The Consortium cities of Fitchburg and Leominster (combined population: 100,080) together constitute the urban center of North Central Massachusetts. Both cities have experienced a significant increase in the minority population from 1980 to 1990, the largest increase occurring in the Asian population Largely blue collar, the communities' workforce is primarily employed in the manufacturing industries followed, first, by wholesale and retail trade and, second, by professional services.
This Consolidated Plan proposes to use a total of $2,698,402 of Community Development Block Grant ($1,602,402 in Fitchburg and $573,000 in Leominster) and HOME consortium funding($523,000). Of the CDBG total, $535,000 will be used for public facilities and improvements and $755,400 will be used for housing activities including rehabilitation, code enforcement and weatherization. Other projects include public services, economic development and demolition.
The Fitchburg Office of the Planning Coordinator and the Leominster Office
of Planning and Development consulted with area agencies, groups, organizations
and others for the purpose of soliciting information relative to the overall
housing and community development needs of the respective City and the
development of the Plan. In Fitchburg, a Provider's Meeting was held on January
11, 1995 and Public Hearings were held on January 17 and April 18, 1995. In
Leominster, Public Hearings were held on January 31 and February 28, 1995.
Additional consultation in order to identify more detailed housing needs within
the Consortium was conducted with the Fitchburg Housing Authority and the
Leominster Housing Authority. In addition to verbal comments, written comments
on the Plan were solicited by including a Public Comment Form with the Fitchburg
CDBG application package which was mailed to nearly ninety organizations and
individuals representing a wide cross section of interests within the City and
surrounding towns.
The neighboring cities of Fitchburg and Leominster joined together to form a HOME Consortium in April of 1993. The consortium represents one of the more significant cooperative efforts between the two cities. The two cities are close in population (Fitchburg 41,194 vs. Leominster 38,145) and in size (27.8 square miles vs. 28.1 square miles). Other similar demographics include median age (31 vs. 32 years old), persons per household (2.54), number of families, and influx of minority populations over the course of the 10 years between 1980 and 1990.
Driving along the main streets which link the two cities of Fitchburg and Leominster one hardly notices where one city begins and one city ends. However, a closer look reveals that the percentage of families living below the poverty level are double in Fitchburg (14%) than Leominster (7.2%). These statistics are also reflected in the difference in median household income ($35,974 vs. $27,101) and educational attainment. About 75% of adults over the age of 25 who live in Leominster hold a high school degree compared to 68% in Fitchburg; 19% of Leominster residents hold at least a bachelor's degree compared to 13% in Fitchburg.
The 1990 U.S. Census reports that 11,299 (11%) of Consortium residents are over 65 years of age or older, 3,700 (4%) are 75 years of age or older and 1,326 (1.3%) are 85 years of age or older. As described above, the Consortium has a higher percentage of elders than the statewide average. A comparison with the 1980 U.S. Census indicates that the number of elders over 65 years of age has increased by 1,252 although this group remained at approximately the same percentage of the total population. Of this increase, more than two thirds of the growth are attributed to Leominster residents.
Although the overall population of the Consortium has increased by 7%, the
most significant increases from 1980 to 1990 have been in the minority
communities. The white population actually decreased slightly (-2%). The
largest increase is in the Asian population (310%), followed by Hispanics
(191%), Blacks (93%) and Native Americans (54%).
An analysis of the data in the 1990 census indicates the need for financial relief and remedial action to resolve housing problems particularly among the extremely low income homeowner. This assistance may be needed for the landlord/home owner whose rental units have gone vacant and are in need of both rehabilitation and rental income. Elderly owner households are the most severely impacted by cost burdens of the low income.
The Fitchburg Housing Authority, Leominster Housing Authority and Rural Housing, Inc. report that the demand for large family units (3 or more bedrooms) is the largest single factor influencing the current composition of their waiting lists.
The growth in the economy and in the housing market which occurred in Massachusetts during the 1980's caused dramatic changes in the Consortium housing market. Between 1980 and 1988, the median price of a home increased by more than 300%, while rents increased by more than 200%. This increase in housing costs was not matched, however, by corresponding increases in median household income levels. As a result, an affordability gap of significant proportion developed which made it more difficult to meet the housing needs of the low and moderate income residents. Costs have since moderated significantly as a result of the decline in real estate values but housing affordability still remains a significant barrier due to the loss of income from the stagnant economic conditions.
The volatile housing market has also had a serious impact on the housing inventory in the Consortium. During the peak of market activity, many multifamily rental properties were purchased by investor/owners at very high loan to value ratios and with inflated value appraisals. Lower income families were displaced by families who could afford the higher rents required to amortize the increased debt on the properties. Many of these properties have now been foreclosed, and some have been abandoned. Almost all of abandoned properties are in Fitchburg, which now has a surplus of rental housing and a vacancy rate ranging to 20% in lower income neighborhoods.
According to the 1990 Census, the Consortium has a total of 33,596 housing units in Fitchburg and Leominster. Less than half of these units contain 3 or more bedrooms, while fewer than a third contain two bedrooms and 17% have 0 or 1 bedroom. Slightly over half of the housing stock are owner-occupied. Condominium housing units account for 1,712 units or about 5% of the housing units. Close to 1.5% of the total housing units lack either complete plumbing and/or kitchen facilities; 2.86% indicate no telephone in unit.
Since the compilation of the 1990 census, economic conditions in Massachusetts and in the Consortium region have deteriorated significantly, and as a result, the housing market has continued to experience a value deflation. While some decline in market was necessary in order to bring stability to prices, the cycle of rapid escalation followed by an equally rapid downturn has made it more difficult for housing providers to respond to these changes. Many investor-owned multifamily properties are in foreclosure, and abandonment of rental housing has become a serious municipal problem. These market conditions are combined with a very high vacancy rate.
A significant portion of the Consortium's housing stock can be considered substandard. The Consortium considers a property to be substandard if a violation in one of the following standards exists: State Sanitary Code, State Building Code, or Housing Quality Standards (HQS). Using this definition, at least 65% of the rental housing stock and 20% of the owner housing stock is considered substandard.
More than one quarter (25%) of the total households identified in the 1990 census are considered low income with income below 51% of the Median Family Income (MFI). Close to 60% of these households are extremely low income, with income below 30% of the MFI. Almost all the large related renter households at the very low income level report a severe cost burden greater than 50%; more than three quarters of the small related renter households also show a severe cost burden, compared to one quarter of the elderly 1 and 2 member renter households and half of all the other renter households. About 70% of the low income renter households also experience housing cost burden problems.
About half of the low income small, large and other renter households cite housing problems. One quarter of the large related renter households show severe cost burden as compared to half of the small related and other renter households. Of the owners, 43% of the elderly show severe cost burdens while not even a third of all other owners show a cost burden.
As expected, the higher the household income, the less the cost burden. Only 21% of all other owners have a severe cost burden although 65% of the elderly owners have a cost burden of >30%. No moderate income renters reported severe cost burdens >50%. Relatively more moderate income owner households (49%) showed cost burden than low income owner household (28%)
The Consortiums main homeless services providers are : Valiton Shelter for homeless adults - the only "wet" shelter in the City, Our Father's House emergency shelter for homeless adults and transitional program for adults in recovery, Women's Resources shelter for battered women and their children and LUK shelters and transitional housing program for youth.
According to the CARE Services Project, the only program in the Consortium area to provide services to individuals with HIV and AIDS, 108 individuals from the Consortium sought supportive services in 1994. While these people are housed, they are threatened with homelessness as their physical condition deteriorates and financial resources wane. They are typically living in sub-standard conditions, are on some type of public assistance and present with a high percentage of substance abuse and mental illness. Posing a particular challenge to the local housing services are the children who face the threat of homelessness when a parent with AIDS dies.
According to Our Father's House, the only program in the Consortium to specifically serve homeless singles, 803 individuals were turned away from their emergency shelter due to lack of space. Information is not available as to where or whether these people ultimately did find shelter. Of those 803 individuals, 57% had substance abuse and/or mental illness issues. Unless these problems are addressed they face a continued threat of homelessness.
The two Housing Authorities in the Consortium operate a combined total of 1,404 units of state-assisted public housing with the majority of the units being for the elderly (70%). In general, units in Fitchburg are in need of various repairs. The Fitchburg Housing Authority is in the process of de-leading forty five units, thirty of which are currently vacant. The other fifteen apartments are occupied by families with no children under the age of seven. The FHA has received approval for over $2.5 million in State funding and $312,000 in HUD funding for modernization and rehabilitation needs and to comply with ADA standards. In Leominster, the family units are old, worn and in need of new kitchens, baths and windows. They have seen little modernization since the early 50's. The elderly units in Leominster are in better condition but buildings still need new roofs. Refrigerators are more than 20 years old and need to be replaced. Very small percentages of the units meet ADA standards and extensive renovation would be required for conformity. Over 1000 people are currently active on consortium waiting lists for public housing.
Major barriers have been the scarcity, competitiveness and administrative complexity of funding sources which impede the effective implementation of housing programs, the small size of local housing authorities which limits their ability to work on concurrent projects, and the difficulty in securing financial loans for investor owners of rental properties. Property tax limitations imposed by Massachusetts Proposition 2 ½, cutbacks in local aid commitments from the state and its inclusionary housing policies regarding the allowance of tax exempt low income and special needs housing vs. the relatively exclusionary housing policies of contiguous communities are factors resulting in inadequate levels of municipal revenue to provide adequate public service to citizens.
City officials estimate that approximately 65% of the older rental stock which is principally occupied by low income or very low income households is contaminated with lead paint. This poses a major health hazard to children under the are of 7 years, and is also a major violation of the Massachusetts State Sanitary Code. Interviews with community agencies and social service providers documented lead paint hazards as a major housing problem for the Consortium. The costs of deleading a unit can run as high as $5000.00, which is prohibitively expensive for most small landlords. In addition, the financial institutions in the community will not lend to investor-owners, particularly when deleading is involved.
Fitchburg is a mature urban city which was principally developed through its mill industries before the turn of the century. As a consequence of its early development, much of the City's infrastructure, particularly its streetscapes, parks, playgrounds, and water and sewer distribution systems are inadequate and in poor condition.
The Fitchburg-Leominster Labor Market Area has a history of higher than average unemployment. The recent economic decline throughout the Northeast has particularly impacted older urban areas like Fitchburg. The area's industrial base remains heavily committed to the plastic and paper industries which account for a significant share of manufacturing employment, but which have been in decline for many years. Efforts to attract new investment have been significantly impaired by the limited highway access of most of the city to Route 2 and Interstate 190.
A high percentage of municipal, residential, commercial and industrial
budgets is being committed to the cost of energy. At the same time, the
knowledge of and financial means to implement cost effective energy efficiency
improvements are often lacking.
The Consortium has identified the following housing priorities:
The Consortium has identified the following non-housing community development priorities:
The city of Fitchburg will address the issues of homelessness, transitional housing needs, drug abuse prevention, youth services and economic development, all of which can be associated in part with poverty, through its CDBG program activities. The City continues on an ongoing basis to work with several local anti-poverty agencies to address the availability of resources to combat poverty issues.
In late 1992, the Leominster City Council adopted a Growth Management Plan to address social services needs in the community. The plan's goal is to encourage, promote and assist the human service agencies in the City in order to reduce the number of households with incomes below the poverty line.
In addition to CDBG and HOME program funding the consortium will receive or anticipates it will submit requests for funding under the following programs: Federal Programs- HUD Section 108, HUD Joint Community Development Program, HUD 203K, EPA Brownfields Economic Redevelopment Initiative, Urban Park and Recreation Recovery, Urban Self Help. Non-Federal Programs- Mass Rental Voucher, Mass Housing Stabilization Fund, Mass community Development Action Grant, Mass Public Works Economic Development Grant, City of Fitchburg Revolving Demolition Fund, City of Fitchburg Water Enterprise Fund and various private resources leveraged through CDBG funded projects.
The social service providers and housing agencies which provide services to those at risk and in need in Fitchburg currently meet on a regular basis to discuss common issues and concerns in a variety of settings. The CRA Coalition includes members from financial institutions, nonprofit agencies, and local government. Their goals encompass facilitating partnerships, better communicating among diverse members, and improving understanding of roles and goals among banks, community groups and government. In Fitchburg, representatives from social service and neighborhood organizations participate in monthly meetings of the Fitchburg Safe and Healthy Neighborhood Coalition. This group promotes safe and healthy neighborhoods that produce individual and community well-being through neighborhood empowerment.
In Leominster, the city plans to take the following actions to enhance
coordination: Establish a Human Service Advisory Committee; Maintain a
directory of social service providers; Appoint a liaison to work with social
service agencies and the human service advisory committee.
In Fitchburg:
In Leominster:
Proposed activities are targeted primarily, in both Fitchburg and Leominster, for the respective CDBG Strategy Area, a principally low and moderate income sector in each City, designated with the use of U.S. Census data, which comprises several older City neighborhoods. These areas contain the highest concentrations of minority populations and of substandard multi unit housing
The Fitchburg Office of the Planning Coordinator and the Leominster Office of Planning and Development oversee the development of the Consolidated Plan and administer their respective Community Development Grant programs. The City of Fitchburg Office of the Planning Coordinator is the lead city in the HOME Consortium agreement.
| Fitchburg: | ||
| Name of Project | Proposed Accomplishments | |
|---|---|---|
| Housing Rehabilitation Staffing | 70 Housing Units | |
| Troubled Properties | 50 Households | |
| Housing Ownership Opportunity Program | 12 Housing Units | |
| Housing Improvement Program | 48 Housing Units | |
| HOME | 37 Housing Units | |
| Leominster: | ||
| Housing Rehabilitation | 25 Housing Units |
MAP 2 depicts points of interest and low-moderate income areas.
MAP 3 depicts points of interest, low-moderate income areas, and minority concentration levels.
MAP 4 depicts points of interest, low-moderate income areas, and unemployment levels.
MAP 5 depicts points of interest, low-moderate income areas, unemployment levels, and proposed HUD funded projects; in addition, a table depicts information about the project(s).
MAP 6 depicts Neighborhood Segments and streets with proposed HUD funded projects.
