The seat of Kent County in central southwest Michigan, Grand Rapids lies in a valley 30 miles east of Lake Michigan. It was settled in 1826, and ten years later cabinetmaker William Haldane established the first of the many furniture factories that would bring the city recognition as the furniture capital of America. The economy of Grand Rapids now encompasses manufacturing plants, producing office supplies, pollution control equipment, office furniture , and many other manufactures, including carpet sweepers. In the center of a major fruit growing area, the City has many fruit processing plants. Specialized kinds of health care, such as burn care, special surgery, and poison control, are being developed in Grand Rapids on a large scale.
The Grand Rapids Consolidated Plan includes a one-year Action Plan for the expenditure of $6,000,000 in Community Development Block Grant funds (which includes the FY 96 appropriation of $4,921,000, $750,000 of program income and $329,000 of previously granted funds); $1,429,000 in HOME Investment Partnerships Program funds; $1,072,000 in Emergency Shelter Grants Program (ESG) funds.
For the purposes of seeking public input on housing and community development needs and priorities for the new HCD Plan, the City held a public hearing on the evening of July 12, 1994 and hosted two public meetings at neighborhood locations. The Public Hearing and Public Meetings were advertised in the Grand Rapids Press, the Grand Rapids Advance, the Grand Rapids Times, Afro-American Gazette, and El Hispano between July 1 and July 9, 1995 and between July 29 and August 3, 1995 respectively. Approximately 380 individuals, community representatives, and organizational representatives were also notified by mail. Over 500 flyers were also distributed to residents of Grand Rapids Public Housing complexes, and 250 flyers to residents through neighborhood-based police officers. Flyers were also posted at business locations. Public service announcements about the meetings were broadcast on several local radio stations and the local government cable television channel.
The neighborhood meetings on August 10, 1994 were co-sponsored by the Kent County and Wyoming Community Development Departments. Representatives of the CDCC and Grand Rapids Housing Commission also served as panel members to hear and assess comments. Two meetings were also held on September 19 and 20, 1994 to solicit specific input by Community Development Block Grant-funded agencies and neighborhood associations. A public hearing on performance of the Community Development Block Grant was held on September 13. The Draft Five-Year HCD Strategy was completed in early October, 1994 and was available for public comment from October 6, 1994 through November 4, 1994. The Grand Rapids City Commission approved the strategy in principle, and the twelve HCD priorities specifically, on November 15, 1994.
The Action Plan was developed based upon the Five-Year Strategy and HCD priorities, extensive citizen input, and the results of proposal solicitations. The Community Development Citizens' Committee engaged in an intensive review and deliberation process to recommend CDBG projects for funding.
The draft Five-Year HCD Strategy and FY 95-96 Annual Action
Plan was
available for public comment from March 15, 1995 through April
14, 1995. A
public hearing on the plan was held April 11, 1995. The City
Commission
approved funding allocations for the CDBG, HOME, and ESG Programs
on April 25,
1995. The final FY 1996-2000 Housing and Community Development
Strategy and the
FY 1995-96 Action Plan was approved by the City Commission on May
2, 1995.
Assisted by large land annexations in the 1960s, Grand Rapids comprised the majority of the Kent County urbanization as of 1970. The 68,100 dwellings within the City were 52.2% of the county's total stock; the City's 63,500 households were 51.3% of the County total. Despite the somewhat larger number of households, Grand Rapids' total population fell behind that of the rest of the county, 197,650 to 213,400.
During the 1970s, Kent County as a whole attained a population growth of 8.1% to total 444,506 persons. More dramatic were the increases in housing stock (up 25.4% to 163,450 units) and in households (up to 25.7% to 155,600). Employment expanded even more, from 156,360 to 202,825 persons, a rise of nearly 30%. However, the City of Grand Rapids experienced little of this growth. The City's housing stock increased about 2.5% and the number of households about 3.2%. Ironically, despite the continuing increase in the number of households, the City actually lost population; a decline from 197,650 to 181,850 persons was a loss of 8%.
The 1980 Census showed that persons of various racial minorities increased to 34,675 persons, nearly 20% of the City's population. This represented about 85% of Kent county's total minority population. By 1980, differences in income between the City and the rest of the County were widely evident. City households reported a median income of $15,450, while the remainder of the County's household achieved a median income of about $20,845.
U.S. Census data for the 1990 indicate that Grand Rapids and Kent county experienced exceptional changes from 1980. while Michigan grew by 0.4%, Kent County added 56,125 persons, an increases of 12.6% for the decade. The City of Grand Rapids increased by nearly 7,300 persons, a 4.0% increase.
By 1990, several major demographic trends affecting Grand
Rapids also became
evident in the remainder of Kent County. The percentage of City
households
owning their own home declined to about 60% of City households,
and 75% in the
rest of the County. Single- persons households increased to 27%
of the City and
to nearly 21% of out-County households. The percentage of
families with
children headed by females also increased to 30.8% of City
households and 14% of
households in the rest of the County. A significant difference
between the City
and the County in 1990 was the incidence of poverty. In the
out-county, the
percentage of persons in poverty dropped to 5.1%; within Grand
Rapids, the
poverty population increased to 16.1%. Poverty within Grand
Rapids became
increasingly a burden on children and was less likely to affect
elderly persons.
For many years, Grand Rapids was the country's foremost producer of residential furniture. By the mid-20th century, Grand Rapid's manufacturing base had diversified to include automotive components, technical instruments, chemicals, brass and other foundry metals, as well as institutional and office furniture, currently the region's largest industry. In the 1950s and early 1960s, the City undertook a series of land annexations, bringing the incorporated land area close to today's approximately 45 square miles.
While this land annexation has enabled extensive residential, industrial, and commercial development in the City over the past thirty years, most of the area's new manufacturing capacity has been built outside of Grand Rapids proper. The City has repositioned itself as the institutional, financial, and cultural services center to the metropolitan region. The City's employment base likewise has shifted toward professional and service industries. As of 1990, the major employers located inside Grand Rapids included hospitals, schools and post secondary education facilities, financial institutions, and various levels of government, as well as office furniture and related manufacturing. The City of Grand Rapids is the second largest city in Michigan and is also the central City of Michigan's largest metropolitan area outside of the Detroit/Southeast Michigan area.
Rental assistance and rehabilitation are the primary needs. Affordability of rental housing for low income families is a critical need in Grand Rapids. The demand for assisted family rental units remains very high.
The existing stock of rental housing appears to be in sufficient quantity and size to provide a varied inventory of units to the renter population. Indeed rental vacancies are quite high, and have been consistently high (around 9%) in the GTA since 1970. Although overcrowding is more likely to affect large families, it appears to be more related to the buying power of the individual family than to the characteristics of the housing stock.
Although the condition of the housing stock varies by structure and geographic area, the housing within the GTA is older than the rest of the City, with 26% of its structures (approximately 6600) showing major or minor deterioration.
Low income renter families have exceedingly high cost burdens for shelter. Family size is not terribly relevant to cost burdens for shelter. Although it might be expected that more large families have problems than small families, large families have slightly lower incidence of cost burden. The extent of cost burden is typically dictated by the amount of income. Out of 4,256 households, for example, 89.7% of small family extremely low income (0-30% of MFI) and 89.1% of large family extremely low income pay more 30% of their income on shelter. This represents a total of 3,811 households. Of these, 3,213 households have an excessive cost burden, i.e. 50% or more of their income is spent on shelter.
While the number of unsheltered persons in Grand Rapids is unknown, a point-in-time count taken on December 15, 1994 indicated 389 persons were living in emergency and transitional shelters. In additional to the sheltered and unsheltered homeless population, there is an indeterminate number of households who are at risk for homelessness.
The City of Grand Rapids' Continuum of Care model consists of several underlying principles:
The following is a summary of the homeless needs and the City's proposed strategies:
To date, the community's primary assessment vehicle has been the intake interview at the Salvation Army Homeless Assistance Program, which is available to single persons, families and persons with special needs. After placement in an emergency shelter, the shelter then assumes the assessment task as part of its overall support services. Outreach efforts have been generally limited to work with single men and with homeless persons with disabilities.
There is a gap in the City's Continuum of Care system for intensive assessment of homeless families early in their shelter stay. This assessment should be conducted by persons skilled in social work and psychology, and capable of making a clinical determination on the family's needs for shelter and services.
While it would appear that single women are being adequately served in family shelters, this situation could change over the next five years. For example, some shelters require a rental payment from participants. Single men are being served in men's missions. However, since a significant portion of single homeless men suffer form serious mental illness and/or substance abuse, men's shelters need to continue to work with community mental health agencies and other service providers to assure its residents get appropriate support services.
The need for emergency shelter for families with children has been generally met through a network of shelters, operated by nonprofit agencies with varying levels of sophistication, commitment and funding. Unfortunately, some of these shelters experience service interruptions which can lead to short-term placement crises. The emphasis will continue to be on prevention of homelessness and increasing the supply of affordable permanent housing. Although the need is not particularly great, transitional housing for "intact' families does not currently exist in the Grand Rapids community. Current needs for emergency and transitional shelters include funding for operating expenses and support services. Persons with special needs are typically served by the existing shelter system, however, there is a clear need to develop a better system for addressing the alcohol/drug abuse problems of many homeless persons.
Certain special needs populations will need long-term supportive care environments suited to their particular needs. It also needs to be recognized that some homeless persons will never be able to live in full independence. This is particularly true among persons with serious mental illness. The Community Mental Health system must take responsibility for finding these persons among the homeless population and working in partnership with housing providers to secure housing.
The best strategy to prevent homelessness is the same strategy to meet the needs of extremely low income renters. There is a need for rental assistance and housing rehabilitation. A support services network for both nonprofit and for-profit landlords is needed to help in preventing eviction by helping landlords identify appropriate social services prior to an economic crisis. Also, services are needed for victims of domestic violence and those with special health care needs such as mental illness and/or substance abuse.
The Grand Rapids Housing Commission is the local public housing authority, sometimes know as a "PHA". The Housing Commission was established in 1966 as a special purpose body authorized under State enabling legislation to "purchase, acquire, construct, maintain, operate, improve, repair, or extend public or senior housing facilities and eliminate adverse housing conditions". The Housing Commission is composed of five members who are representative of the City's citizens and knowledgeable of real estate and/or property management. Members are appointed by the City Manager, with City Commission approval, for terms of five years. The Housing Commission is responsible for its own contracting and procurement for its housing for its housing developments including the construction, maintenance and operations. The City provides in-kind services in support of the Housing Commission, including legal services, central personnel, administration, labor relations, equal opportunity and central mail services.
The Housing Commission has an excellent track record in the management and improvement of its public housing stock. The Commission has been very successful in securing funds under the previous Comprehensive Improvement Assistance Program for renovations and improvements to its family and elderly developments. Under the current Comprehensive Grant Program, HUD provide will provide approximately $750,000 annually. The Commission has identified the completion of Section 504 (handicap accessibility) requirements as a priority task.
Improving the living environment of its sites in order to provide safe and secure homes for its residents is a commitment of the Housing Commission. Theprimary programs to be utilized by the Housing Commission toward this goal are Recreation to Reduce Risk and Family Self- Sufficiency. Both these activities are possible as a result of cooperative working relationships established with various public and private organizations. The Housing Commission has contracted, coordinated, or directly provided training programs for its public housing residents. Additionally, the Housing Commission is in the process of selling its scattered-site housing to eligible public housing residents and residents of the City of Grand Rapids. The sale prices of the homes are being discounted to make them affordable to low income homebuyers.
New Construction
Public policies concerning new construction have been aimed at increasing opportunities and removing barriers to affordable housing. Grand Rapids is a land-locked, central city with an economically, racially and ethnically diverse population. The City takes special care to ensure that its practices are not excessive or discriminatory. Over the past 10 years the City has made modifications to the zoning code to make it less restrictive. The City reviews and approves only a few subdivisions. The City is land-locked and about 97% developed. Where land is available for subdivision, procedures are regulated by Michigan law and City ordinances. In response to inquiries from home builders, the City has pledged to work one- on-one with any developer interested in building affordable housing on unplatted or replatted land. This pledge is a good faith effort to identify and remove unnecessary, excessive or procedural problems that may negatively impact the affordability of housing. Construction codes are often cited as a factor in the rising costs of new homes. The City adopts the national BOCA code to regulate construction. The BOCA code is one of the most progressive codes to recognize changing materials and construction practices.
Existing Housing
The City has a history of using its housing occupancy standards to promote good and affordable housing. Code enforcement attempts to achieve a balance between minimal standards and economic reality. To complement the use of police powers, the City has aggressively sought to promote housing rehabilitation and reuse. The numerous rehabilitation programs supported by the City's CDBG and HOME programs are testament to this commitment. The City has also adopted an amendment to the housing code regarding Single Room Occupancy (SRO) units. The change provides a "middle ground" between standards for rooming units and standards for individual apartments. Additionally, analysis of land use and zoning regulations and procedures shows no negative impacts on the affordability of existing housing.
Citizen Participation
Grand Rapids places a high priority on citizen participation. Although the City staff work to expedite planning and zoning approvals, it is important that new and infill development be sensitive to and support the character of existing neighborhoods. As a result, public hearings are an important part of the approval process.
The City of Grand Rapids conducted an "Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing" which was completed in November of 1992. A number of issues such as population, employment and transportation, hosing, public policies, and institutional practices and community institutions were studied by a 19-member Review Committee. The City's Equal Opportunity Department was responsible for this study and has assumed a leadership role for follow-up activities. The following are the recommendations which are related to housing and community development issues:
The older the housing stock, the more likely there will be lead-based paint hazards. A national survey conducted for HUD established estimates for the percentage of houses having lead-based paint hazards, based on the year of construction. With data provided from the 1990 Census, an estimate of the total potential housing units with lead-based paint hazards in Grand Rapids was made. An astounding 35,717 housing units out of the City's total 73,716 units (or 48%) are at potential risk for lead-based paint hazards.
In addition to the age of housing, other factors that contribute to the risk for lead-based paint hazards include: property condition, poverty levels, rental tenancy, families with young children, and the presence of documented lead poisoning cases.
Since condition of housing and rental tenancy generally coexist with poverty, the housing units which are occupied by, or available to, low-income renter families are those at highest risk. An analysis of documented cases in Grand Rapids confirms that the highest risk units are indeed located in central city neighborhoods and occupied as rental units by poor families. Even though comparable numbers of owner-occupied units are at risk for lead- based paint hazards, both are local and national experience indicate that these units are in better condition than rentals and did not pose the same level of risk.
Priority non-housing community development needs for which CDBG funds may be used have been identified as a result of an historical program assessment and the citizen participation process. The following priorities were identified:
The City of Grand Rapids Neighborhood Services Department is
responsible for
administering the Consolidated Plan and will coordinate
activities with other
City departments.
The City will implement its housing and community development strategy in geographically targeted areas and direct programs to benefit low and moderate income persons to maximize investment of CDBG funds.
The City of Grand Rapids is extremely limited in its ability to reduce or eliminate poverty. Due to its own fragile financial status, the City's General Fund is almost entirely restricted to the provision of essential services. Even the Federal housing programs covered do not typically address the cause of poverty. This is an ironic state of affairs since the poverty rate in Grand Rapids exceeds the national poverty rate.
The programs which the City does operate could be considered "anti-poverty" are funded by higher levels of governments, particularly the Federal government. These include the City's Job-Training Program operated by the Human Resources Department and the Family Self- sufficiency Program administered by the Grand Rapids Housing Commission. The City is also newly endeavoring to increase the use of CDBG to promote economic opportunity, and to prompt collaborative neighborhood development.
One of the 18 programs funded by the Grand Rapids Area Employment and Training council is the Job Training Program. This program is targeted to persons with little or no work experience in the field in which they are receiving training, those who need some type of income in order to attend training, or those who require assistance with work-related behaviors. In general, the Limited Work Experience program consists of part-time training combined with 20 hours of work experience in a public or private nonprofit agency. As a part of the national HUD demonstration program, the Grand Rapids Housing Commission has participated in the Family Self-Sufficiency Program since 1985. This program enables single parents with very low incomes to receive Section 8 rental assistance while they participate in comprehensive job training programs which are augmented by a network of support services. As participants become employed and increase their incomes, the Housing Commission "banks" their incremental increase for a five-year period, after which it becomes available to the participant.
It has long been evident to the Grand Rapids Housing Commission that very low income families cannot maintain enrollment in a job training program or employment without addressing the need for decent, safe and affordable housing. To combat this overall lack of decent, safe, and affordable housing, the Housing Commission is committed to continue developing housing opportunities for low income families. Towards this effort, the Housing Commission has developed a continuum of housing opportunities -- transitional housing, SRO dwellings, public housing rental, Section 8 Rental Assistance and public housing homeownership to provide quality housing to low income families to best suit their needs.
An emphatic message voiced during the citizen participation process for development of the HCD Plan was the prevailing need for jobs and crime prevention, and for related support of neighborhood development and youth activities. Citizen input emphasized the need for enhanced opportunities for minorities in business development, construction contracts, and skilled trades. Corollary needs expressed included neighborhood-based recreational activities and facilities for youth and families, housing code enforcement, increased police assistance and related efforts supporting disadvantaged neighborhoods and their residents in advancing toward healthy self-sufficiency.
The City will use Federal, state and local resources to implement its plan.
Grand Rapids will implement its housing and community
development plan in
coordination with a network of local government agencies, private
entities, and
not-for-profit organizations.
| Code Enforcement and Neighborhood Revitalization Initiative | $532,000 |
| Housing Rehabilitation Program | $1,571,130 |
| Elderly/Disabled Homeowner Rehabilitation Program | $150,000 |
| Rental Rehabilitation Program | $300,000 |
| Exterior Repair Program | $100,000 |
| Paint Spree Program | $26,000 |
| Emergency Furnace Replacement Program | $51,000 |
| Minor Home Repair Program | $295,000 |
| Home Security Program | $42,000 |
| Tool Lending Library Program | $66,000 |
| Builders' Abundance (Surplus Materials) Program | $75,000 |
| Volunteer Coordination | $22,000 |
| Lease/Purchase Program | $238,000 |
| Homebuyer Program | $185,000 |
| Grandville Avenue Project | $206,400 |
| Tenant-to-Homeowner Program | $20,000 |
| Home Purchase Subsidy Program | $15,000 |
| Homebuyer Assistance Fund | $125,000 |
| Homeownership Assistance Program | $15,000 |
| Homeless Prevention Assistance | $30,000 |
| Homeless Housing Program | $21,600 |
| Homeless Assistance Program | $30,000 |
| ICCF Family Haven | $27,200 |
| Salvation Army Family Lodge | $8,600 |
| Domestic Crisis Center | $22,000 |
| My Sisters' House | $18,000 |
| Liz's House | $18,000 |
| Hope Community | $18,000 |
| Kindred Transitional Housing Program | $25,000 |
| Access Modifications | $50,000 |
| Fair Housing Program | $27,144 |
| Fair Housing Services | $40,000 |
| Family Self-Sufficiency | $20,000 |
| Business Start-Up Technical Assistance | $30,750 |
| Business Assessment and training | $17,260 |
| Wealthy Street Facade Renovation | $6,340 |
| Wealthy Street Alive Economic Development | $12,000 |
| Neighborhood Crime Prevention | $288,422 |
| Recreation to Reduce Risk | $117,500 |
| 4-H Learning Center | $20,000 |
| Teen Program | $14,200 |
| Rites of Passage Program | $10,000 |
| Neighborhood Improvement | $188,329 |
| Legal Aid Housing Assistance Center | $55,000 |
| Urban League Housing Center | $50,000 |
| Neighborhood Clean-Ups | $30,000 |
| Target Area Street Improvements | $300,000 |
| Alley Lighting | $20,000 |
| Street Lighting | $20,000 |
| Campau Pool Renovation | $80,000 |
| Park/School Playground Renovation Projects | $168,750 |
| Senior Meals (Facilities Fixtures) | $2,700 |
| Senior Meals (Facilities Fixtures) | $7,000 |
| Parks Facilities Accessibility Accommodations | $65,700 |
| Area Community Service Employment | $24,600 |
| East Hills Accessibility Accommodations | $10,000 |
| General Contingencies | $207,050 |
| Lead Paint Treatment Contingency | $200,000 |
| Targeted Programs Contingency | $ 100,000 |
| Neighborhood Planning and Administration Activities | $174,579 |
| Community Housing Development Organization | $71,450 |
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.
