Strategic Plan: |
|
IV A. GENERAL FORMAT OF THE STRATEGIC PLAN
The strategic plan is a general overview of Iowa City's plan for housing, jobs and services for low-income residents for the next five years. This section of the Consolidated Plan (CITY STEPS) will show the types of projects or activities that we envision taking place, initiated by the City or by other organizations. Since this is a five-year overview, the numbers relating to units, households and funds are rough estimates (based upon the past uses of federal funds).
1. General Priorities for Allocating Investment
Iowa City expects to receive a total of approximately $1,620,000 in federal funds (CDBG & HOME) annually. Other federal funds for specific programs, like the Housing Choice Voucher Program is already designated by the federal government for a specific use (rent assistance for this example). The City has established a citizen-oriented method for allocating CDBG and HOME funds. The Housing and Community Development Commission (HCDC) is a nine member citizen advisory commission to the City Council. As funding becomes available, annually, this commission hears proposals from numerous local organizations (both non-profit and for-profits) and the City itself. Once the presentations are heard this commission ranks each proposal according to pre-determined factors (see Ranking Criteria in Appendix 5). The most important factor is "addressing a priority need identified in the CITY STEPS Plan". Projects requesting funding must address one of these needs, and since funding is limited, the proposals meeting a "HIGH" or "MEDIUM" priority need are given the highest rating. Once the projects are ranked, the commission makes their funding recommendation to the City Council. The City Council reviews the recommendation and makes revisions, as needed, and then votes to adopt the funding allocations of CDBG and HOME monies as part of the one year Action Plan.
a. Geographically
Iowa City is a fairly homogeneous community with no areas of heavy low income or minority concentrations or areas with concentrations of deteriorated housing. The residential central city area surrounding the University of Iowa has a preponderance of student rental housing, but is not an area of concentration of low income families. Because of this, there is no defined plan for allocating CDBG and HOME funds geographically. Since CDBG and HOME projects are often initiated by a number of different organizations, these federal funds are used throughout the community. Likewise, the City's Housing Rehabilitation Program serves citizens on a citywide basis and distributes the assistance accordingly. All service programs are based on individual need and are not allocated geographically.
b. Among Priority Needs as Identified in HUD Table IV.1 and Table IV.3
HUD Tables IV.1 and IV.3 shows that there are a number of needs with "HIGH" priorities in each of the categories (housing, homeless, public facilities, and public services). The City does not use set-asides for any of these categories. However, federal regulations prohibit more than 15 percent of CDBG funds being used for public services. Estimating the public service expenditures annually is fairly simple given the federal restrictions (CDBG funds x .15 = $ for public services). This calculation gives us an estimate of $145,000 annually that may be used to fund public service activities, based upon current CDBG funding levels. There are no limits or requirements for allocating funds in each of the other categories (housing, public facilities and economic development).
2. Basis for Assigning the Priority
In order to develop this plan and determine the community's needs citizen input was solicited. (A complete description of the development of the CITY STEPS Plan can be found in Section I.) This citizen input was the main force behind the priority rankings of the identified needs. A group, made up of six residents, formed the Priorities and Strategies Committee. Committee members attended the public meetings and discussed the community's needs with many organizations. As a result the Priorities and Strategies Committee assigned priority rankings of "HIGH", "MEDIUM", "LOW", and "NO SUCH NEED" to all of the various needs identified in this plan. These priorities will then be used by the HCDC and staff to rank proposed projects and make funding recommendations to the City Council.
These priority rankings are not absolute and are subject to change upon presentation of evidence that a need does exist and the level of that need is well documented. In general, "low" priority rankings indicate that existing services are adequately meeting current demand, or that no specific needs have been identified at this time. It is also important to remember that these are not the needs of the City as a whole, but those of its low-income residents only. Thus, Water Improvements and Parking have a "Low" priority ranking as far as the low-income population alone is concerned, but these improvements are a "high" priority for the City as a whole.
3. Obstacles to Meeting Under Served Needs
Available funding is the most apparent obstacle. Most of the services that are needed by low income persons are available in Iowa City; if more funding were available existing services could be expanded to meet the needs of the community. A second, less apparent, obstacle to meeting lower income residents' needs has to do with community attitudes. Many persons support services or programs designed to help the needy, but do not want "low income housing" or multi-family housing in their neighborhood. (See also Section IV.F.)
Continuum of Care: Gaps Analysis - Individuals | |||||
Beds/Units | Estimated Needs | Current Inventory | Unmet Need/ Gap | Relative Priority | |
| 73 | 55 | 18 | High | |
| 60 | 30 | 30 | High | |
| 381 | 291 | 90 | High | |
| 223 | 85 | 128 | ||
Estimated Supportive Services Slots | |||||
| 120 | 20 | 100 | High | |
| 180 | 84 | 96 | High | |
| 180 | 135 | 45 | High | |
| 120 | 20 | 40 | High | |
| 180 | 80 | 100 | Medium | |
| 228 | 115 | 113 | High | |
Estimated Sub-Populations | |||||
| 180 | 45 | 135 | High | |
| 72 | 20 | 52 | High | |
| 60 | 20 | 40 | Medium | |
| 72 | 22 | 50 | Medium | |
| 23 | 5 | 18 | High | |
| 60 | 20 | 40 | High | |
| 50 | 18 | 32 | High | |
Continuum of Care: Gaps Analysis - Persons in Families with Children | |||||
Beds/Units | Estimated Needs | Current Inventory | Unmet Need/ Gap | Relative Priority | |
| 33 | 48 | (-15)* | High | |
| 101 | 36 | 65 | High | |
| 30 | 0 | 30 | High | |
| 134 | 48 | 86 | ||
Estimated Supportive Services Slots | |||||
| 61 | 15 | 46 | High | |
| 46 | 15 | 31 | Medium | |
| 157 | 27 | 130 | High | |
| 45 | 34 | 11 | High | |
| 92 | 10 | 82 | High | |
| 167 | 40 | 127 | Medium | |
| 1100 | 40 | 1060 | High | |
Estimated Sub-Populations | |||||
| 46 | 15 | 31 | High | |
| 18 | 5 | 13 | High | |
| 15 | 3 | 12 | High | |
| 18 | 5 | 13 | Medium | |
| 5 | 2 | 3 | High | |
| 15 | 4 | 11 | High |
Special Needs/Non-Homeless | ||
Sub-Populations | Priority Need | Estimated $ |
| Medium | Unknown |
| High | Unknown |
| High | Unknown |
| High | Unknown |
| High | Unknown |
| High | Unknown |
| High | Unknown |
*Inventory exists at DVIP, however, funds for staffing do not allow for maximum utilization of the facility.
HUD Table IV.1
LISTING OF PRIORITY NEEDS
PRIORITY HOUSING NEEDS (households) |
Priority Need Level High, Medium, Low, No Such Need |
1990 ESTIMATED UNITS |
1990 ESTIMATED DOLLARS NEEDED TO ADDRESS |
||||
0-30% |
31-50% |
51-80% |
|||||
Renter |
Small |
Cost Burden > 30% |
H |
H |
M |
1,088 |
20,200,000 |
Cost Burden > 50% |
H |
H |
M |
507 |
9,400,000 |
||
Physical Defects |
L |
L |
L |
185 |
1,850,000 |
||
Overcrowded** |
H |
M |
L |
69 |
4,140,000 |
||
Large |
Cost Burden > 30% |
H |
H |
M |
112 |
2,080,000 |
|
Cost Burden > 50% |
H |
H |
M |
9 |
170,000 |
||
Physical Defects |
L |
L |
L |
35 |
350,000 |
||
Overcrowded** |
H |
M |
L |
7 |
420,000 |
||
Elderly |
Cost Burden > 30% |
M |
M |
M |
304 |
5,650,000 |
|
Cost Burden > 50% |
M |
M |
M |
121 |
2,250,000 |
||
Physical Defects |
L |
L |
L |
10 |
100,000 |
||
Overcrowded** |
M |
M |
L |
19 |
1,140,000 |
||
Owner |
Cost Burden > 30% |
H |
M |
M |
955 |
8,600,000 |
|
Cost Burden > 50% |
H |
M |
M |
263 |
4,730,000 |
||
Physical Defects |
H |
H |
M |
2337 |
23,370,000 |
||
Overcrowded** |
L |
L |
L |
75 |
1,400,000 |
PRIORITY HOMELESS NEEDS |
Priority Need Level High, Medium, Low, No Such Need |
ESTIMATED DOLLARS NEEDED TO ADDRESS |
|||||
Outreach Assessment |
Families |
Individuals |
w/ Special Needs |
600,000 |
|||
M |
M |
M |
|||||
Emergency Shelters |
Families |
Individuals |
w/ Special Needs |
1,250,000 |
|||
H |
H |
M |
|||||
Transitional Shelters |
Families |
Individuals |
w/ Special Needs |
3,250,000 |
|||
H |
H |
H |
|||||
Permanent Supportive Housing |
Families |
Individuals |
w/ Special Needs |
1,250,000 |
|||
N |
N |
H |
|||||
Permanent Housing |
Families |
Individuals |
w/ Special Needs |
6,510,000 |
|||
H |
H |
N |
Information on this table is based upon statistics from the 1990 U.S. Census
** NOTE: New Construction of multi-family units
Table IV.2
CITY OF IOWA CITY FY2001-FY2006
ESTIMATED FEDERAL ASSISTANCE (CDBG AND HOME FUNDING)
Tenant Based Rental Assistance |
50 Households Assisted |
$ 180,000 |
Rental Housing – New Construction |
125 Units |
$1,500,000 |
Rental Housing – Acq./Rehabilitation |
50 Units |
$ 750,000 |
Homebuyer Assistance |
55 Households |
$ 165,000 |
Owner-Occupied Housing Rehab |
300 Units |
$1,620,000 |
Homeless Shelters |
--- |
$ 335,000 |
Public Facilities |
--- |
$1,200,000 |
Public Services |
--- |
$ 725,000 |
Economic Development |
--- |
$ 375,000 |
Other Activities |
--- |
$ 250,000 |
Administration and Planning |
CDBG and HOME |
$1,000,000 |
TOTAL EXPENDITURES |
$8,100,000* |
* This table represents the amount of funding the City of Iowa City expects to receive from federal sources (CDBG and HOME) and program income in fiscal years 2001-2006. The activities and estimates of expenditures shown in the table are based upon the past uses of these funds and the strategies highlighted in this plan.
Copyright © 2000 Jeonet |