HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-1995-168 HOME Programs• RESOLUTION NO. R - 95 .. 168
A RESOLUTION authorizing and directing the City Manager of the City of
Yakima to file the Consolidated Plan with the United
States Department of Housing and Urban Development
for funding of the 1996 Community Development Block
Grant and HOME Programs.
WHEREAS, the City of Yakima contemplates a Community
Development Block Grant Program and a HOME Program
for which federal funding is available from the United
States Department of Housing and Urban Development,
and
•
•
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Yakima deems it to be in the
best interests of the City that an application be filed for
funding through the Consolidated. Plan for the purpose
mentioned above, now therefore,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YAKIMA:
R.A. Zais, Jr , City Manager of the City of Yakima, is hereby authorized
and directed to execute and file the attached Consolidated Plan
documents, including all understandings and assurances contained
therein, with the United States Department of Housing and Urban
Development for funding of the purpose mentioned above; and he further
is hereby designated as the official representative of the City to act in
connection with the grant requests and to provide such additional
information as may be required
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
5th day of DECEMBER 1995.
Mayor
CITY OF YAKIMA
OFFICE OF HOUSING AND NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION
A DIVISION OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
(509) 575-6101 FAX (509) 575-6176 SCAN 278-6101
112 S. EIGHTH STREET, YAKIMA, WASHINGTON 98901
Public Comment Process
Addendum
to the
City of Yakima
1995-1996 Consolidated Plan
On November 9, 1995, members of the Community Development Advisory
Committee held a public meeting to discuss the contents of the 1996 Consolidated
Plan. The Committee discussed the plan and agreed to make a recommendation of
approval to City Council which would include the changes and additions suggested
during this meeting. This recommendation will be submitted to the City Council
on December 5, at which time public comments will again be heard, and the Council
will make a final decision of acceptance and HUD submittal.
The attached document pages reflect the public's request for amendments
and/or additions. The revised wording has been italicized for identification from
the original text. Committee members' and citizen's comments which did not
require document changes have be summarized below:
Elberth Trotter commented that in all fairness to the staff, she
appreciated the tremendous amount of work which went into putting this
document together. Last year she was involved in some of the work Dixie did
to gather information and assess the community needs. She believes it was
thoroughly done.
Dan Hernandez said he was very impressed, being a new CDAC
member and not familiar with this process. He expressed that the plan was
very well done.
Dave Jones stated that he was very impressed with the document and
the amount of information included. It seemed very well thought out. The
question he had was whether or not we thought the allocation of the
resources was appropriate; it would be nice to have more money in general.
Bev Luby-Bartz commented on page 48, that she wanted us to accent
the neighborhood and not housing. She asked that we turn that around,
basically housing is part of the neighborhood but not the whole
neighborhood and in order to have good housing you have to have a good
neighborhood for the housing to be in.
Regarding the information on page 51, she was glad to see that the
preservation and substantial rehabilitation of the Central Business District
residential housing stock was emphasized in this document.
On page 54, she thanked us for including the intent to financially assist
with the installation of sewage collection in older existing neighborhoods and
ask if we could also look into assisting with the water needs.
She expressed a concern about "mixed use planning" on page 58. She
said we are mixing the uses so much at we are almost eliminating, in some
areas, single family dwellings which is the basis of the community. Single
family dwellings that have been broken up into apartment buildings have
created a problem because they do not allow for play grounds and parking
areas.
On page 60, Ms. Bartz referred to the technical expertise being given to
smaller non profit agencies. She thinks it is one thing to work with them but
does not think we should share our expertise. She believes they should be
able to stand on their own two feet. Also on page 60, she cautioned us not to
lower our infrastructure standards, because she believes that we would be
asking for additional problems down the road.
Rosemary Small asked us to reword the statement on page 39 under
"Barriers to Fair Housing" regarding educational opportunities to include
convenient, fair access to schools. Se stated that we should have similar
treatment :for those of high income and low income areas to access
educational opportunities. She suggested that we change this phrase to read
"fair access to schools in the same area where the affordable houses are
provided for adults and children."
Ms. Small suggested that parks and schools should be included in
infrastructure improvements on page 68. Parks and schools (should be) in
ratio to the population, especially when we are talking about multi-family
higher density neighborhoods. (The) Growth Management Act is pushing us
that way. She believes it is important to keep up with the real basic
infrastructure needs for residential areas like park space and schools. The
schools play a major part in providing neighborhood park space.
On page 59, she doubted that the "NIMBY attitude" could be mitigated
by "disclosing the importance of the project, its impact of the neighborhood
and its overall benefit to the community".
Again on page 68 in the infrastructure installation section, she asked
that schools be listed. She placed an emphasis on the target area, because of
the concentration of low income, minority population and where building
activities are still occurring.
Public Meeting
November 9, 1995
Page 2
Maud Scott expressed concerns dealing with the language used in the
"Barriers to Affordable Housing" section on page 38. She stated that we all
know they exist, but she asked if we couldn't be more succinct by combining
several items into the same statement, such as, connecting the lack of
adequate financing with construction costs; City and County infrastructure
policies and fees could be combined with the legislative or regulation
restrictions.
Again on page 38, in the second group, "short supply of affordable
land" could be called rising land costs. While we do have a short supply of
available land, not much is affordable any more. She stated that she believes
we are running out of land in southeast and northeast Yakima that is suitable
for development of any kind.
On page 38, she went on to comment about when she came here 18
years ago and the CDBG program was already in existence and working to
revitalize the target area. She thinks it is remarkable the distance we've made
and she said we've done the impossible. Other cities have tried the same
approach to solving their deteriorating housing stock problems and not
managed to succeed. She believes our problem is the reverse: we have
succeeded too well and now we are literally running out of land and over
crowding neighborhoods which do not have adequate infrastructure to match
that density . Her concerns include a need to slow the growth in the areas
which have been over saturated and allow time to catch up on infrastructure
and schools needs. She stated that she feels we have totally inadequate
infrastructure and before we add even one more piece of housing to solve the
affordable housing equation for someone, we should ask at what cost would
this be to the existing neighborhoods and residents. She continues to be
concerned that we are not doing an adequate job of providing not only
schools and parks but other community facilities.
Ms. Scott said if we included statements regarding unfair employment
opportunities, red lining housing ownership opportunities and unfair
tenancy screening on page 38, and we have proven as much, why aren't we as
a community doing something about it. She believes if we have proved it,
we had better be doing something to change it. She ask us to redefine our
suspicions and add demonstration of what we are doing to correct it these
practices.
This is a summary of the reported comments received and does not reflect a
verbatim testimony. Changes requested were reviewed and most were
included. Changes not included would have changed the reported intent of
the plan's content.
Dixie Kracht, Block Grant Manager
Public Meeting Page 3
November 9, 1995
Those in attendance at the Public Meeting to review the 1995-1996
Consolidated Plan at the Community Development Advisory Committee
on November 9,,1995.
Committee Members
Greg Lighty
David Jones
Carol ]Fredrickson
Lynn Kittleson
Elberth Trotter
Betty Gaudette
Carl Falls
Staff
Dixie Kracht
Zella Warner
Public
Rosemary Small
Maud Scott
Bev Luby Bartz
Jo Ann Nowlin
Ora Lee Payment
Phil Hoge
Public Meeting Page 4
November 9, 1995
This population is expected to become impacted by AIDS and mentally
ill clients competing for nursing home beds and services.
On a monthly average, the state and federal cost for elderly care in the
following environments are:
N. Adult family home care: $316 per month
IN Congregate care facility: $256 per month
I. Assisted living care: $904 per month
Nursing home care: $1,937 per month
Individuals who evaluate the cost of elderly care reported figures to be
approximately 30% lower than current local cost incurred.
State reimbursements are well below facility costs while most private
adult family group homes without subsidy have an average monthly
costs of $800 to $1,000 monthly.
Many of the creative housing options such as cluster homes, accessory
artmen housing 'ts occu e • by a re .. ive on me props
d adj ac� to a sin family e, are :�`- ed with akima
There is a great demand for assisted living care in private homes for the
elderly.
Few housing alternatives are available to support the elderly and
disabled person with a limited income needing semi-independent
housing. Their income and/or assets disqualify them for federal or state
assistance due to program requirements.
In the Yakima area, 78% of elderly own their homes. This indicates
there is a great need for additional resources for home rehabilitation and
weatherization programs to assist the aging population to remain in their
own homes.
Competition for rental housing has affected the housing availability
options for the elderly/disabled. Waiting lists for low-income housing
and Section 8 Certificate programs are extremely long; elderly couples
29
H. Fair Housing
Major obstacles that face our community in regards to being treated
fairly and equitably are:
unfair employment opportunities
11. noncompliance with the Americans with Disability At
red lining homeownership opportunities
1.1 selective mortgage and lending criteria
unfair tenancy screening
educational awareness and consumer rights
Most fair housing obstacles are being addressed through an
identification and referral to FHEEO State and Federal governmental
agencies for remedy. Fair housing is defined as equitable and fair
housing opportunities to all persons regardless of their race, creed, color,
family origin, religious preference or family status. Although these
obstacles are covert because of a lack of understanding and awareness,
hese fac • s must b. isclose d reme ed to pr e a fair
uitable. tme:nt X1.1 resid s within r commty. It i
position of OHNC to offer housing opportunities to qualified members
of the community on a fair and equitable basis. This is being;
accomplished by using alternative media coverage, "bilingual"
newspapers and radio advertising. The city's close relationship with
other housing and social providers have allowed us to develop a strong
referral process that has resulted in applications from persons who
would not have otherwise submitted an application for services.
OHNC has an appeal process for program applicants who feel an unfair
decision was made.
To provide for an equitable decision process and evaluation of fair
housing issues, the City of Yakima has considered and will evaluate the
need for the formation of a Human Rights Commission.
result is the continued neglect and omission of infrastructure
improvements within those areas which have the greatest need.
Target area citizens have requested an upgrading and improved
infrastructure to serve their needs so that they can receive equitable
benefits with other parts of the city. It has been emphasized that
consideration should be given to neighborhood impacts such as schools
and parks.
Infrastructure improvements include re-evaluation and upgrading of:
- roadways and traffic control
domestic water and irrigation lines
- sewer
1. storm drain interceptors
street lighting
sidewalks, pedestrian walkways and bike paths
Wages i e Yaki ea hav of kept,A with ethe s e- ide
erage, n nflationhich alsupports assertio at there not
been a significant increase in the median income structure of the Yakima
area since 1980.
Yakima continues to have the highest unemployment rate in Washington
State. Yakima was reported at 10.5%, compared to the state-wide average
of 5.7% (Washington State Labor Area Summary, September 1995).
43
*r Yakima Valley Opportunities Industrialization Center wi.11
implement a Youthbuild ',project for the development of ten
homeowner units and build and operate a ten unit youth shelter.
Community and Economic Development/City of Yakima will
make application for a federal 108 economic development project fbr
commercial infrastructure needs producing a minimum of 26 target
area resident, jobs and resulting in other economic opportunities for
community residents.
Yakima Police Department/Legal Department Capital
FacilitiP : The construction of a 52,000 square foot facility to
house police, communication center for emergency county-
wide 911 and the city legal department.
- Yakima Fire Department and Emergency Medical Capital
Facilities: The citizens approved a $3.7 million fire bond that
addresses; a new fire station 3, new fire training tower facility,
electronic/mechanical shop complex, 102 aerial apparatus,
odelin • , fire sta ;o s s 1 and and a veigi;,ation sy
.tios exi stin u s ire sta i�� s; in - tion toproxim
$120,000 a year for equipment replacement.
IN - Parks and Recreation Capital Facilities: The projected cost
of $5.6 million for capital improvements of four park areas.
ow IN Transportation Capital Facilities: The improvement of
approximately 30 arterial streets and the completion of the I-
82 freeway project.
- Transit Capital Facilities: The evaluation of a public
transportation benefit area in Yakima County and the purchase
of 19 buses.
•• - Wastewater/UtilitieslCapital Facilities: The City ofYakirna
has received approval of its loan application request for
$209,400 to be used in conjunction with $89,729 of locally
matched funds to financially assist the installation of a sewage
collection system in an older, existing residential
neighborhood. Several city neighborhoods fit the profile for
this program. The citi's wastewater program has matured to
the point where we can afford to financially assist (cost share)
i �
centers use of volunteers, in-kind contributions and alternate building
materials.
Supply and demand of building trade services - The supply and
demand of building trade services would limit organizations from
developing a large number of projects. A limited number of
subcontractors are available to both non-profit and for-profit
agencies. It is anticipated that the high level of demand will resolve
itself through the evolution of economic opportunities for new
businesses.
NB Technical expertise for development and costs- The technical
expertise of smaller nonprofit housing providers is very limited.
This limits the agency in the type of programs and resources that can
be applied for or administered. To assist these agencies in making
application for resources, larger entities will offer technical
assistance. The state's technical assistance contracts and
partnerships with smaller entities can use their services,
admin' ration an r staff. D u
City and county infrastructure policies and fees - The existing
policies instituted by the city and county in relationship to their
infrastructure standards makes housing unaffordable to the
low/moderate income clientele. It would be the intent of city and
county governments to make allowances for projects that are used in
the development of low income housing as long as it does not
negatively impact the neighborhood or impede the hearing process.
Local government support in providing improvements could make
low income housing cost -feasible.
1.1 Political commitment - A necessary political commitment is needed
at local, state and federal levels to develop programs, resources and
concessions of existing policies. This will afford nonprofit housing
providers the opportunity to address the housing needs within the
community. This commitment would achieve an understanding of
the community need; benefits of economic projects and a reflected
commitment for their represented constituents.
61
A
and developers in providing units affordable to low and moderate
income households.
The city recognizes the critical ''role of infrastructure installation and
improvements in attracting private investment to the community. This
will be accomplished by:
stems
for the installation of sewage collection systems
initiating a program g
in low-income, residential neighborhoods
federal Section 108 application for commercial infrastructure
installation
® provision of technical assistance for economic development to small,
neighborhood -located businesses and home occupations
INI establish a Neighborhood Improvement Project which shall provide
a matching grant fund to make improvements to neighborhoods
® co:ntinually seek additional ''state, federal and private resources to
assist in the :revitalization of its neighborhoods and commercial
districts
empha,. e and courage ucationk opportizities for a
neighb ¢�% oods Zit '� pa�nse ta� '`_, eir neec
INJ
E. Lead Agencies
The following entities have a long term history and experience in their
respective fields to provide both leadership and technical assistance in
the development and coordination of community services.
Housing City of Yakima Office of Housing and
Neighborhood Conservation
Homeless Yakima County Coalition for the
Homeless
Economic Development City of Yakima Department of
Community and Economic
Development
F. Monitoring
Standards and Procedures
Lead -Based Paint Hazards
City of Yakima Office of Housing and Neighborhood Conservation. 1995. Lead -Based Paint
Policy.
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Community Planning and
Development. 1993. Notification: Watch Out for lead -Based Paint Poisoning.
Population and Housing
U.S. Census of Population and Housing. 1980.
U.S. Census of Population and Housing. 1990. File Tapes la and 3a.
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Northwest/Alaska Area. Northwest
Quarterly Economic Report, 2nd Quarter 1994.
Washington State Office of Financial Management. April 1, 1993. Population Estimate.
Residential Sales and Building Activity
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. 3rd Quarter 1992. Region X Quarterly
Economic Report
City of Yakima. 1988-1992. Multiple Listing Service.
City of Yakima. 1980-1992. Residential Building Activity and Housing Conditions Report
City akima. 19 • • . Field S of HousiVtructuraltinditions.
A if U M
General Sources of Information
City of Yakima. October 1993. Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS)
Fiscal Year 1994-1998.
City of Yakima. October 1994, Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS)
Annual Performance Report, Fiscal Year 1994.
1995 Agencies
Central Washington Service Center for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing
Central Washington Comprehensive Mental Health
City of Yakima Rebound Rehabilitation Plus
Evergreen Legal Services
Office of Rural and Farmworker Housing
Southeast Washington Office of Aging and Long Term Care
Yakima Board of Realtors
Yakima County Coalition for the Homeless
Yakima Health District/Care Bearers
Yakima Housing Authority
Yakima Interfaith Coalition
115
Yakima Valley Opportunities Industrialization Center
Yakima Valley Partners/Habitat for .Humanity
YWCA/Family Crisis Center
A D D E N D U M
CITY OF YAK!
ET ARE--
Tieton Dr
C. W.
Stets
F*gtound
W Nob Hill Blv
W Mead Av
OW—
Washington Av
I Air
XPENDtp: AC
N D U M
111
Appendix D: Acronyms:
AFDC Aid to Families with Dependent Children
AIDS Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome
ALTC Aging and Long Term Care
CBD Central Business District
CDAC Community Development Advisory Committee
CDBG Community Development Block Grant
CED Community Economic Development
CFR Community Redevelopment Financing
CRAB Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy
CRDO Community Housing Development Organization
CWCMH Central Washington Comprehensive Mental Health
DCTED State of Washington Department of Community, Trade and
Economic Development
ESG Emergency Shelter Grant
FMR Fair Market Rent
HIV Human Immune Virus
HOME A HUD funding source
HOPWA Housing Opportunities for People with AIDS
HUD United States Department of Housing and Urban Development
HTC edera s•w Inc sIs' Housi Tax C t1LJ TVE
e tropo an S to tical a
NIMBY Not in my Backyard
OHNC Office of Housing and Neighborhood Conservation
OIC Yakima Valley Opportunities and Industrialization Center
ORFH Office of Rural Farmworker Housing
PHA Public Housing Authority
PSA Public Service Announcement
PWTF State of Washington Public Work Trust Fund
TTS Triumph Treatment Services
YCCH Yakima County Coalition for the Homeless
YHA Yakima Housing Authority
YMSA Yakima Metropolitan Statistical Area
YWCA Young Women's Christian Association
118