16,712 (7.4%) |
|
25 to 34 years |
1,137 (12.0%) |
1,072 (12.3%) |
2,114 (15.6%) |
16,074 (15.7%) |
33,506 (14.8%) |
|
25 to 44 years |
2,099 (22.1%) |
1,945 (22.4%) |
2,594 (19.1%) |
16,349 (16.0%) |
38,769 (17.1%) |
|
45 to 54 years |
1,606 (16.9%) |
1,444 (16.6%) |
1,920 (14.2%) |
12,766 (12.5%) |
30,280 (13.4%) |
|
55 to 59 years |
498 (5.3%) |
437 (5.0%) |
565 (4.2%) |
3,985 (3.9%) |
9,629 (4.2%) |
|
60 to 64 years |
299 (3.2%) |
271 (3.1%) |
407 (3.0%) |
3,192 (3.1%) |
7,516 (3.3%) |
|
65 and over |
505 (5.3%) |
443 (5.1%) |
1,015 (7.6%) |
12,042 (11.8%) |
24,214 (10.7%) |
|
Median Age |
36.5 |
36.2 |
33.8 |
33.2 |
34.2 |
Source: 2000 U.S. Census
Table 3 takes a look at the gender of the population in the area. In some communities a more significant share of the total population in one gender or another can be important for determining the success of certain types of businesses. All areas examined have a relatively equal share of males and females. Therefore, businesses targeting particular genders (i.e. health clubs, beauty saloons, barber shops) will not have a significant competitive advantage over other communities.
|
TABLE 3: Gender Distribution |
||
|
Location |
Males |
Females |
|
Census Tract 202 |
51.2% |
48.8% |
|
Town of Suamico |
51.4% |
48.6% |
|
Village of Howard |
49.1% |
50.9% |
|
City of Green Bay |
49.3% |
50.7% |
|
Brown County |
49.7% |
50.3% |
Source: 2000 U.S. Census
Table 4 examines the different races represented in Census Tract 202, the Town of Suamico, Village of Howard and Brown County. According to the 2000 U.S. Census data, the vast majority of all residents are white. This information is quite comparable to previous census data collected in past decades. Of some interest is the fact that the TMA is less diverse, from a racial perspective, than the county as a whole. However, the county population figures include the City of Green Bay, which is home to a more varied mix of different races and cultures.
|
TABLE 4: Racial Diversity |
|||||
|
Racial Group |
Census Tract 202 |
Town of Suamico |
Village of Howard |
City of Green Bay |
Brown County |
|
White |
97.9% |
98.0% |
96.2% |
85.9% |
91.1% |
|
Black or African American |
0.2% |
0.2% |
0.7% |
1.4% |
1.2% |
|
American Indian |
0.6% |
0.6% |
0.9% |
3.3% |
2.3% |
|
Asian |
0.5% |
0.4% |
0.8% |
3.8% |
2.2% |
|
Native Hawaiian & Other Pacific Islander |
0.1% |
0.1% |
0% |
0% |
0% |
|
Other Race |
0.1% |
0.1% |
0.3% |
3.7% |
1.9% |
|
Two or More Races |
0.6% |
0.6% |
1.1% |
2.0% |
1.3% |
Source: 2000 U.S. Census
Table 5 examines the household types in the TMA. By far, the majority of households in the TMA are family households (85.9%) compared to non-family households (14.1%). The number of family households in the TMA is significantly higher than the number of family households in the Village of Howard and Brown County.
Of the family households, nearly half include children. Female headed households with children area not a significant share of family households in the TMA. Most of the family households (78.1%) were married couples.
It is important to note that new residential development in the Town Center will include apartments (i.e. Snowshoe Estates). Generally speaking, apartments are home to more non-family households than other types of residential development. As a result, the TMA may see the total share of non-family households increase over the next few years. However, single-family residential development is also expected to continue in the TMA. As a result, any modest gains in non-family households will likely be offset by additional gains in families in other areas.
In accordance with having more family households (vs. non-family individual households), and more children, the average household and family size is significantly higher in the TMA than in the Village of Howard, City of Green Bay and Brown County.
|
TABLE 5: Household Types |
|||||
|
Household Type |
Census Tract 202 |
Town of Suamico |
Village of Howard |
City of Green Bay |
Brown County |
|
Total Households |
3,232 |
2,966 |
5,236 |
41,591 |
87,295 |
|
Family Households |
85.9% |
85.8% |
70.5% |
59.3% |
65.9% |
|
With Children |
44.7% |
45.1% |
38.2% |
30.6% |
33.9% |
|
Married Couple Family |
78.1% |
78.1% |
57.7% |
44.1% |
53.2% |
|
Married Couple w/Children |
40.1% |
40.5% |
28.6% |
20.5% |
25.5% |
|
Female Householder w/Children |
2.8% |
2.9% |
7.0% |
10.8% |
6.2% |
|
Non-Family Households |
14.1% |
14.2% |
29.5% |
40.7% |
34.1% |
|
Householder Living Alone |
10.1% |
10.2% |
21.7% |
31.6% |
26.5% |
|
Householder Age 65 and Over |
2.8% |
2.8% |
6.0% |
9.9% |
8.4% |
|
Average Household Size |
2.93 |
2.92 |
2.57 |
2.40 |
2.51 |
|
Average Family Size |
3.15 |
3.15 |
3.04 |
3.06 |
3.08 |
Source: 2000 U.S. Census
Somewhat related to Table 5, Table 6 provides a breakdown of residents by marital status. In the TMA, the vast majority of residents are married. The figures are significantly higher than the comparable marriage rates in the Village of Howard, Green Bay, and Brown County. Likewise, the TMA divorced population is about half the size of the divorced populations in Howard, Green Bay and Brown County. This information again reflects the family character of the TMA.
|
TABLE 6: Marital Status |
|||||
|
Marital Status |
Census Tract 202 |
Town of Suamico |
Village of Howard |
City of Green Bay |
Brown County |
|
Never Married |
19.4% |
19.0% |
25.0% |
31.3% |
27.7% |
|
Now Married |
72.4% |
73.1% |
60.1% |
49.3% |
56.4% |
|
Separated |
0.4% |
0.4% |
0.9% |
1.4% |
1.1% |
|
Widowed |
2.0% |
1.7% |
4.3% |
6.3% |
5.5% |
|
Divorced |
5.8% |
5.9% |
9.6% |
11.6% |
9.3% |
Source: 2000 U.S. Census Note: Figures above are for population age 15 and over
Education is another way to determine the socio-economic status of an area. Because income increases with advancing educational attainment, many retailers focus on income level rather than education. According to the information in Table 7, residents from the TMA have a very similar level of education as residents from the Village of Howard and Brown County. In general, TMA residents have a high level of education attainment. A high rate of high school graduates and college graduates reflects an educated population that has a higher earnings and spending potential.
|
TABLE 7: Educational Attainment |
|||||
|
Educational Attainment |
Census Tract 202 |
Town of Suamico |
Village of Howard |
City of Green Bay |
Brown County |
|
Population Age 25 and Over |
6,169 |
5,657 |
8,624 |
64,507 |
144,172 |
|
Less than 9th Grade |
2.2% |
2.3% |
3.3% |
7.8% |
6.1% |
|
9th to 12th Grade |
5.9% |
5.9% |
5.4% |
9.6% |
7.6% |
|
High School Graduate |
37.2% |
36.5% |
37.2% |
35.3% |
34.9% |
|
Some College, no Degree |
22.9% |
22.8% |
21.7% |
20.0% |
20.0% |
|
Associates Degree |
11.1% |
11.4% |
9.6% |
8.0% |
8.9% |
|
Bachelors Degree |
16.0% |
16.3% |
17.3% |
14.4% |
16.6% |
|
Graduate or Professional Degree |
4.7% |
4.8% |
5.4% |
5.0% |
5.9% |
|
Percent High School Graduate or Higher |
91.9% |
91.8% |
91.3% |
82.6% |
86.3% |
|
Percent Bachelors Degree or Higher |
20.7% |
21.1% |
22.8% |
19.3% |
22.5% |
Source: 2000 U.S. Census NOTE: Figures above are for population age 25 and over
The number of homeowners in an area is an important factor for numerous retailers. Home ownership directly correlates with expenditures for home furnishings and home equipment. Home improvement, furniture, appliances, hardware, paint/wallpaper, floor covering, garden centers and other home products all prosper in active housing markets.
By far, most residents in the TMA are living in homes they are purchasing as opposed to rental properties. This balance is not expected to changes significantly in the future. This trend reflects the family character of the area and the local demand for quality housing choices to raise a family.
Not surprisingly, the average owner-occupied household size is higher than the comparable household size figures for rental households. This again, reflects the tendency of families to locate in owner-occupied environments versus rental communities. However, in the TMA, the size of the rental household is significantly larger than the comparable rental household size in Howard, Green Bay, and Brown County. This reflects the number of married couple households in the community, as well as the fact that a significant share of the rental housing available is rental single-family homes, as compared to apartments.
|
TABLE 8: Home Tenure |
|||||
|
Occupancy Characteristics |
Census Tract 202 |
Town of Suamico |
Village of Howard |
City of Green Bay |
Brown County |
|
Total Housing Units |
3,348 |
3,078 |
5,350 |
43,123 |
90,199 |
|
Occupied Housing Units |
96.5% |
96.4% |
97.9% |
96.4% |
96.8% |
|
Vacant Housing Units |
3.5% |
3.6% |
2.1% |
3.6% |
3.2% |
|
Owner-Occupied |
92.6% |
92.3% |
63.8% |
56.0% |
65.4% |
|
Rental Occupied |
7.4% |
7.7% |
36.2% |
44.0% |
34.6% |
|
Average Household Size Owner Occupied |
2.95 |
2.96 |
2.87 |
2056 |
2.72 |
|
Average Rental Household Size |
2.59 |
2.56 |
2.04 |
2.19 |
2.11 |
Source: 2000 U.S. Census
After the 1990 U.S. Census was complete, the Wisconsin Department of Administration completed population projections for every community in the State of Wisconsin through 2015. The TMA, Town of Suamico, Village of Howard and Brown County have all grown at rates far exceeding the projections. In fact, for all areas, the 2000 U.S. Census populations were in excess of the projected 2015 population. Table 9 provides updated projections. These figures were created by projecting the county population through 2015 (based on the new census data) and maintaining a constant portion of the total county population for the other areas through 2015. The population growth in the City of Green Bay has tracked well against the projections done by the State. Therefore, the same projections are used.
|
TABLE 9: Population Projections |
|||||
|
Year |
Census Tract 202 |
Town of Suamico |
Village of Howard |
City of Green Bay |
Brown County |
|
2005 |
12,626 |
10,101 |
15,152 |
105,344 |
252,527 |
|
2010 |
13,914 |
11,131 |
16,697 |
106,648 |
278,276 |
|
2015 |
15,201 |
13,681 |
18,242 |
107,434 |
304,025 |
Source: Wisconsin Department of Administration, U.S. Census Bureau, Graphic Projection Technique
These projections clearly indicate that the population of all areas is expected to increase in the future.
Job Growth and Economic Conditions
This section provides an overview of the TMA’s economic base. Included in this section are key economic indicators.
|
TABLE 10: Employment Status |
|||||
|
Status |
Census Tract 202 |
Town of Suamico |
Village of Howard |
City of Green Bay |
Brown County |
|
Population Age 16 and Over |
7,029 |
6,417 |
10,184 |
79,125 |
174,305 |
|
In Labor Force |
79.5% |
79.8% |
78.4% |
70.3% |
72.0% |
|
Employed |
78.4% |
78.9% |
75.9% |
66.7% |
69.1% |
|
Unemployed |
1.1% |
0.9% |
2.4% |
3.5% |
2.7% |
|
Not in Labor Force |
20.5% |
20.2% |
21.6% |
29.7% |
28.0% |
Source: 2000 U.S. Census
NOTE: Figures above are specific to the Population over the Age of 16
Many retailers use the concentration of white or blue-collar workers as a gauge of a market’s taste preferences. For example:
Apparel stores thrive on middle to upper income areas and above average white-collar employment.
Second hand clothing stores and used car dealerships are successful in areas with a higher concentration of blue-collar workers.
Office supply stores and large music and video stores are especially sensitive to the occupational profile. These retailers target growth areas with a majority of white-collar workers.Most residents from the TMA are employed in management, professional and related occupations, followed closely by sales and office occupations (white collar positions). These categories reflect the areas high level of education attainment. The occupation breakdown within the TMA is very similar to the breakdowns for the Village of Howard, Green Bay, and Brown County.
|
TABLE 11: Occupation |
|||||
|
Occupation Type |
Census Tract 202 |
Town of Suamico |
Village of Howard |
City of Green Bay |
Brown County |
|
Management, Professional & Related |
32.8% |
33.0% |
30.5% |
26.6% |
30.6% |
|
Service Occupations |
7.4% |
6.7% |
10.8% |
15.0% |
12.6% |
|
Sales & Office |
25.9% |
26.3% |
29.8% |
28.0% |
28.5% |
|
Farming, Fishing & Forestry |
0.5% |
0.5% |
0% |
0.3% |
0.5% |
|
Construction, Extraction and Maintenance |
13.2% |
13.4% |
10.9% |
9.1% |
9.2% |
|
Production, Transportation & Materials Moving |
20.2% |
20.1% |
17.9% |
20.9% |
18.7% |
Source: 2000 U.S. Census
NOTE: Figures above are specific only to Workers Age 16 and Over Employed in the Civilian Labor Force (Census Tract 202 =5,510 , Town of Suamico = 5,062, Village of Howard = 7,733, Green Bay = 52,778 and Brown County = 120,530)
Table 11 indicates in what type of occupations residents are employed. Table 12, provides a description of local employment industry sectors. Again, the data for Census Tract 202 are very similar to the data for the Village of Howard and Brown County. The only industry sector that is significantly behind the Village of Howard, City of Green Bay and Brown County is the "arts, entertainment, recreation, accommodations and food services." sector. This lag seems to suggest that additional industries in this sector may be needed and do well in the TMA.
|
TABLE 12: Industry Sectors |
|||||
|
Industry |
Census Tract 202 |
Town of Suamico |
Village of Howard |
City of Green Bay |
Brown County |
|
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing, Hunting & Mining |
1.1% |
0.9% |
0.1% |
0.5% |
1.2% |
|
Construction |
6.6% |
6.6% |
7.2% |
6.2% |
6.2% |
|
Manufacturing |
27.0% |
26.9% |
22.2% |
21.3% |
21.1% |
|
Wholesale Trade |
4.8% |
4.4% |
5.3% |
3.6% |
4.0% |
|
Retail Trade |
10.2% |
10.3% |
12.0% |
13.6% |
12.6% |
|
Transportation, Communication & Utilities |
8.3% |
8.8% |
6.3% |
5.5% |
6.2% |
|
Information |
1.2% |
1.3% |
1.3% |
2.0% |
2.0% |
|
Finance, Insurance, Real Estate |
10.1% |
10.5% |
9.7% |
7.6% |
8.1% |
|
Professional, Scientific, Management, Administrative & Waste Management Services |
5.3% |
5.6% |
6.8% |
6.1% |
6.3% |
|
Educational, Heath and Social Services |
16.3% |
16.0% |
15.1% |
16.4% |
17.6% |
|
Arts, Entertainment, Recreation, Accommodations & Food Services |
3.6% |
3.3% |
6.6% |
8.8% |
7.3% |
|
Other Services (Except Public Administration) |
3.7% |
3.5% |
5.4% |
5.0% |
4.5% |
|
Public Administration |
1.9% |
1.9% |
2.0% |
3.3% |
2.9% |
Source: 2000 U.S. Census
Table 13 provides information about the largest employers in the county. This information is important because most residents from the TMA commute elsewhere to work (See Table 15). The list of the largest employers in the county is quite diversified and is considered a strength for the Brown County Area. As changes occur in the national and international economies, often one sector is affected more than others. The diversification provides some protection against a large decline in employment.
|
TABLE 13: Major County Employers |
||
|
Employers |
Product or Service |
Size |
|
Georgia Pacific (Formerly Fort James) |
Paper Products |
1000+ |
|
Green Bay Public School District |
Education |
1000+ |
|
Employers Health Insurance Co. |
Insurance |
1000+ |
|
Bellin Memorial Hospital |
Health Care Services |
1000+ |
|
Oneida Tribe of Indians |
Casino/Bingo/Hotel |
1000+ |
|
Saint Vincent Hospital |
Health Care Services |
1000+ |
|
Shopko Stores Inc |
Retail Store Distributor |
1000+ |
|
Wisconsin Public Service Corp. |
Energy Distributor |
1000+ |
|
Schneider National Inc. |
Transportation Services |
1000+ |
|
Krueger Intl Inc. |
Office Furniture Manufacturer |
1000+ |
Source: 2000 U.S. Census
The overall average wage for Brown County was 105.3 percent of the state’s average annual wage during 2001. The average annual wage in Brown County is above the state average wage in six of the ten industry sectors.
Wages in the retail sector were 108.3 percent of the state average, but this sector had the lowest annual wage of all ten industries. Differences between state and local averages do not necessarily reflect higher or lower hourly rates since these are annual average, and may be influenced by other factors, such as number of hours worked by employees.
The transportation, communication and utilities had the highest wage in the area. This is most likely led by the high concentration of the trucking industry in the county.
Manufacturing had the third highest wage at $37,276. Wages in the manufacturing sector are 98.8 percent of the state average. Wages in manufacturing are influenced by the paper industry. Wages from manufacturing make up the largest percent of the area’s wages. Nearly 25 percent of the area’s annual wages come from manufacturing, while providing 21 percent of the area’s employment.
The wages in finance, insurance, and real estate compares the least favorably with the state average. Wages in this sector are only 84.6 percent of the state average.|
TABLE 14: Annual Average Wage By Industry Division |
|||
|
Category |
Brown Co. Annual Average Wage |
WI Annual Average Wage |
Percent of State Average |
|
All Industries* |
$32,551 |
$30,922 |
105.3% |
|
Ag, Forestry & Fishing |
$21,274 |
$22,565 |
94.3% |
|
Construction |
$37,747 |
$39,011 |
96.8% |
|
Manufacturing |
$39,276 |
$39,739 |
98.8% |
|
Transportation, Communication & Utilities |
$42,876 |
$36,639 |
117.0% |
|
Wholesale Trade |
$39,562 |
$40,521 |
97.6% |
|
Retail Trade |
$16,939 |
$14,596 |
116.1% |
|
Finance, Insurance & Real Estate |
$34,548 |
$40,933 |
84.4% |
|
Services |
$31,171 |
$28,775 |
108.3% |
|
Total Government |
$34,101 |
$33,785 |
100.9% |
* Mining excluded from table to maintain confidentiality
Source: WI DWD, 2002
Most residents within the TMA commute to work. For businesses catering to local residents to be successful, they will need to have extended evening and weekend hours. However, businesses at the interchange, serving the needs of passing motorists, need to be accessible during the daytime hours as well.
In terms of the time it takes a person from Census Tract 202 to travel to work (one way):
9.4% of all commuters travel less than 10 minutes;
11.2% travel between 10 and 14 minutes;
24.0% travel 15 to 19 minutes;
40.1% travel 20 to 29 minutes
9.6% travel 30 to 44 minutes; and
5.7% travel 45 minutes.
|
TABLE 15: Commute To Work |
|||||
|
Time |
Census Tract 202 |
Town of Suamico |
Village of Howard |
City of Green Bay |
Brown County |
|
Total Number of Workers Over 16 |
5,430 |
4,982 |
7,686 |
51,993 |
118,872 |
|
Drive Alone |
89.8% |
89.9% |
88.9% |
82.9% |
84.7% |
|
Carpool |
6.4% |
6.2% |
7.9% |
10.3% |
8.4% |
|
Public Transit (Including Taxicab) |
0.2% |
0.3% |
0.2% |
1.3% |
0.9% |
|
Walking |
0.6% |
0.7% |
0.7% |
2.8% |
2.8% |
|
Other Means |
0.8% |
0.8% |
0.3% |
0.8% |
0.7% |
|
Worked At Home |
2.2% |
2.1% |
2.1% |
1.8% |
2.5% |
|
Mean Travel Time To Work (minutes) |
21.9 |
22.0 |
17.8 |
17.0 |
17.5 |
Source: 2000 U.S. Census
There are many different breakdowns of income:
·
Per capita income is total income divided by the total number of residents, including children and other groups of individuals who do not actually earn income.·
Median household income is the average U.S. Census report of household income in a community (households include families, married couple households and individual households).·
Median family income is the average income reported by families in the 2000 U.S. Census. (An important distinction between median family income and the Wisconsin Department of Revenue adjusted gross income data is that the latter does not include social security and other types of transfer payments.)
Income is the primary indicator of spending power of residents. Household and family income correlate with retail expenditures in many product categories. Retailers may consider the median or average household income in a trade area or seek a minimum number of households with a certain income range. For example, discount stores avoid high or low-income areas. Traditional department stores focus on markets with incomes over $35,000, while some specialty fashion stores target incomes above $75,000. A few store categories, including auto parts, are more commonly found in areas with lower household incomes. Using income as the sole measure of a market’s taste preference, however, can be deceptive. Therefore, these figures are presented as part of a series of data about the TMA population.
Table 16 provides a detailed breakdown of the per capita, median household and median family incomes for residents in 1990 and 2000. In all categories, the TMA has the highest income breakdown. This is a strong indicator of the spending power of residents of the TMA.
|
TABLE 16: Income Comparison |
||||||
|
Location |
Per Capita Income |
Median Household Income |
Median Family Income |
|||
|
1990 |
2000 |
1990 |
2000 |
1990 |
2000 |
|
|
Census Tract 202 |
$15,022 |
$24,756 |
$40,369 |
$65,155 |
$42,609 |
$68,167 |
|
Town of Suamico |
$15,022 |
$24,735 |
$40,369 |
$65,189 |
$42,609 |
$67,528 |
|
Village of Howard |
$13,619 |
$21,688 |
$36,141 |
$51,974 |
$40,078 |
$56,579 |
|
City of Green Bay |
$12,969 |
$19,269 |
$26,770 |
$38,820 |
$33,367 |
$48,678 |
|
Brown County |
$13,906 |
$21,784 |
$31,303 |
$46,447 |
$37,121 |
$56,194 |
Source: 1990 and 2000 U.S. Census
Poverty status information is also an important characteristic realtors will consider when deciding to locate in an area. A high incidence of poverty will discourage retail development. Not surprisingly, based on the income information presented in the previous table, the TMA has a very low poverty rate. In fact all areas profiled in the table have a low poverty rate. Of special interest is that between 1990 and 2000, only the Village of Howard saw an increase in the total number of individuals living below the poverty rate.
|
TABLE 17: Poverty Status By Age |
||||||||||
|
Status |
Census Tract 202 |
Town of Suamico |
Village of Howard |
City of Green Bay |
Brown County |
|||||
|
1990 |
2000* |
1990 |
2000* |
1990 |
2000* |
1990 |
2000* |
1990 |
2000* |
|
|
Total Individuals |
180 |
177 (1.9%) |
180 |
155 (1.8%) |
457 |
581 (4.3%) |
12,607
|
10,490 (10.5%) |
17,357 |
15,123 (6.9%) |
|
Under Age 18 |
58 |
45 (1.6%) |
58 |
43 (1.7%) |
222 |
173 (4.7%) |
4,718 |
3,237 (12.7%) |
6,276 |
4,526 (7.8%) |
|
18 Years of Age and Over |
122 |
120 (1.8%) |
||||||||