The city of Pittsfield, Massachusetts, the seat of Berkshire County, is located near the New York-Massachusetts State line, about 35 miles east of Albany, New York, and 45 miles northwest of Springfield, Massachusetts. Pittsfield is the largest commun ity in west-central Massachusetts, and is the business center of the region. Located in the Berkshire Hills, the city's attractions include the Berkshire Music Festival, held south of the city at Tanglewood, and several nearby ski resorts. Pittsfield wa s founded in 1752, and for much of its history has been a busy manufacturing center, with factories producing textiles, paper and wood products, electrical goods, and plastics.
HUD's Consolidated Plan regulations require local governments to identify and describe housing and community development needs and priorities, and to establish a comprehensive 5-year strategy for addressing these needs using Federal and other resources. For fiscal year 1996, the first year of the plan, Pittsfield has applied for $1,950,000 in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding.
Pittsfield's Consolidated Plan was developed with considerable community input. The three main components were a survey, two neighborhood workshops, and two public hearings. In January 1995, about 1,500 surveys were distributed in two low-income neighbor hoods and in the Public Housing Authority's housing developments. Surveys were sent home with school children for their parents to complete, and were distributed door-to-door to family and elderly public housing residents. Survey forms were also mailed with the West Side Neighborhood Resource Center's newsletter, and distributed by a senior center to individuals using its services.
Neighborhood workshop meetings were held at Morningside and Conte Community Schools, which together serve most of the city's CDBG-eligible neighborhoods. These meetings were publicized by newspaper advertisements; two newspaper articles; fliers distribute d to school children; and by neighborhood stores, agencies, and city council members.
There were also two public hearings. One, held December 12, 1994, solicited public comment on Pittsfield's Housing and Community Development needs, and presented an overview of the Consolidated Plan process. The second hearing, on April 6, 1995, sought c itizens' views of the draft Consolidated Plan.
Pittsfield plans to hold two public hearings annually on the Consolidated Plan. The hearings will review program performance, obtain citizens' views on housing and community development needs, and present proposed new activities for comment.
For the past 20 years, the city of Pittsfield has experienced dramatic changes in its economy, with an overall decline in both manufacturing jobs and population. Historically, the city has been economically dependent upon the General Electric Company (GE ), with both GE's defense systems division headquarters and a plastics technology center located here. Portions of GE's Pittsfield operations were acquired by Martin Marietta (now Lockheed Martin), as part of a nationwide consolidation of the defense ind ustry.
In 1975 GE employed 10,900 workers in Pittsfield. By 1993 GE and Martin Marietta's combined employment had been reduced to 2,600; and 2,400 by 1994.
GE's downsizing and the loss of its high-paying manufacturing jobs were accompanied by a loss of population and a weakening of the local economy and the viability of the downtown. Between 1970 and 1990, Pittsfield's population dropped by 15 percent, from 57,020 to 48,622. As a result of several plant closings and the downsizing of remaining operations, manufacturing employment has declined. In 1980 one out of three jobs in Pittsfield and Berkshire County was in the manufacturing sector; by 1990 it had slipped to one in five.
Pittsfield is the commercial center of Berkshire County, housing the majority of the county's retail and office space. Nevertheless, commercial vacancy rates have risen as high as 30 percent and downtown Pittsfield has undergone a general decline. The r easons include increased commercial development in other parts of the city, retail development in neighboring towns, and the downturn in the national economy.
According to the 1990 census, Pittsfield's median family income was $38,006. There were 2,906 extremely low-income households (with incomes under $11,402 a year) and 2,306 low-income households (under $19,003 a year). Another 3,877 moderate-income househo
lds had annual incomes between $19,003 and $30,405 (from 51-80 percent of the city's median family income), while 1,814 were considered middle-income families with incomes of $30,406 to $36,105 (81-85 percent of median family income). Minority population
s were concentrated in census tract 9006, where 45 percent of the total black population and 45 percent of other minorities lived.
During the citizen participation process, social workers indicated that the two current and future highest priority housing-related needs are rent subsidies for extremely low- and low-income renters, and housing rehabilitation for both rental units and ow ner-occupied housing. Other needs identified by citizen input include lead paint removal with emphasis on rental housing, more affordable rental housing for the working poor, and solving the problem of vacant and dilapidated buildings in Pittsfield.
The 1990 census reported that Pittsfield had 21,272 year-round housing units. Of the 19,916 occupied units, 8,054 (40 percent) were rentals and 11,862 (60 percent) were owner occupied. The vacancy rate for rental units was 7.25 percent in 1990. Some le nders, however, reported multifamily rental vacancy rates ranging from 10-20 percent, depending upon property condition and/or location. High vacancy rates have also been attributed to crime. On the West Side, an increase in drug-related activity has pr ompted some households to move from the area and is making it difficult for owners to rent or sell vacant housing.
The residential resale price trend has been downward. The County Board of Realtors identified 398 residential structures for sale in Pittsfield as of August 1993. The average sale price that month was $95,137, compared to $109,000 in August 1992.
The city estimates that 25 percent (5,318) of Pittsfield's 21,272 year-round housing units are substandard, defined as violating one or more of the HUD Section 8 Housing Quality Standards. Of these, 98 percent (5,212) are suitable for rehabilitation.
The supply of lead-free housing is considered insufficient to meet the need. According to the 1990 census, there were 3,861 families with children under the age of 6, but only 1,796 housing units built after 1979 that could be considered lead free.
Citywide there is an increasing number of vacant and abandoned residential structures. This is due in part to the owners' inability to rent the housing, with the loss of rental income eventually leading to the loss of ownership. Lending institutions rep ort an increase in "real estate owned," foreclosed properties, or those surrendered by the owner. There is also a significant number of vacant HUD-owned homes.
An analysis of Pittsfield's "fair market rents" (FMRs), as determined by HUD for rental assistance purposes within this market, indicates that if a family's income is equal to or less than 50 percent of the city's median family income of $38,005, rents at FMR level are not affordable. Households are considered "cost-burdened" if they pay more than 30 percent of their income for housing. There are many cost-burdened households in Pittsfield. The city's 1994 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Study repo rts that an average of 64 percent of the extremely low-income renter households pay more than 30 percent of their income for housing, as do 73 percent of low-income renter households.
Although there is a sufficient inventory of homes for sale at more affordable prices than a few years ago, lenders report impediments to first-time ownership. These include the lack of a downpayment, credit problems, and the inability to meet lending deb t ratios. There is need for programs that provide assistance with downpayments and counseling for buyers.
A homeless person is defined as one who is sleeping in shelters or in places not meant for human habitation. The 1990 census reported 28 sheltered homeless individuals in Pittsfield, but a "point in time" count on October 19, 1993, found a total of 53 sh eltered homeless. This included 10 families with children and 24 individuals. There is no known reliable count of unsheltered homeless persons. Arrangements for homeless include a battered women's shelter that accepts women with children, a family hom eless shelter, and Red Cross provisions for homeless individuals at local motels, the YMCA, and the Robbins Inn at the Christian Center.
Providers report that basic needs are met but there is a need to upgrade the quality of existing facilities, a need for a "stepped approach" to take families from shelters to transitional housing to supported housing and eventually to self-sufficiency, an d a need for transitional housing and for subsidized permanent housing.
Households threatened with homelessness are mainly those whose incomes are less than 30 percent of median income, and severely "cost-burdened" households who are paying 50 percent or more of their income for housing. Social service providers say the most important needs for households threatened with homelessness are rental assistance and continued support service programs for extremely low- and low-income households, especially renters.
The city's inventory of public housing is 746 units, all of which are owned and managed by the Pittsfield Housing Authority (PHA). Though overall condition of these units is very good, the PHA reports a need to continue modernization, including updating k itchens and baths, and modifying units to improve accessibility for handicapped persons. Other public housing needs include conversion of some apartments for handicapped accessibility, an improved rent collection system, better preventive maintenance, an d continued Drug Awareness Resistance Education (DARE).
As of August 1993, there were 1,491 Section 8 assisted housing units in Pittsfield. The PHA administers 515 subsidies. Berkshire Housing Services, Inc., administers 738 subsidies, Druker Company another 75, and Dalton Housing Associates handles 18.
The size of current waiting lists indicates continuing need for more public and assisted housing units. The Pittsfield Housing Authority maintains separate lists, totaling 692 applicants as of July 1993, for Federal public housing, Section 8 rental assis tance, and State-funded public housing. New applications are not being accepted. Berkshire Housing Services, Inc., maintains waiting lists for Section 8 assistance. There is an estimated 50 percent duplication rate between PHA's and Berkshire Housing Se rvices' lists. The greatest need is for 2-bedroom housing--84 percent of those on the PHA's lists are waiting for 2-bedroom units.
The city recognizes a need to create and modify some existing policies to promote affordable housing. Local development standards should be reevaluated to encourage affordability. The city needs to continue working with private housing providers to expa nd opportunities for homeownership.
Within the city of Pittsfield, fair housing and tenant/landlord counseling needs are served by the Berkshire County Regional Housing Authority and the Fair Housing Officer of the city's Department of Community Development. Available services include assi stance in processing fair housing discrimination complaints, distribution of a fair housing book, a "hotline" service for questions regarding housing laws and issues, legal counseling for housing issues, mediation services, educational workshops for landl ords and tenants, and landlord/tenant matching services.
The recent Citizen Participation Survey indicates, however, that Pittsfield residents assign a very low priority to counseling on both fair housing and tenant/landlord matters compared to such issues as crime prevention and vacant buildings. However, the need is more apparent to social service agencies. The city's Fair Housing Officer, for example, handles 200 inquiries a year, and the Berkshire County Regional Housing Authority reported providing housing counseling or negotiation services to 540 Pittsf ield residents and 120 landlords during the past year.
The Consolidated Plan cautions, though, that funding for the housing counseling programs of the Berkshire County Regional Housing Authority is "questionable" after June 1996. This agency is the primary source of housing counseling services for Pittsfield residents. Funding for these services comes from the Massachusetts Homeless Intercept Program.
Lead-based paint currently represents the foremost environmental hazard in Pittsfield's housing stock. According to estimates, 75 percent (15,910) of the city's 21,272 housing units contain lead-based paint (LBP). This is primarily because most of Pitts field's housing was constructed before LBP was banned in 1979. Half of the city's housing units were built before 1940. Of the units containing LBP, 45 percent (7,231) are estimated to be occupied by extremely low- and low-income households.
There is a distinction between the mere presence of LBP and LBP hazards (e.g., peeling, flaking, or chalking LBP; LBP on accessible surfaces that a small child could mouth or chew). The city estimates that 1,860 rental units may contain a lead-based paint hazard. The estimate is based upon both the age of the units and the income level of the tenants; 1,860 extremely low- and low-income renter households are living in housing built before 1940.
Because of the Pittsfield area's long dependence upon a few industries that have declined over the past 20 years, economic development is a very important part of the city's community development needs. A 1993 "Overall Economic Development Program for Be rkshire County, Massachusetts," outlines the goal of ". . . evolution from an economy based primarily upon a few major employers to an economy comprised of a broad array of economic sectors . . . and a wide array of businesses . . ." Redevelopment of dow ntown Pittsfield is an important element in the city's economic development effort. Once the region's primary retail shopping area, downtown Pittsfield must be transformed by creating facilities that will draw people downtown for recreational, entertainme nt, and cultural purposes. Parking facilities are a critical factor in attracting people downtown, whether for business or fun. Parking for any downtown destination (except for a few stores with their own parking) is seldom perceived as "convenient." T here is a need to expand downtown parking to enhance viability of the vacant and underutilized properties there.
Other economic development needs include rehabilitation of commercial and industrial properties. Almost half of the commercial office and retail space in Downtown Pittsfield is unoccupied (1,050,000 square feet). Another 1,000,000 square feet are occupi ed by institutional, government, religious, and cultural tenants. Rehabilitating vacant downtown space must include improving handicapped access; new Federal requirements for accessibility make this a mandatory consideration for new tenants. To obtain n ew and better jobs for residents, Pittsfield must be able to accommodate new businesses. This will require rehabilitation of existing commercial properties, existing sites ready for construction, and developing more industrial and business park space.
Community development needs include continued public works activities, such as rebuilding sidewalks in lower income neighborhoods, rehabilitating community parks, and neighborhood planning to coordinate future work. The Consolidated Plan notes that in pa
st years, the city has used CDBG funds to refurbish most of the eligible parks and streets. The plan notes, though, that several parks and other facilities in neighborhoods not eligible for CDBG funds need renewal and suggests that available non-CDBG fun
ds be reserved for necessary work outside of CDBG-eligible neighborhoods.
The city has assigned a high priority to cost-burdened and severely cost-burdened renter households, and proposes to address their plight by applying for additional Federal rental assistance subsidies. The Pittsfield Housing Authority and Berkshire Housi ng Services, Inc., are the two organizations that receive and administer rent subsidies. Together, these two entities are expected to apply for 30 new subsidies each year, or 150 over the course of 5 years. Substandard housing is another priority, and w ill be addressed primarily through a CDBG-funded housing rehabilitation program, serving both renters and homeowners, to include abatement of lead hazards. The city contains a record number (127) of vacant and abandoned buildings, many the result of a fa iling economy and lender foreclosures, frequently reverting to HUD ownership. The plan to reduce this serious blight problem includes demolishing about 15 structures over the next 2 years, funding staff positions for a Vacant Buildings Coordinator and a C ode Enforcement Inspector, and establishing a loan pool to fund rehabilitation of other abandoned buildings.
Neighborhood planning is a priority need that will include evaluation and development of appropriate housing programs and crime prevention planning efforts. Homeless needs are assigned only a medium priority, primarily because there is a strong referral system for known homeless persons. However, the city intends to seek strategic planning funds in the first 2 years to assess the entire problem of delivering services to homeless persons.
Over the next 5 years, the city intends to continue the existing Lead Paint Removal Program, providing grants to abate units for low-income households. CDBG funds at $160,000 a year are available. Educational workshops on lead-based paint for landlords and tenants will continue, and the Pittsfield Health Department will continue to enforce State lead-testing requirements for school entry.
For city parks, the priorities are to complete rehabilitation of CDBG-eligible parks already underway (years 1-2), to rehabilitate any remaining CDBG-eligible parks warranting rehabilitation (years 2-5), to continue Riverway planning and implementation, a nd to establish CDBG-eligibility for three other parks, if possible. For public works, priorities include continuing reconstruction of sidewalks (approximately 4,000 linear feet a year), and planting about 125 shade trees a year in various neighborhoods. The highest priority for neighborhood facilities is moving the West Side Neighborhood Resource Center (which contains a police substation) to a larger and more permanent location. The Center's success and the need for expansion warrants the move.
For parking facilities, the highest priority this year is to acquire the vacant commercial buildings scattered in the same block as the First Street Parking Lot, for lot expansion purposes. The city will also acquire and demolish a HUD-owned house on Sey mour Street and pave the lot to create off-street parking and ease the neighborhood parking shortage.
The following priorities were established for human services: (1) utilize CDBG monies and city general revenues to continue to fund various human service agencies at a level of $300,000 to $400,000 a year; (2) study the city's current system of delivering human services and assess facility needs. Highest priority for crime prevention is strategic planning and needs assessment for the Morningside neighborhood, which the Police Department feels is "at risk." Budget for this planning and assessment is incl uded in neighborhood planning.
Accessibility needs priorities include continuation of the Department of Community Development's annual curb cut construction program, a grant program to help nonprofit organizations comply with Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements, a low-in terest loan program to assist landlords of older buildings in meeting ADA accessibility requirements, and similar improvements to public buildings.
The first priority for downtown development is completion of activities already underway. The Consolidated Plan notes that subsequent planned activities are very dependent upon results of activities currently underway. Feasibility studies for restoratio n of the Colonial Theatre and for a proposed Business Meeting/Conference Center are priorities 2 and 3. For commercial rehabilitation, the first priority is the ADA Accessibility Revolving Loan Program to eliminate problems for property owners, especiall y downtown, who have difficulty retaining or attracting tenants because their buildings lack handicapped accessibility. This loan program is budgeted with other accessibility activities. For industrial rehabilitation and infrastructure, the intent is to begin (by year 2) planning for the next Pittsfield industrial park. The first phase would involve assessing potential locations, starting with a review of past studies, progressing to a full study, then to a planning and feasibility study of the propose d location. A loan program for small and micro businesses is to continue, matched with other private and public funding, and administered by the Pittsfield Economic Revitalization Corporation (PERC).
The antipoverty strategy continues through programs offered by various organizations that are designed to help reduce the number of households with incomes below the poverty level. Pittsfield's Department of Community Development (DCD), in cooperation wi th the University of Massachusetts and the Association for Basic Community Development & Education, runs an Economic Empowerment Program to train low-income minority entrepreneurs. This effort is funded by a 2-year HUD grant. Economic development loans for small businesses (above), Small Business Administration (SBA) Section 504 loans, and block grants are offered through DCD, cooperating with PERC, and the Western Massachusetts Enterprise Fund.
Other antipoverty programs include vocational rehabilitation by the Massachusetts Rehabilitation Commission, Jobs Employment and Training Program by the State's Department of Public Welfare, work experience and training by the Berkshire Training and Emplo yment Program, and training for dislocated workers by Berkshire Enterprises (operated by the University of Massachusetts).
Coordination of development of the Consolidated Plan was carried out by the Department of Community Development. The delivery of Pittsfield's housing, community development, and human services programs are conducted by social service providers (mostly no nprofits), public and private housing providers, local government, and quasi-public nonprofit organizations. There is a high level of intergovernmental cooperation (i.e., State of Massachusetts agencies, Berkshire County, and the city of Pittsfield), and a significant level of cooperation and interagency support among the area's social service organizations. Pittsfield also has many committees such as the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee, Human Services Advisory Committee, Vacant Housing Task Group , and Parks Commission.
At the intragovernmental level, there is a history of collaboration between city departments and with community groups. The Department of Community Development, for example, has long worked with community groups, the Parks Commission, Parks Department st
aff, handicapped advocacy groups, and the Police Department on the design of parks. It is anticipated that high levels of coordination and cooperation will continue.
During 1995 the city of Pittsfield proposes to use the CDBG allocation of $1,950,000 (plus $440,000 of related funds, such as loan repayments and lease income) on 39 housing, community development, economic development, and human services efforts. Import ant CDBG allocations to improve the city's stock of low- to moderate-income housing include:
Significant community development projects to be funded include:
Planned economic development programs, with the objective of creating new jobs for low-to-moderate-income workers include:
Funding includes $310,000 of CDBG money and $65,000 in city general funds to 27 human services agencies providing services to Pittsfield residents.
To prepare for future improvement efforts, $55,000 is to be set aside for studies in the following three areas: downtown planning, neighborhood planning, and human services planning.
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.
MAP 6 is a map, sectioned by neighborhood, which depicts points of interest, low-moderate income areas, unemployment levels, and proposed HUD funded projects.
MAP 7 depicts points of interest, low-moderate income areas, unemployment levels, and proposed HUD funded projects within one of the four neighborhoods indicated in MAP 6.
MAP 8 depicts points of interest, low-moderate income areas, unemployment levels, and proposed HUD funded projects within another of the four neighborhoods indicated in MAP 6.
MAP 9 depicts points of interest, low-moderate income areas, unemployment levels, and proposed HUD funded project(s) from a street level vantage point; in addition, a table provides information about the project(s).
Andre Tremoulet
Commissioner of Community and Economic Development
413-499-9368
