The Consolidated Plan presents a strategic plan for housing and community development. It includes a One-Year Action Plan for spending approximately $569,554 in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds and program income during the 12 months starting July 1, 1995. These funds will be spent primarily on housing rehabilitation, parks and recreation, various public services and home ownership assistance.
Public hearings were held on January 3, 1995 to review the proposed five year strategy
with a second hearing on May 3, 1995 on the entire plan. Comments were varied, but the City Council accepted the Plan with guidance that the process should be revised for the 1996 plan.
While some of its infrastructure is deteriorating and some neighborhoods are aging, the City has been successful in mitigating problems utilizing an aggressive infrastructure replacement program and housing inspection and rehabilitation programs. Additional efforts to meet needs include partnerships with non-profit organizations and the private sector illustrated in one case by the successful improvement and revitalization of the City's downtown commercial area.
Approximately 40% of all renters and 23% of all homeowners had some type of housing problems. However, when looking at actual households, the difference almost disappears with 1,370 renter households reporting some type of problem vs. 1072 owner households. Cost burden was particularly important for elderly renters and low income homeowners. This emphasizes the need to address both renter and homeowner needs.
The City had a 6% vacancy in 1990 where 45% of the vacant units were seasonal and not available to the market. This low vacancy rate combined with consistent rental rates regardless of location indicates a very strong demand for housing. The housing market is predominately homeowners (68%) with 3-bedroom units accounting for the largest housing type found (55%) but comprising only 32% of vacant units. With owners occupying 85% of all 3-bedroom units, larger families unable to purchase a home will find it difficult to rent a properly sized unit. A large demand for subsidized units is indicated the large percentage (87.4%) of renter households with incomes less than $20,000 experiencing affordability problems. Over 2,500 owner household (41% of owner units) live in housing units not encumbered by a mortgage and is thought to be primarily elderly households who enjoy very affordable housing. Lower interest rates and reasonable housing prices have allowed 60% of households in Holland to find affordable housing.
The primary needs in affordable housing are to increase home ownership opportunities, maintaining existing housing stock and increasing the stock of affordable rental housing.
Data limitations effect planning for and understanding the needs of homeless persons in Holland. The scarcity of homeless providers in the area result in Holland drawing individuals from a two county area for services and shelter. Improved data should be provided by standardizing an intake form for area shelters and utilizing a point in time count. However, existing data indicates that homeless teenagers are an under-served group. Furthermore, transitional housing is a scarce commodity given an estimated homeless household count of 332 with 10 transitional units available. Child care has been determined to be a key component to homeless households looking for employment as a long-term solution to their needs.
The City does not have a public housing authority. There is a three year waiting list for Section 8 certificates/vouchers administered by the Michigan State Housing Development Authority. Most activity in this area is through State financed private developments.
The low actual vacancy rates have kept rental housing costs high, even in areas where unit quality would normally result in lower rents. Significant numbers of units of substandard units with lead hazards exist because of the age of the housing stock. Housing in the poorest condition tends to be in the Core-city area occupied by households that will have difficulties fixing and maintaining those homes. The cost of meeting Federal lead abatement requirements excludes many of these units from existing assistance programs.
There are no significant Fair Housing issues currently identified.
With 9,086 housing units built before 1980 accounting for 81% of the housing units in the City, and 68% of them before 1970, lead based paint is potentially a significant hazard. Despite the potential, actual identified lead poisoning cases in Ottawa County totaled 1. It is estimated that 5,238 low income families reside in units with potential lead hazards. City abatement efforts will concentrate on developing education programs that help owners of older homes recognize potential lead and asbestos hazards and learn effective strategies to manage or eliminate the hazards.
Total non-housing needs exceeding $110,000,000 were identified in the Plan. The largest cost items include water and sewer improvements totaling $54,000,000. Other needs requiring significant investment included street improvements, parks/recreation facilities, accessibility needs and historic preservation. In addition to physical improvements substantial public service needs were identified as well as some economic development activities.
This plan has reported improved coordination amongst organizations serving the housing market. Regular meetings are being held by non-profits, often attended by representatives of financial institutions and neighborhood groups. Community forums have also been held. Through the Housing commission he City has taken a coordinating approach and role in neighborhoods selected for assistance. While increased coordination is recommended and
discussed in almost every forum, evidence does support that improved communications are occurring.
The primary objectives during the Consolidate Plan period involve expanding the supply of affordable housing, maintaining existing housing stock, upgrade infrastructure in low and moderate income areas and providing various public services.
Since poverty-level designation is an income issue, only improved earning capability can address it. Several of the City's identified activities (e.g. job training and child care) support economic independence for all income groups. Efforts to increase affordable housing stock while not directly addressing the poverty issue will mitigate some of its affects.
The only constant funding source for the City's programs is the CDBG program. The City actively seeks competitive funds from such sources as the HOME and Section 8 programs administered by State while supporting other applicants funds. Other special efforts are being made by the City to support housing needs, these include Payment in Lieu of Taxes and donating property to lower the cost of new housing. Nonprofit groups assist in addressing various goals as do local financial institution s addressing their CRA responsibilities.
MAP 1 City map with points of interest.
MAP 2 City map with points of interest and low - moderate income.
MAP 3 Map with points of interest, low-mod income and areas of racial concentration.
MAP 4 Map with points of interest, low-mod income and unemployment levels.
MAP 5 Map with points of interest, low-mod income, unemployment and selected projects.
MAP 6 neighborhood map with points of interest, low-mod income, unemployment, and selected projects.
Mr. Bruce Bos
Community Development Coordinator
Phone: (616) 394-1317
