The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1979-01-08 (Special) Meeting Agenda• CITY COU~CIL MEETING -Special -Ja..lUarf d, 1979 • • • • • SPECIAL MEETING: • • • COUNCIL CHAMBERS CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO January 8, 1979 The City Council of the City of Englewood, Arapahoe County, Colorado, met in special session on January 8, 1979. The invocation was given by City Manager Andy McCown. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Taylor. Mayor Taylor asked for a roll call. Upon a call of the roll, the following were present: Council Members Williams, Weber, Smith , Harper, Clayton, Mann, Taylor. Absent : None. The Mayor declared a quorum present. * * * * * * Also present were : City Manager McCown Assistant City Manager Curnes City Attorney Berardini Director of Community Development Wanush Deputy City Clerk Watkins * * * * * * COUNCILMAN MANN MOVED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING TO CON- SIDER AN APPLICATION TO THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HUD) FROM THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD REQUESTING ADDITIONAL FUNDS UNDER THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM. Councilman Weber seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: Ayes: Nays: Council Members Clayton, Mann, Williams, Weber, Smith, Harper, Taylor. None. The Mayor declared the motion carried. Director of Community Development Wanush appeared before Council and presented the application. Director Wanush stated there • I • • • • January 8, 1979 Page 2 • • • were two categories for which funds could be requested. The first category is the single purpose grant for housing rehabilitation; and th e second category is the comprehens ive grant which is for a series of different programs related to a general area. Councilman Mann asked if it was possible to submit an application that would provide funds for the rehabilitation of the downtown development district, i.e. curbs, gutters, etc. Director Wanush stated it would be eligible under the terms of the regulations and statutes. Many entitlement com- munities such as Littleton receive money automatically just by submitting an application that meets the federal government guidelines. However, Englewood is a non-entitlement city and it never has had the kind of federal funding through HUD that would entitle it to a certain amount of money. Englewood has to compete with all the other cities throughout the state for funding. Director Wanush stated the chances for getting the funds are slim even though Councilman Mann's idea would be an eligible activity. Director Wanush stated the Housing Rehabilitation Pro- gram will run out of money for rehab funding some time in May and he proposed that the City submit the application for $226,000 under the single purpose grant in order to continue the reha- bilitation program in the City. In answer to Mayor Taylor's question on what the City would do if the application is turned down, Director Wanush stated there were still several options for the City. Director Wanush stated 1) the City can still operate the program without the subsidy; 2) the Housing Authority could request funds from the City in order to subsidize the program; and 3) loans made to elderly on the deferred payment method could be reduced. Mayor Taylor asked if there was anyone in the audience wishing to speak in favor of the application. There was no one in the audience to speak in favor of the application. Mayor Taylor asked if there was anyone in the audience wishing to speak against the application. There was no one in the audience to speak against the application. COUNCILMAN SMITH MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. Councilman Harper seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: Ayes: Council Members Clayton, Mann, Williams, Weber, Smith, Harper, Taylor • • I • • • • January 8, 1979 Page 3 Nays : None. The Mayor declared the motion carried. * * * * * * COUNCILMAN SMITH MOVED TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION TO THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT RE- QUESTING THE FUNDS FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM AND TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN THE APPLICATION. Councilman Weber seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: 8 :00 p.m. Ayes : Nays : Council Members Clayton, Mann, Willliams, Weber, Smith, Harper, Taylor. None. The Mayor declared the motion carried. COUNCILMAN WILLIAMS MOVED TO ADJOURN. Mayor Taylor adjourned the meeting without a vote at I . ( • SPECIAL MEETING: • • • COUNCIL CHAMBERS CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO January 8, 1979 The City Council of the City of Englewood, Arapahoe County, Colorado, met in special session on January 8, 1979. The invocation was given by City Manager Andy McCown. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Taylor. Mayor Taylor asked for a roll call. Upon a call of the roll, the following were present: Council Members Williams, Weber, Smith, Harper, Clayton, Mann, Taylor. Absent : None. The Mayor declared a quorum present. * * * * * * Also present were : City Manager McCown Assistant City Manager Curnes City Attorney Berardini Director of Community Development Wanush Deputy City Clerk Watkins * * * * * * COUNCILMAN MANN MOVED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING TO CON- SIDER AN APPLICATION TO THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HUD) FROM THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD REQUESTING ADDITIONAL FUNDS UNDER THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM. Councilman Weber seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll , the vote resu l ted as follows : Ayes: Nays : Council Members Clayton, Mann, Williams, Weber , Smith, Harper , Taylor. None. The Mayor declared t he motion carried. Director of Communi t y Development Wanush appeared before Council and presented the application. Director Wanush stated there I • • January 8 , 1979 Page 2 • • .. were two categories for which funds could be requested. Th e first category is the single purpose grant f or housing r ehab ilita t ion ; and th e second cat e gory is the compre hens iv e grant which is f o r a series of different programs r e lated to a g e n e ra l ar e a . Councilman Mann asked if it was possible to submit an application that would provide funds for the rehabilitation of the downtown development district, i.e. curbs, gutters, etc. Director Wanush stated it would be eligible under the terms of the regulations and statutes. Many entitlement com- munities such as Littleton receive money automatically just by submitting an application that meets the federal government guidelines. However, Englewood is a non-entitlement city and it never has had the kind of federal funding through HUD that would entitle it to a certain amount of money. Englewood has to compete with all the other cities throughout the state for funding. Director Wanush stated the chances for getting the funds are slim even though Councilman Mann's idea would be an eligible activity. Director Wanush stated the Housing Rehabilitation Pro- gram will run out of money for rehab funding some time in May and he proposed that the City submit the application for $226,000 under the single purpose grant in order to continue the reha- bilitation program in the City. In answer to Mayor Taylor's question on what the City would do if the application is turned down, Director Wanush stated there were still several options for the City. Director Wanush stated 1) the City can still operate the program without the subsidy; 2 ) the Housing Authority could request funds from the City in order to subsidize the program; and 3) loans made to elderly on the deferred payment method could be reduced. Mayor Taylor asked if there was anyone in the audience wishing to speak in favor of the application. There was no one in the audience to speak in favor of the application. Mayor Taylor asked if there was anyone in the audience wis hing to sp e ak against the application. There was no one in th e audience to speak against the application. COUNCILMAN SMITH MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. Counc i lman Harper seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll, the v ot e r e su l ted as f ollows: Ay e s : Council Members Clayton, Mann, Williams, Weber, Smith, Harper, Taylor • • I • • -- ( • • • • • January 8 , 1979 Page 3 Nays: None. The Mayor declared the motion carried. * * * * * * COUNCILMAN SMITH MOVED TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION TO THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT RE- QUESTING THE FUNDS FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM AND TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN THE APPLICATION. Councilman Weber seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: 8 :00 p.m. Ayes: Nays : Council Members Clayton, Mann, Willliams, Weber, Smith, Harper, Taylor. None. The Mayor declared the motion carried. COUNCILMAN WILLIAMS MOVED TO ADJOURN. Mayor Taylor adjourned the meeting without a vote at • I • • - • • ----~---' • SPECIAL MEETING: COUNCIL CHAMBERS CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO January 8, 1979 The City Council of the City of Englewood, Arapahoe County, Colorado , met in special session on January 8, 1979. The invocation was given by City Manager Andy McCown. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Taylor. Mayor Taylor asked for a roll call. Upon a call of the roll, the following were present: Council Members Williams, Weber, Smith, Harper, Clayton, Mann, Taylor. Absent: None. The Mayor declared a quorum present. * * * * * * Also present were : City Manager McCown Assistant City Manager Curnes City Attorney Berardini Director of Community Development Wanush Deputy City Clerk Watkins * * * * * * COUNCILMAN MANN MOVED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING TO CON- SIDER AN APPLICATION TO THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HUD) FROM THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD REQUESTING ADDITIONAL FUNDS UNDER THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM. Councilman Weber seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll , the vote resulted as follows: Ayes: Nays : Council Members Clayton, Mann, Williams, Weber, Smith, Harper, Taylor. None. The Mayor declared the motion carried. Director of Community Development Wanush appeared before Council and presented the application. Director Wanush stated there • I • • Januar y 8, 1979 Page 2 • • • were two categor i fo r which funds could be requested. The first category is th single pu rp ose grant fo r housing rehabilitation; and th e second cat gory is the comp rehens iv e grant which is for a series of di fferent programs related to a general area. Counc ilman Ma nn ask e d if it was possible to submit an application that would provide f unds for the rehabilitation of the downtown developm ent district, i.e. curbs, gutters, etc. Director Wanush stated it would be eligible under the terms o f the regulations and statutes. Many entitlement com- munities such as Littleton r eceive money automatically just by submitting an application that meets the federal government guidelines. However, Englewood is a non-entitlement city and it never has had the kind of federal funding through HUD that would entitle it to a certain amount of money. Englewood has to compete with all the other cities throughout the state for funding. Director Wanush stated the chances for getting the funds are slim even though Councilman Mann's idea would be an eligible activity. Director Wanush stated the Housing Rehabilitation Pro- gram will run out of money for rehab funding some time in May and he proposed that the City submit the application for $226,000 under the single purpose grant in order to continue the reha- bilitation program in the City. In answer to Mayor Taylor's question on what the City would do if the application is turned down, Director Wanush stated there were still several options for the City. Director Wanush stated l) the City can still operate the program without the subsidy; 2) the Housing Authority could request funds from the City in order to subsidize the program; and 3) loans made to elderly on the deferred payment method could be reduced. Mayor Taylor asked if there was anyone in the audience wishing to speak in favor of the application. There was no one in the audience to speak in favor of the application. Mayor Taylor asked if there was anyone in the audience wishing to speak against the application. There was no one in the audience to speak against the application. COUNCILMAN SMITH MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. Councilman Harper seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: Ayes : Council Members Clayton, Mann, Williams, Weber, Smith, Harper, Taylor • • I • - • • • • • January 8, 1 979 Page 3 Nays : None. The Mayor declared the motion carried. * * * * * * COUNCILMAN SMITH MOVED TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION TO THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT RE- QUESTING THE FUNDS FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM AND TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN THE APPLICATION. Councilman Weber seconded the motion. Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: 8 :00 p.m. Ayes: Nays : Council Members Clayton, Mann , Willliams, Weber, Smith, Harper, Taylor. None. The Mayor declared the motion carried. COUNCILMAN WILLIAMS MOVED TO ADJOURN. Mayor Taylor adjourned the meeting without a vote at I • • - • • ;-J?.-19 Moved Sec'Jndpd A ve IY s il n sen .l wn,-: 1'~-:,----T Na Ab t 1 Ab t I ..lliebe.r_ 2._m..!.E_r. l ..~:fAn~ .L· Cl~ton ~ .l Mann · ~a y_or ra1 )_:u 0 • I . • • • • - • • t~O ll CALL " ed s d d A ov ec~m P ve NC!.Y_ sta n sent j Wi 1 , 1 ?r.-=,----·r--v Ab Ab ' ...weber ----~ 2m_!!r, l ,..... -...IW:D.frr_ i ,__... C li!.Y_ton ~l ,..... Mann I ~ _"!a.~~r Tayt::.c.J...~ · • I . • • • • • ROLL CALL H ed S d d A ov ec'Jn l' ve a.!.. s a n sen Wi 1, t ?~~--~--j v- ~ ' ..weber. ~ N Ab t 1 Ab t 2.11!!.¥· -.1 _k:_ ....l:l.i.r.ll.tt._ I ,.... Cl~ton~ J.~ V""" Mann j ~ ..!!_ay ~r r~1r~~~ I . • • • • • ~~--~--------~-----~----------~ -- Moved Sec d d ':ln e l Wi1, ~ ?,:~----~Ave I Nav Abstain Absent ' w .. h-;;-;: -· --- I ~mit:r, l 1 l·faro~ --, . Clavton-1 Mann . lT,a .v~..c. r~.r)_~u- • • I . • • - • • RO LL CALL --- Ave .-=;·-~-~T Nav Abstafn __ ! Absent l 4 --.l ' I .I ~.x ... ~u _ l j • I . • • • • • • ----------------------~ RO LL CALL Moved Sec~nded r----t---L.Ji!1wi.C:1' 2_1~ ?r.-:,·---~=Av=-e· rN=a vT-~Ab~s!!ta!!!f n..,._Aru!b!!!Se:!!jnt:.__ 'w~ ------~T---1~---+--=::.J Smltr, l r--~--~~Ham.~-·-J·t=~--t-----~====~ Clavton ·=j1=-t---t-----J===j • I . . • • • ------ ROLL CALL H ed S OY ec-:>n ve a_.r s a n sen wi1''f?r.-_;·--~] v- ·~~>r_ v-~ __?~~!..!.!..', ---l (..,./ ,.....-..IW:D~r._ ! .....--Cl~ton ~_l v- Mann 1 I/' l!_a.~9!. Tay_1_1Q_ ,., A Ab t N Ab t f I • • • • - • - -~ ROLL CALL Moved _=:f!l_!!r. l ..... r-----r-----~~~~o·~---=T·--~~t---t-------~-------1 Clayton 4-r ,- r-----T-----~~~~nn 1 ~ _____ _,___ ____ -L..!2 M,,a2.vo T y)_,d_-~v"j----t-------f--------J ~- I . • • - c • • • "'ed s dd ov ec-:m e ve ay s a n ~ l Wi 1, f?~~--~--T - ' ....weber A N Ab t f :l"!!Y, ---.1 Hare~ ' Clc!l_ton J Mann __ ._ Ma .Y.~.!:. Ta yJ_?!:_l ~d-~~~cJ~ ~ Ab t sen ----------------------- • I . . - ( • 7 :30 P.M. 1. • • • AGENDA FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING OF THE ENGLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 8, 1979 Call to order, invocat~dge~~llegiance and roll call . Public Hearing. (a) To consider an appl i ca t ion to the U.S . Depart- ment of Housing and Ur ban Development (HUD) from the Ci t y o f En glewood reques in addi~ional funds under the Community Dev lopmen Pro ra . (Copies enclo sed .) 2. Adjournment. {Al2~d AN~~c co~ City Manager I . • • - 1 FEDERAL ASSISTANCE .. Arf'U· ..... u L I'TATI •. .,...lit CAHn APP\JCA. L TYP( Arf'U· .. Mn noN liiJ NUPPUCAnOII IOO:HTl-.... Tt y ... -·· ... or II r70 '""i"' •• N:fiOH 0 -.ICAilOII c:ATlOH c nu AIIICN [D .. ,., ..... ~ 0 .-r~FICATIOII Or .miT IIIPI.l '-• f r::r-i5 ..... Of fEIIUAI. -...... 4. UGAL ,.,.,_.CAHT/RlCir'I(NT L r&DtAAL IM'LOTIA IDUITI1U:.A TIO H NO . ........... -:City of Englewood • Dlrl-' ..... U.ll ' De pa rtme nt of Co mmunity Developme nt o. 1 1 1• J I 1 I .. ......., ... .. :34 00 South Elati Street .... 0 • •• 1111[11 CltAW ._ lRU ...... 'Eng lewood o.Cioooaor : 1.-a. 11,_, Arapahoe f T~- eN-· Colorado F .... al .. __ 80110 c .... ,, I ..... ,.,.._N•) :Ri c h ard s . Wanus h 761-1140 xt 400 7. T1Tu: MD OUCAintOH O F U,.UCAHr5 ~OJt.CT I. TYf"l OF' A...,UCANT /R[CI ... (Nl I S ing le purpose grant addressing the hou sing ~·-~ll'l~o~ll l f)Acttu a.,et~cy t-4•..,.•a t..=:' ,~~:."'''0"'' lll&ltlllttatl ~ .. ""''' l f a c ~or, the .prog ram is a housing rehab ilitation ...::; liJIIM"ifw l : ~ proJect des1gned to upgrade substandard housing l-CiiJ ,_..._Dit.&nct 'in areas wh ere con ce ntrati o n s o f this type of ~,..,, .... •~ ·~•JI""Ntt Jtu .-r ~ ~r ope rty exist . Upg rading to be a ccomplished I . TYP'l 01 AUIITANCl •th r o ugh s ubs idi zed loan s t o those who qualify ........... , .,_._ un ~~-·''-' ,_ 6akr •Pr .. ' rn ~1 (c ontinue d on back of o aa~l C...• ~ ... ~(·} 10. AatA Of" PWDJECT IM,ACT t N-•I .U.., ........_ lL UTIUATm NUM ll. TYPE 01 A,.,.UCATI ON ........ ) a:: Of P[lltSOM' ,.._ '--"" 1-AAI ..... t.. EFt riNG .._. ~-~-City of Englewo od 4600 ·~ .,~ ...... ,. "'"•' GJ u. ~~to Fl.lfliiO INCi M. CONORa.&IOkAL. Dl51'1tll:'n OF: JL TYK or CHAHQl crrr uc rr u.) ·-22 6 0 00 a.~ICMT ...... CT ~--Ditlll.., F-CNiar cl...,;twJ ; .. ....._.o.~ • ., . 5 o; C-tac~WM o.,,.,IOfl ~ AnliCM'T .. o-a.ouw D11rth• -.nan 16. P'ltOJtcT ITARl 17. NOJ[CT (~ltU• .. 8o ,o uu OAT[ r--"'•• DUIU.l ~OH 11-01 • ~ ·ar,~:~~.J 0:0 c UICOL .. .. ·n lj 1 •. ln'Mll 300 000 .. I& lf~~T!fn~~~J O ,_ -•• Jt. UIITING FIDUAL t0£NTIFICATI0frij NUitlllltR I . -' 6 06 .0 00 .. ~L ~NC,. .. •• 7 C 1 '" a. NDUU.I. MUfCY TO IUCDYI. -.u&IT tN ... ,c.t, ....... &II_.J 11. ftl.MAI:K5 ADDl.D IIllO , 14 0 5 \u rh s , Denvp r, Co l o r a d o 80 202 0 ·-0 No I :. • 1e • ._ .t 11t --.. • ........ ! '-:,.:.,. .., -c;,..., ~n .. ._ ,..,_, ..... ..._.,uM . ,., ..... 1 -.. 11'1 N• .. •· ·-........ ....., ...... ,..,..... ... -...---...,'-' .................... ---... -· ........ ""'LICAfltT : ::..;:;\,":.=.a~'-: I ~ 0 C[,fTI"U .. --.c ,.. -"'" -~ 1 Ill Denver Regional Co unci 1 of Gov ' ts. t TKA.T .. : ':'.::::;: -• .. -.., S tat P lannin g O ff ice ~ 0 m -0 I D. a. nf"l.D IWill MD Tln.l ........ 1\,11( a. IWl IIIM.D CCRlH"YIHG Andrew McC own, City Mg r . .... -·· IW"Rl· II &OfTATIV£ Ci tv of En a lewood a.t.. AGUICY Matt l'L APPLICA· ,. _ _...,.. liON ttt'CEIV[D 11 a.. OltGAirti.ZATIOHAL UNI1 rl. ADUINISTRATI'i[ OrUC[ I:L F[D[RA l APPLICAT ION I IOl.NTifiCATION ... ADOitDa 80. nD£RAL CMNT IOUITlriCATION IL ACnOH TAUPe u. P\INDtNO ,_ --... ~'•• -•• ll nARTtNQ I OL -.. JUI[IAl .00 D. N:TION DAn. ... 11 OAT[ .. 0 ......... .._ N'f"LI CMT -a =l'f;:.,:.o:.,~ ...!-~ ... r ... _.... .... DtDINQ D .. .,_.,. L JTAT( ... DATl .. -011' c. LOCAL .00 17. QMAAK.I ADDED 0'--.. cm<U 1/0 o .. -I . ,.,... ' .00 0 ·-QHe :a. L ..................... __.. ...... ._~_.-. ... FDOAi. IIIUICT .... OffiCIAl ..... H ~-· ................... 1. '*'-' ..... • "' ................... , ,_._., ·-~·· .... I . _...,_ AIIDAJUI P'OMI u• PMf l Ul)-76) aT __ .. ...._, _____ ,..., • - • • • • cr Fede rally defined low income l e vels and un subsid i zed l ow inte r est loans to others wi thin target areas. • I . , • • • • 1 A THE PROGRAM NARRATIVE STATEMENTS Community Development Needs and Obj ectives Addressed Over 1800 housing units in Englewood have been ident i f ied as possibly being substandard. On e of the factors contributing to the problem o f un suitable housing is that there were no f ormal buildi ng standa rd s until 1940; 25% of Englewood's housing stock was constructed prior to this date. By this time , the residential area surrounding the core of the Cit y and the General Iron Works indus trial plant was already developed, pr imari l y in small, one -story fr am e dwellings. Also , because of the age of Englewood's housing st o ck, the rate at which hous e s are becoming substandard is a severe problem . To identify areas where hi gher concentrations of substa nda r d housing exists, the City conducted a survey of housing conditions. Indicators of possible s ubstandard housing such as low prope rt y tax valuation , extre mely low squ are f oota ge or a basement l eve l structure were noted and will be fo llowed up with a f ield inspection conducted by the Cit y building department in Januar y, 1979. Even though some rehabilitation work has ta k e n place, ther e r emain some concentrations of housing that need improvement. Two target are as ident if ied for the current r e habilitation program c entered arou nd the original core of the City. Because a home rehabilitati on eff ort takes some time to reverse the trends in a neighborhood, three of the origin al five target areas appear t o remain. The survey revea l ed o t her areas o f concentration which will be investigated f or possible d esig nation . (See Map) Because Englewood has a scarcity of raw land f or housing development (in 1975 , onl y 5.9% o f usabl e residentially z oned land was vacant and the percentage is lower t od ay), and is a n older suburb (compared to the surrounding areas ), it is impor t ant to preserve the housing stock and t he cha r acter of t h e City . Onl y one o f the target areas encompasses an entire censu s tract so it is difficult to isolate income data ; however, income data for the entire census tract, concentrations of elderly (li kel y to be on f ixed income), and housing value (19 70 Census ) support the presumpt ion that the areas with concentrations of substandard housing are also the areas with higher concentrations of low and moderat e income residents. The need for housing rehabilitation is a combination of c oncent rations of substandard h ous ing and the eff ect not only on occupants of s uch housing but on adjacent property and attitudes o f the community and financial institutions . By upgr ading such properties in a large a nd c oncentrated effort, we hope not only to slow the cycle of deterioration, but e ncourage privately sponsored viable redevelopment in target areas and adjace n t areas . • I • • - { • • • ,. - Proposed Activity The proposed activity addresses the housing program factor. This appli cation is f or a $226,000 grant to continue a home rehabilitation loan program f or low income residents. Included in the amount is $25,500 for program admi nistration. The program has been operating successfully f or approx imately one year by providing affordable low interest loans to homeowners in order to bring property into compliance with the Englewood Housing Code as well as make improvements that will make homes more modern and livable given today's standards . The present rehabilitation program is to be continued by providing the opportunity for low income homeowners to bor row money for home improvement through a local bank consortium at a subsidized interest rate. The grant money is used f or the subsidy. By leveraging money the number o f homes improved is increased as much as four times. The present program will be expanded to allow for grants to be given in the case o f extreme immediate haz ards to the resident. The amount of $10,000 will be earmarked for this facet of the program (based on an average cost o f $1,000/per emergency). The rehabilitation program begun with the 1977 bl ock grant has allowed approval of 48 loans , with an additional 14 loans to complete the expenditure of the $13 5,000 grant. The program life was project ed at two ye ars ; however, calculations indicate all of our Federal g rant will be expended b y this Spring. The money applied f or in this applicati on will provide sufficient f unds to subsidize loans for a two-year period. Two years was chosen as the expected life of the project si nce we are currently negotiating for a n addi tional $30 0,000 line of credit from local bank participants. This figure plus money fr om the grant woul d permit continued operation for a two -yea r period. Our calculat i ons indica te if we were to negotiate successfully for an additional $300,000 line of credit we would require $190,500 in subsidy (these figures are based on the average loan and subsid y amounts from the curre nt operation). These funds woul d provide 107 loans and emergency grants over the wo-year program operation . In the pa t year 48 loans have b en made wi thout as much of a publici y effor as might have been produced . With increased publicity in h target areas, we anticipa e a higher volume of loans. In addition , the City Council is cur rently studying the possi bility of increasing it contribut ion to the loan fund from $90,000 to $170,000 --an increase of $80,000. This will assis t at least 16 additional low income fami lies. Bene fit to Low and Th e present pr0gram is availalle to families that fall within the current Section 8 inco e guidelines. As the City desires that all of he CDBG gran b n i low income, the rehab program income guidelines will b a .iu<=<t d to re lect the CDBG defini tion -2- • I • f (_ • • • • of low income. Due to the combined effort of subsidy and bank f unds , all homes in target areas are eligible for rehab loans . Only those with low income will be subsidized. Past experience has shown the average subsidy to be approximately $3 ,300.00. The proposed $190,500 grant would provide direct benefit to 58 low-income families plus 10 low-income emergency cases. With the addition of the $80,000 of Cit y funds, the to t al direc t benefit would be to 84 families. The other loans will be t o homes in target areas , but will not be subsidi zed. Of course , the indirect benefit to the neighborhoo d is assumed to bene f it many other low-income residents through an improved neighborhood and possibly some privately funded rehabilitation and redevelopment . The pool of bank money, leveraged by City funds will be available, as it has been in the past, to all residents in the target areas in an effort to improve the entire area; however, 100% of the CDBG Small Cities grant would directly benefit low and moderate income. Housing Performance Since the preparation of our last HAP in 1977, we have received allocations f or 75 Section 8 existing housing units, and a Small Cities grant for housing rehabilitation. This has helped us achieve 107% of our one-year goal and 63% of the three-year goal for Existing Rental Units and 34% of our three- year goal for rehabilitation assistance. We currently manage a 104-unit Section 8 new construction project for elderly, 100 units of Section 8 existing, and have approved 48 home rehabilitation loans . We have submitted an application in response to the recent HUD NOFA for public housing -new construction -in order to meet part of our new construction goals in elderly, family and large family categories. While Englewood does not have a local fair housing ordinance, the City Council has endorsed the goals of the Regional Housing Opportunity Plan developed b y DRCOG. In the operation o f hou s ing programs the staff assists in directing discrimination complaints to the proper agencies -Metro, State and Federal. Local Equal Opportunity Efforts Of the $96,317 o f Federal rehab contract dollars committed, approximately $4,650 has been awarded to minorit y contractors. This reveals 5% of the dollar value of our contracts have been awarded to minority businesses. In the operation of the current rehab program, $5,000-$6,000 of work has been routed through the County weatherization program which uses minorities extensively. The rehab technician worked with the weatherization program employees in training inspectors and assisted in setting up a framework for administration. Although the City is working toward achieving the g oals of the Affirmative Action Plan, a percentage of employees equal to or exceeding that of the SMSA has not been obtained. -3- • • I • • - • • • • • ot h e r Dat a Englewood is not abl e to grow in area ; howev e r , the c ommunity does serve as an economic center due to the c oncentrat ion of commercial and business activity in the City's core (i.e ., Cinderella City, six financial institutions, etc.). This creates an employment center for a large number of people . It then becomes important to maintain the residential character o f the City and try to provide the means for the area 's employees to remain close to work instead of forcing them to search for housing to meet a growing family's needs outside the community. Participation In An Approved HOP Although the RHOP for this area has not been approved b y HUD, the Englewood City Council has officially adopted the objectives of the plan and the goals for housing production it projects . -4- • • I • • • • • CO ITfNJ=NlAI. Natio n 2 ! Sa nk 3333 SOUTH BANN OC K EN GL EWOOD . COLO> I DO 80110 303 76 1·10 00 December 21, 19 78 Englewood Housing Au thority 3400 South Elati Street Englewood, Colorado 8 0110 Gentlemen : ---~-··---.. --·--·····~----. We have very much enjoyed our association with th e Englewood Hou sing Auth ority since our present rehabi- litation program was establ ished back in 1977. We look forward to doing conti nued business with the Englewood Housing Authority in 1979, and would be happy t o consider future programs or r eq uests of this natur e in the future. Sincerely, ~ J. W. Johnson Vi ce President JWJ:mm • • I . • ] • - CENSUS TRACTS WcsltJ t===--~==1 l!aker . ~ City of Englewood . Harvard . ~ Vasser ~=-ij. '-'il'-' Collegel--o-~=1 66~01 I . • 1970 CENSUS • • n • • • MEDIAN INCOMES l C i ty of !C ng lewood · I . • ( 1976 BUREAU OF CENSUS • • - Ci ty of f:ng le wood r % of Spanish American % of Negro Minorities • • • MINORITIES Rodcl ill Stanford Tufts Un ion I . 1970 CENSUS • C1ty of Englewood ( • • • • EXISTING TARGET AREAS TARGET AREA A • II ~ O•fO<d ;~ Pr .nceron 1, urncy Rodc !,rf 11 J S ta nford . ,. ; Tuf ts ~ Unron I • • Wesley r===t ~=~l="-'1 Bailer l===l ,~"il City of Englewood ( c:::::J ( ·---· L • •• J EXISTING TARGET AREAS TARGET AREAS TO BE DELETED -AREAS UNDER CONSIDERATION • • • • TARGET AREAS • Rooc lo lf . \i 'r 1 ~St an f ord II II 1; l Tufts 1. • f Unoo n ~Layton 1 l Chl'Mnqo ~Grand I .j Belle,ew JANUARY 4, 1979 'Eo!l.lmon ...:__. -us 21l~ I • • . I ( • • • • STATUS REPORT ENGLEWOOD HOUSING AUTHORITY HOME REHABILITATION LOAN PROGRAM 1 The Englewood Housing Authority began administering the Rehab Loan Program in 1976 with the primary purpose of improving and expanding the housing within the City of Englewood. Initially funds from the City ($90,000) and the State Housing Division ($40,000) were used to provide low-interest or deferred payment loans to low income (Loans of up to $5,000 to those on fixed income. Repayment occurs when the title of the property is transferred). In 1977, the City was granted a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) from the Federal government. The grant allowed the expansion of the loan program. One of the expansions was a $450,000 line of credit negotiated with a local bank consortium. This allowed the grant money to be used to subsidize the interest rates on loans made with bank money. Homeowners who fall within the Section 8 program income guidelines qualify for subsidized loans. (See Appendix A.) The lower the income the larger the subsidy. Those who do not fall within the low-income guidelines but live in one of the five target areas (Appendix B) still qualify for a loan; however, no subsidy is given from the grant money. In this type of loan only bank money is used. By allowing subsidized and unsubsidized loans in the areas identified as having high concentrations of substandard housing, an overall upgrading impact is anticipated. Another expansion made possible by the grant allowed more rehab work to be accomplished per case. A priority system of work items was developed ranging from items effecting the resident's health and safety to general property improvements . (Appendix C) Fund Status Since the program received CDBG funding, 48 loans have been made . (See Appendix D.) The following data is based on those 48 loans : • I • • - • ( • • • • Loan Funds Original bank line of vredit $450,000.00 Committed bank funds 12/31 /78 ($239,076.61) Remaining bank funds $210,923.39 Uncommitted funds received through loan payoffs $ 8,069.00 Total uncommitted bank funds $218,992.39 Subsidy Funds Original local grant Committed local funds 12/31 /78 Remaining local funds Original State grant Committed State funds Remaining State funds Original Federal CDBG grant Administration funds Committed Federal CDBG funds Remaining Federal CDBG funds Uncommitted funds through payoff Remaining uncommitted funds General Data Average unsubsidized loan Average subsidized loan Average subsidy Number of subsidized loans Number of unsubsidized loans $ 90,000.00 ($ 88,763 .13) $ 1,236.87 $ 40,000.00 ($ 35,000.00) $ 5,000.00 $150,000.00 ~ ($ 15,000.00) ($ 96,317.40) $ 6,896.80 $ 4,312.77 $ 3,274.04 34 (71%) 14 (29%) $ 38,682.50* $ 487.00 $ 45,406.37 (See Appendix D) (See Appendix D) *The Federal grant was originally projected to provide subsidies for loans for a two-year period. The program has been in operation for 1 1 /4 years and already 74% of the grant money has been committed. -2- • I • • • • • Future Funds According to our calculations 14 more subsidized loans will expend the available grant monies. Using our average of four loans per month, the loan subsidy facet of the program will end by May with approximately $71,000 remaining in the line of credit. The following table projects various additional lines of bank credit and the subsidy money required to continue the current rehab effort. BANK LINE OF CREDIT OPTIONS Possible New Total No. of Amount Remaining Line of Credit No. of SUbsidized Needed For 0Etion Bank Credit From the Bank Loans Loans Subsid~ I 2 3 4 $71,000 $ 16 16 $ 52,400 $71 '000 $200,000 73 44 $145,000 $71,000 $300,000 97 58 $190,500 $71 '000 $450,000 132 79 $258,900 The local banks have expressed a willingness to continue the program and negotiations for an additional line of credit have begun. An application to HUD is being prepared for an additional $190,500 to be used in subsidizing loans. -3- • • I . - • • ( • • • • APPENDIX A The figures below represent the new annual income limits for all Section 8 new, rehab and existing projects as of January 16, 1978. These limits, therefore, apply to the Simon Center, as well as our existing program. These limits are also used to determine eligibility for subsidy under the Rehabilitation Loan Program. No. of Low Income Very Low Persons Limits Income Limits 1 $ 9,900 $ 6,200 2 11,350 7,100 3 12,750 7,950 4 14,150 8,850 5 15,050 9,550 6 15,950 10' 250 7 16,800 10,950 8 17' 700 11,700 9 17' 700 11 '700 10 17' 700 11,700 -4- • I • • • • APPENDIX B (' EXISTING TARGET AREAS :::ity of Englewood Welle, r==.-,~ Boke r 1-==-=111-"1 • Approved Rehabilitation Projects • l -5- •I 1! . •I c A 0 ' ., ",.I ...:: c. .. c qo ~ .Z:Q: ... c > 't:o)lrnon FJuyll virwu IJ~ C IJ'• ~ I . ( • • • • APPENDIX C TYPE OF WORK Number Code 32 _%_ 67% (Most commonly electrical rewires, plumbing problems, etc .) Room Additions 20 42% Handicap Facilities 4 12.5% General Improvements 19 39.5% Roofing 4 8 % Cement work 2 4.2% Other 7 14.5% Weatherization 7 14 .5% (Includes insulating, storm windows and doors , etc.) Remodeling Existing Rooms 9 19% Garages 4 8 % -6- • I> I • • • • • APPENDIX D Amount of Amount of Amount Name Bank Loan Subsid~ Deferred (Unsu bsidized Loans) 2331 w. Warren $11,575.00 2144 W. Wesley 12,000.00 3020 s. Fox 12,000.00 2870 s. Bannock 1,396.00 3580 s. Bannock 9,759.00 2030 w. Harvard 8,000.00 4748 s. Cherokee 9,876.75 2337 W. Wesley 4,794.00 2822 s. Cherokee 12,000.00 4787 s. Galapago 4,411 .00 2357 w. Wesley 3,150.00 4782 s. Elati 741.75 2711 s. Cherokee 2,966.00 3709 s. Cherokee 3,704.00 (Subsidized Loans) 3245 s. Franklin 6,262.00 $2,253.00 4396 S·. :Grant 7,153. 00 2,847.00 4395 s. Elati 5,551.00 2,209.00 4110 s. Fox 5,060.75 1,526.00 3068 s. Grant 7,153.00 2,847.00 4545 s. Delaware 5,789.00 1,853.00 6290 s. Humboldt 2,220.00 1,180.00 D 2017 W. Wesley 8,621.00 1,379.00 4298 s. Pearl 2,267.00 487.00 2201 w. Warren 3,559.00 2,441.00 2881 s. Acoma 3,415.00 2,342.00 4200 s. Delaware 7,816.00 2,184.00 3018 s. Logan 7,816.00 2,184. 00 4385 s. Elati 3,976.00 1 '111. 00 2714 s. Cherokee 6,495.00 1,733.00 2268 w. Iliff 7,153.00 2,847.00 4334 s. Delaware 3,548.00 336.00 4756 s. Delaware 5,687.00 2,263.00 2928 s . Clarkson 7,141.76 2,841.24 4001 s. Elati 6,525.00 3,475.00 4033 s. Grant 3,421.00 1 '360.00 (Deferred Loans) 4895 s. Delaware 933.67 467.00 $5,000.00 3234 s. Washington 2,118.75 1,128.00 5,000.00* 4403 s. Acoma 3,577.00 1,423.00 5,000.00 2030 w. Adriatic 4,638 .10 3336 s. Pearl 509.75 81.00 5,000 .00* 2052 w. Iliff 2, 563.00 1,363.00 5,000 .00* I 2838 s. Clarkson 1,181.00 964.00 5,000.00 • • 2840 s. Clarkson 3,561.90 1 ,418.00 5,000.00 2352 w. Iliff 3,842.00 1,158.00 5,000.00 4289 s . Bannock 850.00 3274 s. Washington 1,756.13 2,560.62 5,000.00 3233 s. Washington 2 ,966.00 2,034.00 4,493.38* 2841 s. Delaware 21882.75 11534.44 51000.00 TOTALS ~ 239 1 07~ .6I $961317.90 $40,988.10 *Deferred portion comes from S,!f,!e grant money • • • • • APPENDIX E PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS Age Number _%_ Younger than 30 9 19% 31 to 62 26 54% Older than 62 13 27% Female Heads of Household Yes 17 35% No 31 65% Ethnic Origin Non-Minority 39 81 % Mexican-American 8 17% Black 1 2% Income Low 17 35.5% Very Low 17 35.5% Neither 14 29% CONCENTRATIONS OF WORK Ta!l{et Areas Census Tract Number .......L_ A (54.03) 13 27% B (57) 7 14.5% c (59) 0 0 % D (60) 2 4 % E (69) 5 10.5% Not in Target Area 21 44%* I • • ( *All Low Income -8- • •