Strategic Plan Final m

Transcription

City of Norwalk
3-5 Year Strategic Plan
This document includes Narrative Responses to specific questions
that grantees of the Community Development Block Grant, HOME
Investment Partnership, Housing Opportunities for People with AIDS
and Emergency Shelter Grants Programs must respond to in order to be compliant
with the Consolidated Planning Regulations.
Table of Contents, Tables and Charts
Table of Contents, Tables and Charts ..................................................................................... 1
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. 3
List of Charts ................................................................................................................................. 4
Executive Summary ............................................................................................................... 6
Part I Context of the Plan ................................................................................................................ 6
Part II Summary of the Plan Items.................................................................................................. 15
Introduction ...............................................................................................................................................15
DECENT HOUSING..................................................................................................................................15
A SUITABLE LIVING ENVIRONMENT .......................................................................................................15
EXPANDED ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES ...............................................................................................15
Executive Summary Response: Include the objectives and outcomes identified in the plan ....................18
Goal One: Support efforts to stabilize or reduce housing costs .........................................................18
(Housing Pathway) ................................................................................................................................18
Priority Two: Support efforts to create income stability ....................................................................19
(Income Stability Pathway)...................................................................................................................19
Goal Three: Support efforts to ameliorate the impacts of this economic depression on families
(Household Stability Pathway) .............................................................................................................19
Executive Summary Response: Evaluation of Past Performance...............................................................20
Executive Summary Response: A Summary of Comments or Views and a Summary of Comments or
Views not Accepted and the Reasons therefore (24 CFR 91.105 (B)(5))....................................................20
Executive Summary Response: A Summary of Comments or Views and a Summary of Comments or
Views not Accepted and the Reasons therefore (24 CFR 91.105 (B)(5))....................................................21
Strategic Plan ...................................................................................................................... 21
Mission:......................................................................................................................................... 21
General Questions............................................................................................................... 22
Managing the Process (91.200 (b)) ....................................................................................... 27
Citizen Participation (91.200 (b)).......................................................................................... 31
Statement of Policy...............................................................................................................................31
Public Meetings in Development of the 5 Year Consolidated and Annual Action Plan......................32
Organizations and Municipal Departments Contacted and Consulted in Preparation of the Plans ..........33
Institutional Structure (91.215 (i))........................................................................................ 34
Monitoring (91.230) ............................................................................................................ 38
Priority Needs Analysis and Strategies (91.215 (a))............................................................... 42
Norwalk
3-5 Year Strategic Plan 2010-2014
Page 1
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Goal One: Support efforts to stabilize or reduce housing costs. ........................................................43
Priority Two: Support efforts to create income stability. ...................................................................43
Goal Three: Support efforts to ameliorate the impacts of this economic depression on families....43
Lead-based Paint (91.215 (g))............................................................................................... 45
HOUSING ............................................................................................................................ 48
Housing Needs (91.205)................................................................................................................. 48
Housing Problems ......................................................................................................................................49
Housing Problems by Income ................................................................................................................49
Housing Problems for the Disabled .......................................................................................................50
Housing Problems of the Elderly............................................................................................................51
Housing Problems for Families ..............................................................................................................52
Housing Problem Severity ..........................................................................................................................52
Cost-Burden and Severe Cost-Burden........................................................................................................53
Substandard Housing .................................................................................................................................55
Overcrowding.............................................................................................................................................56
Summary Conclusion..................................................................................................................................58
Priority Housing Needs (91.215 (b)) ..................................................................................... 59
Housing Market Analysis (91.210)........................................................................................ 62
General Population Characteristics............................................................................................................63
Housing Characteristics..............................................................................................................................64
Ownership and Rental Housing..................................................................................................................65
Housing Supply ...............................................................................................................................................66
Affordable Housing Production..................................................................................................................67
Ownership Affordability.............................................................................................................................71
Rental Affordability ....................................................................................................................................77
Specific Housing Objectives (91.215 (b))............................................................................... 79
Needs of Public Housing (91.210 (b)).................................................................................... 82
Public Housing Strategy (91.210).......................................................................................... 84
Barriers to Affordable Housing (91.210 (e) and 91.215 (f)).................................................... 86
HOMELESS........................................................................................................................... 89
Homeless Needs (91.205 (b) and 91.215 (c))......................................................................... 89
Priority Homeless Needs...................................................................................................... 91
Homeless Inventory (91.210 (c)) .......................................................................................... 93
Homeless Strategic Plan (91.215 (c)) .................................................................................... 93
Emergency Shelter Grants (ESG) .......................................................................................... 97
N/A................................................................................................................................................ 97
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT .............................................................................................. 97
Community Development (91.215 (e)) ..........................................................................................97
Introduction to Norwalk Economic Conditions ..............................................................................................98
Antipoverty Strategy (91.215 (h))....................................................................................... 107
Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) Coordination (91.315 (k)) ...............................................109
Norwalk
Page 2
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
NON-HOMELESS SPECIAL NEEDS ........................................................................................ 110
Specific Special Needs Objectives (91.215) ..................................................................................110
Specific Special Needs Objectives (91.215) ..................................................................................110
Non-homeless Special Needs (91.205 (d) and 91.210 (d)) Analysis (including HOPWA) .................112
Housing Opportunities for People with AIDS (HOPWA)................................................................118
Specific HOPWA Objectives ........................................................................................................119
OTHER NARRATIVE ............................................................................................................ 120
ATTACHMENTS.................................................................................................................. 121
ATTACHMENT A: OTHER RESOURCES........................................................................................... 121
ATTACHMENT B: LOW-MOD % BY CENSUS TRACT AND BLOCK GROUP........................................ 125
ATTACHMENT C: CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLAN ........................................................................... 127
ATTACHMENT D: CITIZEN COMMENTS AND AGENCY RESPONSES ................................................ 131
ATTACHMENT E: HOUSING NEEDS ANALYSIS HUD 2009 CHAS/ACS TABLES.................................. 132
List of Tables
TABLE 1: DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS ...............................................................................................................................17
TABLE 2: POVERTY AND RACIAL CONCENTRATIONS (2000 CENSUS, 2008 ACS, 2009 ESRI).......................................23
TABLE 3: HUD DEFINED LOW MOD PERCENTAGES BY CENSUS TRACT .......................................................................23
TABLE 4: NORWALK MINORITY CONCENTRATION BY CENSUS TRACT ........................................................................24
TABLE 5: HUD ANALYSIS OF DELINQUENCIES, FORECLOSURES AND MORTGAGES....................................................24
TABLE 6: DELIVERY ORGANIZATIONS FOR MCKINNEY-VENTO ....................................................................................29
TABLE 7: ORGANIZATIONS CONSULTED ......................................................................................................................30
TABLE 8: HOUSEHOLDS AT RISK FOR LEAD-BASED PAINT POISONING, 2000..............................................................46
TABLE 9A: HOUSING PROBLEMS BY INCOME ..............................................................................................................50
TABLE 9B: HOUSING PROBLEMS BY INCOME <20% AMI LEVEL ..................................................................................50
TABLE 10: HOUSING NEEDS OF THE LOW INCOME DISABLED ....................................................................................50
TABLE 11: PROFILE OF ELDERLY IN NORWALK............................................................................................................51
TABLE 12: HOUSING PROBLEMS BY FAMILY TYPE .......................................................................................................52
TABLE 13A: MODERATE COST BURDEN BY TENURE ....................................................................................................54
TABLE 13B: SEVERE COST BURDEN BY TENURE...........................................................................................................55
TABLE 14: RACE AND ETHNICITY IN NORWALK 2000, 2009, 2014...............................................................................57
TABLE 15: DISPROPORTIONATE SHARE OF HOUSING PROBLEMS BY RACE ................................................................57
TABLE 16: DISPROPORTIONATE SHARE OF HOUSING COST PROBLEMS BY RACE .......................................................58
TABLE 17: PRIORITIES ASSIGNED .................................................................................................................................60
TABLE 18: POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS................................................................................................................63
TABLE 19: 2000-2009 & ESTIMATED 2014 POPULATION CHANGE.............................................................................63
TABLE 20: OVERVIEW OF POPULATION AND HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS ................................................................64
TABLE 21: RACIAL/ETHNIC COMPOSITION ..................................................................................................................64
TABLE 22: TRENDS IN TENURE FOR NORWALK............................................................................................................65
TABLE 23: TENURE CHARACTERISTICS ........................................................................................................................66
TABLE 24: NORWALK BUILDING PERMITS BY CATEGORY ...........................................................................................67
TABLE 25: AFFORDABLE HOUSING PRODUCTION .......................................................................................................67
TABLE 26: SUBSIDIZED HOUSING INVENTORY.............................................................................................................68
TABLE 27: PUBLIC HOUSING AND VOUCHER LISTS......................................................................................................68
TABLE 28A: NUMBER OF OWNER HOUSING UNITS WITH AND WITHOUT MORTGAGES AFFORDABLE TO
HOUSEHOLDS IN 2008........................................................................................................................................69
TABLE 28B: NUMBER OF RENTAL HOUSING UNITS AFFORDABLE TO HOUSEHOLDS IN 2008.....................................69
TABLE 29A: NUMBER OF VACANT OWNER UNITS AFFORDABLE TO HOUSEHOLDS IN 2008.......................................70
TABLE 29B: NUMBER OF VACANT RENTER UNITS AFFORDABLE TO HOUSEHOLDS IN 2008.......................................71
Norwalk
Page 3
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
TABLE 30: MEDIAN HOUSING PRICE AS A MULTIPLE OF MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME..........................................73
TABLE 31: MEDIAN AND AVERAGE HOUSING VALUES AS A MULTIPLE OF MEDIAN AND AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD
INCOME FOR NORWALK ....................................................................................................................................73
TABLE 32: 2009 MONTHLY OWNER MAXIMUMS FOR LOW INCOME HHS..................................................................74
TABLE 33: HOME SALES LISTINGS AT 2/28/2010.........................................................................................................75
TABLE 34: AVERAGE TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE AND 1993-2001 CHANGE FOR U.S. ..................................................76
TABLE 35: 2009 MONTHLY RENTAL MAXIMUMS FOR LOW INCOME HHS..................................................................78
TABLE 36: RENTAL LISTINGS AT 2/22/2010 .................................................................................................................78
TABLE 38: PRIORITIES AND OBJECTIVES 2010-2014 ....................................................................................................79
TABLE 39: PHA PROGRAMS ........................................................................................................................................82
TABLE 40: NHA DECLARED AGENCY NEEDS ................................................................................................................83
TABLE 41: HOUSING AUTHORITY SPECIAL NEEDS SURVEY..........................................................................................83
TABLE 42: STATUS OF MAJOR INITIATIVES AFFECTING AFFORDABLE HOUSING.........................................................87
TABLE 43 TITLE 8-30G AFFORDABLE HOUSING INVENTORY........................................................................................88
TABLE 44: BUSINESS AND EMPLOYEES IN NORWALK 2009 – ORGANIZED BY TRADE GROUP ....................................98
TABLE 45: NUMBER OF BUSINESSES BY INDUSTRY GROUP 2009 SORTED BY SIZE .....................................................99
TABLE 46: EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY 2009 SORTED BY SIZE .................................................................................100
TABLE 47: TYPE OF INDUSTRY BY RATIO OF EMPLOYEES PER BUSINESS...................................................................101
TABLE 48: EDUCATIONAL ACHIEVEMENTS 2009 ......................................................................................................103
TABLE 49: NORWALK INCOME DISTRIBUTION 2000-2014 BY HOUSEHOLDS ............................................................103
TABLE 50: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NEEDS – SUMMARY FROM NEEDS.XLS .....................................................105
TABLE 51: POVERTY PERCENTAGE [2000 VS 2009]....................................................................................................108
TABLE 52: POVERTY ESTIMATIONS 2000, 2009, 2014 ...............................................................................................108
TABLE 53: NORWALK TRACT LEVEL POVERTY CENSUS 2000 .....................................................................................109
TABLE E1: HOUSING PROBLEMS BY INCOME LEVEL ..................................................................................................132
TABLE E2: HOUSING PROBLEMS BY INCOME LEVEL ..................................................................................................132
TABLE E3: HOUSING PROBLEMS BY INCOME <20% AMI LEVEL.................................................................................133
TABLE E4: HOUSING PROBLEMS OF THE LOW INCOME DISABLED ...........................................................................133
TABLE E5: HOUSING PROBLEMS OF THE DISABLED ABOVE 80% AMI .......................................................................133
TABLE E6: PROFILE OF ELDERLY IN NORWALK..........................................................................................................134
TABLE E7: HOUSING PROBLEMS FOR THE ELDERLY AND EXTRA-ELDERLY ................................................................134
TABLE E8: HOUSING PROBLEMS BY FAMILY TYPE .....................................................................................................135
TABLE E9: HOUSING PROBLEM SEVERITY..................................................................................................................135
TABLE E10: HOUSING PROBLEM SEVERITY................................................................................................................136
TABLE E11: COST-BURDEN BY HOUSEHOLD TYPE .....................................................................................................136
TABLE E12: MODERATE COST BURDEN BY TENURE ..................................................................................................136
TABLE E13: SEVERE COST BURDEN BY TENURE .........................................................................................................137
TABLE E14: COST BURDEN BY INCOME AND PHYSICAL CONDITION OF UNIT ...........................................................137
TABLE E15: OVERCROWDING ....................................................................................................................................138
TABLE E16: RACE AND ETHNICITY IN NORWALK 2000, 2009, 2014...........................................................................139
TABLE E17: HOUSING NEEDS BY RACE.......................................................................................................................139
TABLE E18: PERCENTAGE OF HHS WITH HOUSING PROBLEMS BY RACE .................................................................141
TABLE E19: SEVERE HOUSING NEEDS BY RACE..........................................................................................................141
TABLE E20: COST BURDEN BY RACE (NUMBERS).......................................................................................................142
TABLE E21: COST BURDEN BY RACE (PERCENTAGES) ................................................................................................142
List of Charts
CHART 1: UNEMPLOYED, UNDER-EMPLOYED AND IN LABOR RESERVES ...............................................................8
CHART 2: COST BURDENS BY FAMILY TYPE ................................................................................................................10
CHART 3: PERCENT OF HOUSEHOLDS PAYING MORE THAN 50% OF INCOME FOR HOUSING BY INCOME GROUP IN
2008 ...................................................................................................................................................................11
Norwalk
Page 4
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
CHART 4: FORECLOSURE TRENDS IN BRIDGEPORT, STAMFORD AND NORWALK .......................................................12
CHART 5: ELEVATED LEAD LEVEL RATE IN TESTED CHILDREN ....................................................................................46
CHART 6: HOUSING PROBLEMS FOR LOW INCOME ELDERLY .....................................................................................51
CHART 7: DISTRIBUTION OF HOUSING PROBLEM SEVERITYBY TYPE AND INCOME GROUP .......................................52
CHART 8: HOUSING COST BURDENS FOR OWNERS AND RENTERS IN NORWALK.......................................................54
CHART 9: HOUSEHOLDS PAYING MORE THAN 50% OF INCOME FOR HOUSING BY INCOME GROUP ........................55
CHART 10: DIVERSITY INDEX........................................................................................................................................65
CHART 11: BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED IN NORWALK PER YEAR (2000-2008) ............................................................66
CHART 12: SINGLE FAMILY MEDIAN HOUSING PRICES 1995-2004 .............................................................................71
CHART 13: HOME PRICES IN NORWALK 2004-2009 ....................................................................................................72
CHART 14: MEDIAN AND AVERAGE HOUSING VALUES IN NORWALK.........................................................................72
CHART 15: MEDIAN HOUSING VALUE AS A RATIO OF MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME..............................................74
CHART 16A: FORECLOSURE RATES IN NORWALK AND NEARBY CITIES AND TOWNS..................................................75
CHART 16B: FORECLOSURE RATES IN NORWALK AND NEARBY CITIES AND TOWNS..................................................75
CHART 17: HUD FMRS FOR A MODEST 2BR UNIT 1990-2010 .....................................................................................77
Norwalk
Page 5
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Executive Summary
The Executive Summary is required. Include the objectives and outcomes identified
in the plan as well as an evaluation of past performance, a summary of the citizen
participation and consultation process (including efforts to broaden public
participation) (24 CFR 91.200 (b)), a summary of comments or views, and a
summary of comments or views not accepted and the reasons therefore (24 CFR
91.105 (b)(5)).
Part I Context of the Plan
The Consolidated Plan is a plan required by Congress every five years and is
designed to encourage jurisdictions to shape the goals and strategies for expending
the Community Development Block Grants [CDBG] they are eligible to receive. The
context in which these 5 year plans are developed affect the elements of the plan
but at each year in the five year period, there is an Annual Action Plan which can
also be used to change the five year plan. In 2005 the pressing context was the
escalation in housing prices and how these were affecting low income households.
Late 2007, that issue began to fade as the housing bubble burst and as the
economy began to deteriorate.
In 2010, our communities are facing a continuing and massive correction in the
housing market but also a dramatic decline in the economy, which is especially
severe for low income households, the intended beneficiaries of the CDBG program.
While the most recent studies are for the most part, national in scope, they also
examined regional impacts in the Northeast, which support the general conclusions.
While these studies however, have not specifically included studies of the County
and local data, the overall trends do provide a context for evaluating local data and
setting local priorities.
Since November 2007, the number of employed workers nationally has declined by
9 million; the number of unemployed has doubled and the number of underemployed has also doubled.1 But as recent studies have documented:
“The broadest measure of unemployment and underemployment (which includes
people who want to work but have stopped actively searching for a job, along
with those who want full-time jobs but can find only part-time work) reached
17.4 percent in October, which appears to be the highest figure since the 1930s.
And for large swaths of society—young adults, men, minorities—that figure was
much higher (among teenagers, for instance, even the narrowest measure of
unemployment stood at roughly 27 percent). One recent survey showed that 44
1
See: Andrew Sum, Ishwar Khatiwada, and Sheila Palma, Labor Underutilization Problems of U.S.
Workers Across Household Income Groups at the End of the Great Recession: A Truly Great Depression
Among the Nation’s Low Income Workers Amidst Full Employment Among the Most Affluent. Center for
Labor Market Studies, Northeastern University, 2010, p2
Norwalk
Page 6
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
percent of families had experienced a job loss, a reduction in hours, or a pay cut
in the past year”.2
Another recent study has documented,
“a disproportionate share of the losses in jobs and the increases in open
unemployment were borne by males, the young (under 30, especially
teenagers), the less well educated, blue collar workers especially those in the
construction trades, and Black men”.3
To put this phenomenon into numbers, the Atlantic Monthly article notes:
“Late last year [2009], unemployment among black teens ages 16 to 19 was
nearly 50 percent, and the unemployment rate for black men age 20 or older
was almost 17 percent.”4
What is particularly noteworthy is how this loss of jobs amongst low income
persons contrasts with the experience of those who are above median income.
Nationally, white collar, professional and college educated classes have been
somewhat insulated from job losses and severe reductions in income. Despite
national indicators, the labor market in Fairfield County has been negatively
impacted as many high-income earners have faced unemployment as the result of
the dramatic reduction of financial sector jobs in New York City and the surrounding
region. The related problem of underemployment also disproportionately impacts
low income households.
“the incidence of underemployment problems in the fourth quarter of 2009
was 13 times higher among those workers in the bottom household
income decile as opposed to those residing in the top decile of the income
distribution (20.6% vs. 1.6%).”5
The average underemployed person works only 22-23 hours per week versus 43
hours for those employed full-time.6
If one adds to the unemployed and the underemployed, those who are in reserve
(persons who are not actively participating in the labor force but who have
expressed a desire for immediate employment, (such as students graduating
from high school or college), we then have what Andrew Sum calls an
‘underutilized labor’ rate.7 In the last quarter of 2009, this rate was starkly
2
“How a New Jobless Era Will Transform America”, Don Peck, The Atlantic Monthly March 2010
3
See: Andrew Sum, et.al.
4
Peck Ibid.
5
Ibid. The lowest decile nationally was $12,160 or less and the highest was $138,700 or more.
6
Ibid.
7
Ibid.
Norwalk
Page 7
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
different for low income compared with middle income families, as Sum’s data
shows in the chart below.
Chart 1: Unemployed, Under-Employed and In Labor Reserves8
Note that for Norwalk, low income is a household with an income of $79,450 or
less (group 8); very low income households earn $61,150 or less (group 6); and
extremely low income households earn $36,700 or less (group 4).9
By analyzing this data, it is apparent that a substantial percentage of the low
income population is struggling with employment and income. This is
particularly true for those earning below $40,000/year.
The impact of the economic changes during the past two years differs significantly,
depending upon the income group. Data and studies confirm this.
Locally, service organizations and agencies which provide financial and social
services to the local population, report that more of the people requesting services
are coming from situations where they and their families have been affected by the
recession. For example, agencies providing basic services (such as food and
clothing) note that they have seen people who have had a history of full
employment beginning to outnumber their traditional clients who have had a more
sporadic or no employment history.
8
Ibid.
9
The Bureau of Labor Statistics puts the combined rate of unemployment, and underemployment
nationally at 16.2% for all of 2009 and for Connecticut at 14.4%.
Norwalk
Page 8
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
According to economists, the consequences of this recession will be felt for a
decade or more based on prior recessions.
In summary, SUM put it best:
“At the end of calendar year 2009, as the national economy was
recovering from the recession of 2007-2009, workers in different
segments of the income distribution clearly found themselves in radically
different labor market conditions. A true labor market depression faced
those in the bottom two deciles of the income distribution, a deep labor
market recession prevailed among those in the middle of the
distribution, and close to a full employment environment prevailed at the
top. There was no labor market recession for America’s affluent.”
HUD and the Census Bureau had already reported and documented negative
trends. The current economic environment as reported in 2010 further confirms
these difficulties. These issues and the ramifications are discussed more fully in
the following individual sections of the Plan. However, we want to draw attention
to the key trends.
Housing cost burdens affect all owners and renters, but they affect some much
more than others. Households that have a severe cost-burden are defined as those
who spend more than 50% of their income on their housing. Households with a
moderate cost-burden spend between 30% and 50% of their income on housing.
Households categorized as not having a cost-burden, spend no more than 30% of
their income on housing.
Although the cost of housing affects those households above 80% of median
income, they still have sufficient income for other basic needs and usually have
enough resources to manage some income reduction for a period of time. In
housing economics, we refer to this phenomenon as incomeelasticity. Lowincome families have less elasticity than higher income families. Thus for lower
income households, spending 50% of income on housing results can result in
neglect of other basic needs and certainly constrains the ability of the family to
weather an economic storm.
To put this in real dollar terms, 60% of the families in Norwalk, earning less than
$29,160 in Norwalk in 2008 were paying more than $14,580 for housing alone.
This impacts their ability to meet other critical expenditures. For example, several
day care experts noted that fee income is down at day care centers, as households
struggle economically. Either these agencies begin to terminate participants or
they begin to run deficits. Yet this service is critical to many working families,
especially one parent households.
The following chart illustrates how cost burdens affect different types of
households:
Norwalk
Page 9
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Chart 2: Cost Burdens by Family Type10
Large families at all income levels experience the most significant cost burden.
If we examine severe cost burdens in terms of which income group they belong to,
we see that extremely low income households, which numbered 3,255 in Norwalk in
2008, are bearing the full brunt of this problem as evidenced in the chart below.
Unfortunately the CDBG budget is quite small (it represents .05% of the total City
budget) and yet the depth or amount of subsidy needed for extremely low income
families is large and thus places the City on the horns of a dilemma – decrease the
number of extremely low income households served and serve more households
between 60% and 80% of median or assist fewer families at the lowest end,
limiting assistance to those in that upper band. It is a difficult strategy problem
which affects Norwalk families at all levels of income. After long and careful
consideration of the issues, the decision was that the City should focus much of its
assistance on the population at the upper end of the CDBG eligible beneficiary
scale.
10
CHAS/ACS 2009 Table 7
Norwalk
Page 10
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Chart 3: Percent of Households Paying More Than 50% of Income for Housing by Income
Group in 200811
Many agencies in Norwalk have noted that all low income families are struggling to
survive. It is extraordinarily difficult for a typical Norwalk family to live on $1,215 a
month for all other expenses.
The fact that these housing costs are impacting a large number of owners is
ominous. 22% of all owners and 28% of all renters are paying between 30% and
50% of their income for housing with 16% of all owners and 22% of all renters
paying more than 50% of their income. These highly cost burdened renters are in
danger of not being able to meet their rental obligations and thus losing their
housing. The highly cost burdened owners are likely to fall behind on paying taxes
and mortgages and ultimately at risk of foreclosure.
Since January 2010, there has been a continuation of delinquency filings and
completed foreclosures. While not a major issue, it is a reflection of the recession’s
impact and a cause for continuing concern. Currently (March 16, 2010) there are
156 lis pendens filed in Norwalk. There are 101 properties in REO (Real Estate
Owned by banks) status in lenders’ portfolios and there are 5 properties proceeding
to auction. Norwalk has a foreclosure rate of .18% compared with .17% for Fairfield
County and .15% for Connecticut as a whole12.
11
Ibid.
12
The rate for the US as a whole is .25%
Norwalk
Page 11
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Chart 4: Foreclosure Trends in Bridgeport, Stamford and Norwalk13
Legend: ____ Bridgeport ____ Stamford ____ Norwalk
If the trends in the labor market continue, it is likely that we will see a continued
delinquency and foreclosure problem for owners and a continued delinquency rate
for renters also.
This issue is not just a human issue for the households impacted, but also for the
economic health of the City. The local economy and businesses depend upon a
diversified workforce with a range of incomes. The Community Development
section near the end of this document, shows that a substantial amount of the
employment in Norwalk depends upon workers at lower incomes. This is a sound
reason for sustaining affordable housing and continuing discussions with employers
in the City about their employee needs in terms of housing and education.14
The impact of the recession upon families is significant. One dimension of this is the
potential for doubling up. Nationally, for example, “the percentage of 26-year-olds
living with their parents reached 20 percent [in 2005], nearly double what it was in
1970.”15Research documents that “physical health tends to deteriorate during
unemployment.”16
13
RealtyTrac 2-22-10
14
Other policies are important as well. The Housing Authority has adopted working preferences and a
two tier rental subsidy program which enables employed people or those with a job offer to work in
Norwalk, to not only to go to the top of the waiting list for subsidized housing but also to have higher
subsidies if they rent an apartment in low poverty neighborhoods of the City. These policies have had a
significant impact on the City.
15
Peck Ibid.
16
Peck Ibid.
Norwalk
Page 12
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
In documenting the needs of and service to the non-homeless, organizations
working with these populations and data analysis, both indicate that in terms of key
issues confronting the special non homeless populations (including the elderly, the
disabled and victims of domestic violence among others), several trends and issues
arise, that will impact planning and programs for the next five years.
For example, the elderly population overall will have increased 12% between 20002014. The most significant increase will be in the population over the age of 85. It
is this group that is most frail and will require support services and appropriate
housing. 64% of the elderly population have incomes less than 80% of median and
of those, 41% are extremely low income.
The disabled population in Norwalk represents 10% of the population, but is
disproportionately low income (72%). Furthermore, 76% of this group have
housing problems. Affordable housing needs are at a crisis level. Young disabled
have been stuck in nursing homes and shelters, because there is no affordable
accessible housing. There have been no group homes built since 1992, because
costs allowed by the State, do not reflect housing costs in Norwalk and code
requirements make construction and rehabilitation that much more prohibitive.
There is also growth in domestic violence with even more growth in familial
tensions. Nationally, 63% of homeless women have experienced domestic violence
in their lives. In Norwalk agencies report that they have provided direct services
(such as counseling, hotline and legal advocacy) to 2,457 individuals in the past
year. The Domestic Violence Crisis Center (DVCC) also runs a prevention and
education program in the schools. In summary DVCC provided a crisis or
prevention service to 7,780 unduplicated residents of Norwalk during the past year.
In documenting the needs for housing and services to the homeless, the
Connecticut Coalition to End Homelessness, on behalf of the Norwalk-Fairfield
County Continuum of Care conducts a count of homeless in January of each year.
The numbers for 2010 are currently being compiled. Therefore we are relying on
the figures based on the count conducted in January, 2009. At that point in time
there were 225 individuals experiencing homelessness17. The most common
reasons for homelessness among adults in families were rent problems, evictions
and domestic violence.
It is expected that with the continuing unemployment and underemployment, the
risk and reality of such outcomes just discussed above, will be increasing, especially
for families. Confirmation of this has been provided through numerous examples
by agencies, which are providing various social and financial services to local
households.
The challenge over the next five years will be to continue to assist those who are
chronically homeless to be able to achieve independence and at the same time,
17
This includes Wilton, Weston and Westport as well. 2010 numbers will be broken out just for Norwalk.
Norwalk
Page 13
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
address a new homeless population, who are recent victims of economic hardship
related to the foreclosure crisis and unemployment.
Conclusions
If you are a member of an average low income family in Norwalk, i.e., with an
income of less than 80% of median in 2009 ($79,450) then it is likely that you have
experienced or are experiencing the following:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
reduced household income
increased underemployment and/or unemployment
increased family disturbances
increased emotional stress
increased demand for essentials of daily living
increased cost of housing
increased likelihood of a foreclosure
These impacts are being documented everyday by organizations working with
Norwalk children, youth, adults and seniors.
To address these problems, there are three major strategies that may be used by
the City. The City has limited CDBG funds. The CDBG program receives
approximately $950,00018 each year from HUD (in PY35 this figure was $970,080),
which represents only .05% of the total City budget. It also is expended in an
economy that was valued in 2008 at $7.7 billion. However, added to this CDBG
funding are funds from other sources that are designed to be supportive of local
community development activities. For example, each year the City of Norwalk
makes available funds available to local service providers through a competitive
grant process. In Fiscal Year 2010, the City allocated approximately $3.0 million to
local service organizations and municipal departments to support housing and
community development activities.
While the funds are small and limited, when they are focused on low income
families with appropriate strategies, they can have a significant impact.
After reviewing the needs and the strategies which have been used in the past and
those which have been suggested or proposed by agencies throughout Norwalk, the
priority themes being recommended for the next 5 years are the following:
1.
Support efforts to stabilize or reduce housing costs. Efforts that can
help people secure affordable housing; efforts that can result in lower
operational costs of housing such as energy retrofits; efforts that can
address the struggle of people to make necessary housing repairs.
These efforts can be part of the solution to address the housing cost
problem.
18
The City is able to supplement the annual award of the CDBG Entitlement funds with
program income (or debt) derived from loans that originate from CDBG funds.
Norwalk
Page 14
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
2.
3.
Support efforts to create income stability. Programs that enable
people to retain jobs; efforts that help people to find jobs; efforts that
help people to transition from one career to another; efforts that help
people to be more appropriately trained for jobs that are available.
These efforts will help bring stability to those families.
Support organizations and programs that are trying to ameliorate the
impacts of this economic depression on families. Efforts to supplement
the basic necessities of life; efforts to address the psychological toll on
individuals and families; efforts to provide uplifting experiences. These
and other interventions will help families survive intact.
Part II Summary of the Plan Items
The following Part II of this Executive Summary, outlines the responses of the City
of Norwalk to the HUD requirements for the Executive Summary.
Introduction
The Community Development Block Grant [CDBG] program was initiated by the
Housing and Community Development Act (HCDA) of 1974. The statutory
objectives of this program stated by Congress are to develop viable urban
communities by creating and supporting:
DECENT HOUSING
• assisting homeless persons obtain affordable housing;
• assisting persons at risk of becoming homeless;
• retention of affordable housing stock;
• increasing the availability of affordable permanent housing in standard
condition to low-income and moderate-income families, particularly to
members of disadvantaged minorities without discrimination on the basis of
race, color, religion, sex, national origin, familial status, or disability;
• increasing the supply of supportive housing which includes structural features
and services to enable persons with special needs (including persons with
HIV/AIDS) to live in dignity and independence; and
• providing affordable housing that is accessible to job opportunities.
A SUITABLE LIVING ENVIRONMENT
• improving the safety and livability of neighborhoods;
• increasing access to quality public and private facilities and services;
• reducing the isolation of income groups within areas through spatial deconcentration of housing opportunities for lower income persons and the
revitalization of deteriorating neighborhoods;
• restoring and preserving properties of special historic, architectural, or
aesthetic value; and
• conservation of energy resources.
EXPANDED ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES
• job creation and retention;
Norwalk
Page 15
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
establishment, stabilization and expansion of small businesses (including
micro- businesses);
provision of public services concerned with employment;
provision of jobs to low-income persons living in areas affected by those
programs and activities, or jobs resulting from carrying out activities under
programs covered by the plan;
availability of mortgage financing for low-income persons at reasonable rates
using non-discriminatory lending practices;
access to capital and credit for development activities that promote the longterm economic and social viability of the community; and
empowerment and self-sufficiency for low-income persons to reduce
generational poverty in federally assisted housing and public housing.
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) administers the
funds appropriated by Congress and transmits them to the City of Norwalk for this
wide range of community development activities as outlined in the Five Year
Consolidated Plan and Annual Action Plan. Regulations governing the CDBG
program require that each activity undertaken with CDBG funds meet one of the
following three broad national objectives:
•
•
•
Benefit people with low and moderate incomes
Aid in the prevention or elimination of slums and blight
Meet an urgent need (such as earthquake, flood, or hurricane relief)
The FY2010-FY2014 Norwalk Consolidated Plan outlines the housing and
economic development strategy for the Agency. The five-year Strategic Plan is
the centerpiece of the Consolidated Plan which sets forth the City’s general plan
of action to address the goals, objectives and measurement benchmarks necessary
to address the needs identified in the needs assessment.
The Annual Action Plan is the specific detailed plan, projects and budget for the coming
year of that 5 year plan. In this case, it is the first year (2010) of the five year plan
(2010-2014).
The overall strategic framework for the Consolidated Plan is consistent with a
number of important elements, including:
•
•
•
•
•
the Agency prior experience and recommendations;
the citizen and community consultation process;
the specific requests for funding from organizations and agencies;
the market context of the plan;
the amount of CDBG funding from HUD.
The City of Norwalk (pop. 82,951) is located in the center of Connecticut’s Fairfield
County, a 45 minute drive or train ride to New York City, and benefits from the rich
heritage of a New England waterfront. Norwalk is the sixth most densely populated
City in the state and according to the Connecticut Economic Resource Center (CERC
Norwalk
Page 16
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
- www.cerc.com), the City’s population density is three times the population density
for Fairfield County and five times the population density for the State of
Connecticut.
Throughout the 19th and 20th centuries, Norwalk’s economy was dominated by
textile and hat manufacturing. It is estimated that during this time, the City was
home to one of the highest concentration of textile manufacturing facilities in the
country (over 100 based on Sanborn Maps and other historical records).
The majority of these facilities were located in close proximity to the Norwalk River
and Harbor and South Norwalk.
The City has undertaken a concerted effort to revitalize South Norwalk by pursuing
the adaptive re-use of the City’s historic commercial row and residential structures.
While success has been achieved in older sections of South Norwalk, such as the
Washington Street Historic District, the neighborhood immediately south of
Washington Street, which includes the South Norwalk Train Station, remains home
to the City’s highest levels of poverty and economic distress.
The City has been undergoing significant changes in the last 10 years, especially as
it is more exposed to the impact of the unemployment and under-employment
tsunami which has impacted the blue and pink collar national labor markets in the
last two and half years.
The following table summarizes the trends in the City. More detailed analysis is in
the Housing Needs Analysis, Market Analysis, Community Development and AntiPoverty sections of this Plan.
Table 1: Demographic Trends19
Norwalk
Population
Households
Families
80% Median
HH Income
Minority
Population
2000
2009
Est. 2014
% Change
2000-2009
Est. % Change
2009-2014
84,386
84,656
1.73%
0.32%
33,307
20,935
1.50%
0.49%
0.32%
20,963
33,202
21,065
-0.62%
$47,898
$65,574
$68,318
36.91%
4.18%
21,612
26,238
28,704
21.40%
9.73%
82,951
32,711
Despite the vibrancy Norwalk experiences from its working waterfront and location
within the New York metropolitan area, the South Norwalk neighborhood still
experiences high levels of unemployment, poverty, and crime. The area south of
Washington Street is perceived to be saddled with an incongruent and inconsistent
19
ESRI forecasts for 2009 and 2014. ACS data for 2008 has significantly different numbers – it shows a population
decline to 78,242, a household decline to 31,003, a family decline to 19,613 and a minority population decline to
17,196. It also shows high error rates. If one chooses the high end of the error rate, the number come close to the
ESRI 2009 numbers.
Norwalk
Page 17
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
mix of land uses and higher levels of crime. Unemployment and poverty statistics
reveal a dramatic contrast between South Norwalk and the balance of the City,
State of Connecticut and Stamford-Norwalk Metropolitan Fair Market Rent Area
(FMRA). FMRAs are geographies designated by the U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD) for use in calculating income and rent requirements for
many of that organization’s programs. The Stamford-Norwalk FMRA is one of 530
metropolitan areas identified by HUD and generally contains those municipalities in
southwestern Connecticut.
In addition, the City’ Low-to-Moderate Income (LMI) census tracts are home to
77% of the City’s Federally-funded, family-only public housing units. South Norwalk
is an ethnically diverse area facing a myriad of economic challenges including high
rates of unemployment, low income and high rates of poverty.
The City of Norwalk's current planning documents drive the City’s Strategic Plan
including the City’s recently adopted Plan of Conservation and Development, last
adopted in 2008.In addition, consideration has been given to HUD’s Choice
Neighborhoods program. This is a $250 million initiative intended “to transform
neighborhoods of extreme poverty into functioning, sustainable mixed-income
neighborhoods with well-functioning services, schools, public assets, transportation,
and access to jobs.”
Executive Summary Response: Include the objectives and outcomes
identified in the plan
The Norwalk Redevelopment Agency [Agency] is a sub-recipient of the City of
Norwalk, which is the Grantee under CDBG definitions. The Agency carries out the
CDBG program under the terms of its contract with the City. As part of the process
to establish priorities and strategies, public and private agencies and organizations
serving populations within the City, are invited to propose projects which are then
reviewed by the Agency and referred to the CDBG Joint Committee which makes
recommendations for projects to fund, to the Common Council. The priorities that
the City has established for the five-year period 2010-2014 are:
Goal One: Support efforts to stabilize or reduce housing costs
(Housing Pathway)
Objective One
Respond to the overwhelming percentage of Norwalk households that are housing
cost burdened by providing increased access to affordable housing opportunities by
fostering homeownership, providing those financial mechanisms needed to preserve
Norwalk’s existing housing stock, investing in the rehabilitation and increased
energy efficiency of sub-standard housing units and housing placement services.
Norwalk
Page 18
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Strategies
Housing rehabilitation
Energy efficient renovations
Preservation
First-time homeownership
Placement services
Tenant-based rental assistance
Rehabilitation Administration
Priority
High
High
High
High
Medium
Medium
High
Target Units
150 Units
Total Over
Term of
ConPlan
Priority Two: Support efforts to create income stability
(Income Stability Pathway)
Objective Two
Utilize community development resources to first invest in small businesses and
redevelopment activities within low/moderate income neighborhoods thus
generating employment opportunities while also providing literacy, job readiness
and placement services to prepare low/moderate income residents for entry into
the workforce.
Strategies
Business loans
Literacy/GED/
Customized Job Training
Summer Youth Employment
Section 108-financed activities
HOPE VI/Choice Neighborhoods
application
Priority
High
Target Units
5 Loans
High
High
Medium
150 Persons
250 Youth
1 Activity/Project
Medium
1 Application
Goal Three: Support efforts to ameliorate the impacts of this economic
depression on families (Household Stability Pathway)
Objective Three
Invest in programs, facilities and initiatives which strengthen those families
impacted by the recent economic recession including basic necessities (i.e. food,
fuel and emergency shelter), child care services, health care – including mental
health services, domestic violence prevention, drug-prevention education and afterschool programming.
Strategies
Health/Mental Health Services
After-School Programming
Domestic violence prevention
Drug prevention education
Child care services
Basic services
Norwalk
Priority
High
High
Medium
Medium
Medium
Medium
Target Units
150 Persons
500 Youth
250 Persons
250 Youth
100 Children
250 Persons
Page 19
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Funding resources will also support investments in facility projects designed to
address the Strategies associated with this Goal.
Executive Summary Response: Evaluation of Past Performance
An estimated total of 5,300 households have benefitted from an investment of
approximately $5.90 Million of community development resources over the past 5
years. The major accomplishments in the CDBG targeted priority areas are as
follows:
The City has invested in the renovation, rehabilitation or preservation of
approximately 400 housing units. Further the City has utilized CDBG funds to
provide after-school programming for approximately 1,000 youth while overseeing
improvements to the public facilities and urban parks.
Executive Summary Response: A Summary of Comments or Views and a
Summary of Comments or Views not Accepted and the Reasons therefore
(24 CFR 91.105 (B)(5)).
Groups with programs which use or could use resources outlined in the
Consolidated Plan, were notified of the development of the plan and were invited to
submit suggestions, ideas and requests for support.
In addition, various organizations active in housing and services were surveyed.
The survey was followed by a series of public meetings and hearings which were
conducted for public input, after official notices were advertised in local community
newspapers. In addition several interviews were conducted with over 20
organizations, soliciting specific ideas and priorities.
A series of public meetings were conducted. The two advertised city-wide public
meetings for public input were conducted at Norwalk City Hall in Norwalk (March 4
and April 1, 2010).
In addition attendees were invited to submit data and comments by e-mail after the
meetings.
An Executive Summary of the Plan was made available on March 4, 2010 to the
members of the Planning Committee of the Norwalk Common Council.
The draft Plan was made available to the Norwalk Common Council on March 18,
2010. The draft Plan was also available online at www.norwalkct.org, available via a
30 day public comment period and placed at locations throughout the City.
Input was received from seniors, residents of public housing, City departments and
public service agencies and beneficiaries. People expressed their continued support
of the last 5 year plan programs and added some additional concerns. During the
Norwalk
Page 20
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
public hearings prior to the draft being issued, the City received the comments
which are detailed in the Citizen Participation section below.
To ensure inclusion by underserved populations, agencies and groups that serve
housing and public service needs serving minorities and low income persons were
invited to participate in the process to identify goals and suggest strategies.
Agencies specifically representing the underserved were contacted, to verify needs
as identified in the plan.
Consultations also included the input of private real estate developers, property
owners, business persons and residents for community development needs at
various hearings throughout the year on project or area specific issues.
The Agency also invited proposals for specific uses of CDBG funds.
Any input received from organizations and citizens was considered and incorporated
into this plan, if appropriate.
Executive Summary Response: A Summary of Comments or Views and a
Summary of Comments or Views not Accepted and the Reasons therefore
(24 CFR 91.105 (B)(5)).
A summary of opinions received and expressed and Agency responses will be
included as an addendum to this document after the public comment period of 30
days.
Strategic Plan
Due every three, four, or five years (length of period is at the grantee’s discretion)
no less than 45 days prior to the start of the grantee’s program year start date.
HUD does not accept plans between August 15 and November 15.
Mission:
The City of Norwalk and Norwalk Redevelopment Agency (Agency) have entered
into a working agreement by which the Agency is identified as the sole subrecipient and administrator of the local CDBG Program. Under this agreement the
Agency is charged with allocating Norwalk’s CDBG resources in accordance with the
needs and priorities outlined in the Plan. The Agency’s mission statement follows:
The Norwalk Redevelopment Agency seeks to improve the physical,
economic and social environment of the Norwalk Community by serving
as the primary governmental organization dedicated to promoting
commercial development, to preserving and improving the City's housing
Norwalk
Page 21
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
stock and to securing and administering the resources required to carry out
these goals.
General Questions
1. Describe the geographic areas of the jurisdiction (including areas of low income
families and/or racial/minority concentration) in which assistance will be
directed.
2. Describe the basis for allocating investments geographically within the
jurisdiction (or within the EMSA for HOPWA) (91.215(a)(1)) and the basis for
assigning the priority (including the relative priority, where required) given to
each category of priority needs (91.215(a)(2)). Where appropriate, the
jurisdiction should estimate the percentage of funds the jurisdiction plans to
dedicate to target areas.
3. Identify any obstacles to meeting underserved needs (91.215(a)(3)).
3-5 Year Strategic Plan General Questions response:
1.
Describe the geographic areas of the jurisdiction (including areas of low
income families and/or racial/minority concentration) in which assistance will be
directed.
The City has consistently striven for distribution of CDBG funds to especially needy
neighborhoods of the City, which are usually defined by HUD as those areas with
high concentrations of low and moderate income residents and those areas which
have a disproportionate minority population in need. In this respect it has been
singularly successful.
Significant concentrations of low and moderate income persons and/or racial
concentrations, provide pertinent information when decisions are made of where
CDBG resources might be focused. De-concentration of poverty and race is a
Congressional objective and under HUD regulations it affects the site selection of
new housing. It also defines how some CDBG uses may be approved under what is
termed an ‘area benefit’. Under this designation, it is presumed that activities
funded with CDBG would primarily benefit low income persons, if they are
implemented in a defined area with a low-moderate income population of 51% or
greater.
As can be seen from the Table below, the poverty population and the minority
populations in Norwalk in 2008 are significant. Within the City, there will be census
tracts and census blocks that have lesser or greater concentrations of minorities.
Norwalk
Page 22
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Table 2: Poverty and Racial Concentrations20 (2000 Census, 2008 ACS, 2009 ESRI)
% Minority
% Minority
% Minority
% Poverty
% Poverty
2008ACS
2009ESRI
Families ACS 2000Census
Families
Estimate
Estimate
200821
Community
Census 2000
Norwalk
7.23%
6.92%
26.05%
31.1%
31.01%
The following Table uses HUD data to establish the percentages of low-mod people
in census areas of the City.
Table 3: HUD Defined Low Mod Percentages by Census Tract22
Tract
044100
044500
043700
044000
043400
043800
044400
043200
044200
043300
043900
043000
043600
043400
043500
042800
044300
042600
042700
042900
042500
043100
044600
Low Mod #
2407
2293
1206
3871
2477
3930
1911
1515
1919
1085
1675
905
873
671
671
1289
1058
1046
885
332
759
811
543
Universe
3199
3288
1795
5912
4509
7201
3598
3039
4007
3057
5087
3017
2921
2278
2278
4443
3805
3908
4151
1581
3687
4169
3432
Low Mod
%
75.24%
69.74%
67.19%
65.48%
54.93%
54.58%
53.11%
49.85%
47.89%
35.49%
32.93%
30.00%
29.89%
29.46%
29.46%
29.01%
27.81%
26.77%
21.32%
21.00%
20.59%
19.45%
15.82%
For the detailed information by census blocks see Attachment B.
Note: The highlighted Tracts are eligible for area benefit designation of CDBG funds
as are individual Block Groups as in Attachment B.
The next table lists the census tracts in terms of racial concentration.
20
US Census 2000 SF3. American Community Survey 2008, ESRI forecasts for 2009 and 2014
21
Note that the ACS data has a higher error rate than the Decennial Census.
22
HUD Low-Mod Census Tracts 2007
Norwalk
Page 23
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Table 4: Norwalk Minority Concentration by Census Tract23
Norwalk Census
% Minority 2009
Tract
Estimate
445
444
441
440
437
434
438
432
442
433
439
435
428
431
427
430
436
426
443
425
446
429
69.20%
64.90%
55.60%
50.10%
46.90%
45.80%
41.00%
38.20%
30.10%
26.80%
24.80%
19.20%
19.00%
18.70%
18.50%
18.00%
17.50%
16.00%
14.50%
10.50%
7.00%
6.00%
Eight census tracts in Norwalk have a minority concentration of more than 30% and
four census tracts are over 50% minority. Note that the top 7 census tracts in
terms of low-mod population are also the top 7 in terms of minority concentration.
A new condition affecting the City during the last 2 years and likely to continue for
the next two to three years, is the foreclosure problem. While HUD and the State
have not included Norwalk as one of the identified communities with significant
foreclosure problems, in 2008 HUD listed the following delinquency and foreclosure
information for Norwalk. The tracts highlighted in yellow are low-mod tracts.
Table 5: HUD Analysis of Delinquencies, Foreclosures and Mortgages24
Census
Tract
042500
042600
042700
042800
2008 number of
delinquent
mortgages and
foreclosures
15
19
27
26
23
ESRI
24
HUD NSP Analysis
Norwalk
Foreclosure Rate
1.5%
2.0%
2.1%
1.9%
% of mortgages
made 2004-2007
which were high
cost but with low
leverage
60
73
106
104
Page 24
% of mortgages
made 2004-2007
which were high
cost and highly
leveraged
10.2%
13.1%
14.2%
13.0%
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Census
Tract
042900
043000
043100
043200
043300
043400
043500
043600
043700
043800
043900
044000
044100
044200
044300
044400
044500
044600
Total
2008 number of
delinquent
mortgages and
foreclosures
4
23
19
13
32
33
15
15
8
63
41
46
13
21
12
29
25
7
506
Foreclosure Rate
0.7%
2.5%
1.6%
2.1%
3.3%
3.4%
2.3%
1.9%
3.0%
3.5%
2.6%
4.0%
2.4%
3.0%
1.3%
4.6%
5.5%
0.7%
2.5%
% of mortgages
made 2004-2007
which were high
cost but with low
leverage
18
88
74
51
123
129
58
59
32
244
160
176
49
83
50
112
96
28
1,973
% of mortgages
made 2004-2007
which were high
cost and highly
leveraged
5.4%
16.8%
10.6%
14.4%
21.7%
23.0%
15.5%
13.1%
20.5%
23.6%
17.4%
26.6%
15.5%
20.6%
9.7%
30.9%
36.6%
4.9%
16.8%
2. Describe the basis for allocating investments geographically within the
jurisdiction (or within the EMSA for HOPWA) (91.215(a)(1)) and the basis for
assigning the priority (including the relative priority, where required) given to each
category of priority needs (91.215(a)(2)). Where appropriate, the jurisdiction
should estimate the percentage of funds the jurisdiction plans to dedicate to target
areas.
The City envisions continuing targeting a substantial portion of its CDBG resources
to those neighborhoods found within Norwalk’s low/moderate income census tracts
thus maximizing the benefits CDBG funds may produce within these neighborhood
settings. However, while many of the areas being targeted are also CDBG defined
area benefit neighborhoods, the Agency does not plan to use that technical
eligibility criterion.
The public facilities and improvements projects that will receive funding meet
eligibility criteria by providing services that benefit low and moderate-income
persons living throughout the community. Many of the proposed improvements are
designed specifically to accommodate and provide accessibility to the physically
disabled.
The most effective method to estimate the total number of minority households
expected to be assisted in the next five years, is to examine the results of the last
Norwalk
Page 25
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
four fiscal years. Based on this historical data, we expect that approximately 67%
of beneficiaries in the next five years, will be minority households.
As noted already, the City uses its programs and gives consideration to projects
which are in high poverty or minority concentration areas, or which target very and
extremely low income households or individuals with disabilities, in order to better
meet underserved needs. In the last 5 years the City made few investments using
the area benefit however through initiatives such as the City Neighborhoods the
City and the Agency attempted to target CDBG housing resources to neighborhoods
within the City’s low/moderate income neighborhoods.
3.
Describe actions that will take place during the next year to address
obstacles to meeting underserved needs
The primary obstacle to meeting the underserved housing needs of low-income and
moderate-income populations continues to be the availability of funds. Except for
special populations unable to work (some elderly, most extra elderly, some disabled
and those institutionalized), the critical need is jobs. When working with service
agencies to develop this plan, many of them noted that a shift in the characteristics
of clients had occurred. In the past, many of the clients had no employment or
sporadic employment histories. Currently people who previously had regular and
long term employment are seeking help.
Organizations serving these populations continue to experience significant
reductions in funding from both governmental and private sources. Reductions in
state aid to local budgets have increased the funding shortfall, leaving many worthy
and valuable programs unfunded or underfunded.
While this may be beyond the capacity of the local jurisdiction to address
satisfactorily, the Agency is committed to continuing to work with and support
public non-profit agencies (such as the Norwalk Housing Authority, human service
departments, elder service organizations, homeless providers and other special
needs providers), in their mission to meet the needs of the underserved population
of the area.
One of the problems faced by the City, is the duplication of services by agencies
which received CDBG funds from the City and also received funds from the City’s
regular budget. An effective coordination and monitoring of all services between
agencies in a constrained budget environment, is critical. This is a problem or
obstacle to meeting underserved needs, which will be addressed in the next five
years.
The Agency will continue to communicate with all service agencies and development
organizations as needs change and the demand changes. Wherever possible, the
Agency will provide technical assistance and support to providers in their use and
pursuit of federal, state and other funding sources.
Moreover, the Agency actively educates organizations and citizens, about the need
for affordable housing for the sake of the economic health of the City and about
ways to remove barriers to the development of affordable housing. The Agency will
continue these efforts in the future.
Norwalk
Page 26
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Managing the Process (91.200 (b))
1. Lead Agency. Identify the lead agency or entity for overseeing the development
of the plan and the major public and private agencies responsible for
administering programs covered by the consolidated plan.
2. Identify the significant aspects of the process by which the plan was developed,
and the agencies, groups, organizations, and others who participated in the
process.
3. Describe the jurisdiction's consultations with housing, social service agencies,
and other entities, including those focusing on services to children, elderly
persons, persons with disabilities, persons with HIV/AIDS and their families, and
homeless persons.
*Note: HOPWA grantees must consult broadly to develop a metropolitan-wide strategy and other jurisdictions
must assist in the preparation of the HOPWA submission.
3-5 Year Strategic Plan Managing the Process response:
1.
Lead Agency. Identify the lead agency or entity for overseeing the
development of the plan and the major public and private agencies responsible for
administering programs covered by the consolidated plan.
The lead entity for administering programs covered by the Plan is the Norwalk
Redevelopment Agency (Agency), whose mission is to improve the physical,
economic and social environment of the Norwalk community by serving as the
primary governmental organization dedicated to promoting commercial
development, to preserving and improving the City’s housing stock and to securing
and administering the resources required to carry out these goals.
Please note: the City and Agency have entered into a formal contract that
designates the Agency as the administrator and sole sub-recipient of Norwalk’s
annual entitlement of CDBG funds. With this arrangement the City transfers the
entitlement funds to the Agency who is then responsible for undertaking a
competitive process to allocate and use CDBG funds to meet the needs of the City.
In the upcoming five year period (2010-2014), the Agency will contract each year,
with those entities chosen to receive CDBG funds.
The expenditure of local CDBG resources – including the review and selection of
grant awards – was overseen by the City’s Common Council. The Agency works
with the Joint Committee, which is an annual ad-hoc committee, which makes
recommendations concerning the distribution of the annual allocation of CDBG and
the funding of sub-grantees. This process is initiated by the circulation of a Notice
of Funding Availability that outlines the amount of funding available each year,
Norwalk
Page 27
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
identifies annual funding priorities and the steps associated with applying to the
City for funding.
Requests are rated and ranked by the Agency using criteria such as the applicant’s
•
•
•
adherence to the goals and objectives outlined in the Plan,
ability to use CDBG funds to leverage their resources and
past performance using CDBG funds.
In drafting the Five Year Consolidated Plan and the Annual Action Plan, the Agency
conducted two public hearings during which the residents and stakeholders were
given the opportunity to comment on the priorities being considered and on the
allocation process. The Plans were made available for a 30-day, open comment
period. The hearings and comment period were legally noticed in a periodical of
general circulation.
Cooperation between the Agency, other municipal offices and social services
agencies throughout the program years, will ensure the flow of information and
ideas regarding the conditions facing the City’s low/moderate income residents. To
facilitate this flow of information and further encourage inter-disciplinary
cooperation, the Agency establishes public information sessions and/or informal
outreach meetings, during which municipal agencies, social service organizations
and residents can express opinions and describe the status of projects.
The Agency uses 20% of the CDBG allocation for planning and administrative costs.
The CDBG program is administered by the Agency. The Agency is responsible for
the implementation of the City’s urban renewal/redevelopment and economic
development activities; ensuring that all program activities are carried out in a
timely manner consistent with grant conditions, State and Federal regulations;
acting as contact point between the CDBG program and other City departments,
Federal and State agencies and the general public; seeking out and applying for
other funding sources to help leverage funds; monitoring all activities for timely
implementation; compiling and submits grant reports; supervising personnel;
initiating and obtaining approvals for program and budget amendments; processing
payment requests; and ensuring that appropriate program and financial records are
maintained.
The Agency is also responsible for the overall administration of the local Residential
Rehabilitation Program; assisting homeowners with their applications for loans and
grants; evaluating bids; monitoring rehabilitation contracts; insuring compliance
with national objective; adequately maintaining all housing files. Additionally, it is
responsible for the grant application and public hearing process and financial
management. It is responsible for work write-ups and job inspections. The Agency
also provides staff support to Norwalk’s Fair Housing Advisory Commission Fair
Housing activities.
Norwalk
Page 28
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
The major public agencies contributing to the administration of the programs
covered by the Plan include other government agencies as appropriate (such as the
Norwalk Housing Authority), other public/private agencies (such as the North Walke
Housing Corporation) local CAP agencies (such as NEON) and various private nonprofit organizations involved in housing development, services for the homeless,
elderly, disabled, substance abuse and victims of domestic violence.
The Norwalk/Fairfield County Continuum of Care (CoC) is the primary decision
making group that manages the overall planning effort for the entire CoC. The lead
organization is the Human Services Council. The communities served by the CoC
include Norwalk, Weston, Wilton and Westport. In response to identified need and
the location of the population served, the vast majority of beds, housing units and
services funded through the CoC are provided within the City of Norwalk.
The key agencies responsible for the McKinney-Vento program are:
Table 6: Delivery Organizations for McKinney-Vento25
Other Funded Priorities
Homeless housing
Homeless services
HMIS
Organizations Delivering Programs Funded
by McKinney-Vento
Mid-Fairfield AIDS Project
Ct. DMHAS
Norwalk Emergency Shelter, Inc.
Family and Children’s Agency
Hall-Brooke Behavioral Health
Norwalk Housing Authority
United Way of Coastal Fairfield County
2.
Identify the significant aspects of the process by which the plan was
developed, and the agencies, groups, organizations and others who participated in
the process.
The City authorizes the planning and management process and contracts its
implementation to the Agency. The Agency’s approach to research and analysis of
needs was to hire a consultant to assist it in the assembly and analysis of data from
databases, from agencies in the area, from surveys and from meetings. As
described more fully in the Citizen Participation section, the Agency also built upon
the extensive process used to create prior Plans which drives much of what the City
does in housing and economic development.
The City of Norwalk's current planning documents drive the City’s Strategic Plan
including the City’s recently adopted Plan of Conservation and Development, last
adopted in 2008. In addition, consideration has been given to HUD’s Choice
Neighborhoods program. This is a $250 million initiative intended “to transform
neighborhoods of extreme poverty into functioning, sustainable mixed-income
25
Greater Norwalk CoC
Norwalk
Page 29
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
neighborhoods with well-functioning services, schools, public assets, transportation,
and access to jobs.”
Groups active in areas which use or could use resources were made aware of the
Plan being developed, by advertisements and public notices and were invited to
submit suggestions, ideas and requests for support. In addition some of these
same groups responded to a survey mailed to all potential groups, were interviewed
in person and by telephone and attended a series of public hearings which were
conducted for public input. A Notice of Funding Availability for funds were made
available at meetings and were also distributed upon request.
Project applications are evaluated and ranked by an objective set of criteria and
then recommended to the Common Council for approval.
This process will continue during the next 5 years.
3.
Describe the jurisdiction's consultations with housing, social service agencies,
and other entities, including those focusing on services to children, elderly persons,
persons with disabilities, persons with HIV/AIDS and their families, and homeless
persons.
The consultations are described more fully in the Citizen Participation section below.
The Agency’s approach to securing input consisted of interviewing 23 organizations
serving many special populations and asking specific questions about the number
and characteristics of the populations that the organization or agency serves.
Table 7: Organizations Consulted
Organization
Fairfield ’08 (now Housing Works
Connecticut)
Greater Norwalk Continuum of Care
City of Norwalk Department of Health
Disability Resources of Fairfield County
Domestic Violence Crisis Center, Inc.
Family & Children’s Agency, Inc.
Fairfield County Community Foundation
GW Carver Community Center, Inc.
Housing Development Fund, Inc.
Human Services Council, Inc.
Mutual Housing Association of Fairfield
County, Inc.
Mid Fairfield Aids Project
Mid Fairfield Substance Abuse Coalition
Mid-Fairfield Child Guidance Center, Inc.
Norwalk
Primary Client Focus
Homeless
Homeless
Public Health
Individuals with Physical Disabilities
Victims of Domestic Violence
At-Risk Youth, Economically Distressed
Families
Financial Support of Local, Regional Service
Providers
LMI Youth
Affordable Housing
Families
Affordable Housing
HIV/AIDS
Substance Abuse
Mental Health Services for LMI Youth and
Page 30
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Organization
Norwalk Education Foundation
NEON (Norwalk Economic Opportunity Now,
Inc.)
Norwalk Housing Authority
City of Norwalk Department of Planning and
Zoning
City of Norwalk Department of Police
Services
Norwalk Board of Education
Senior Services Coordinating Council, Inc.
STAR, Inc.
United Way of Coastal Fairfield County
Primary Client Focus
Families
Educational Enrichment for Youth City-Wide
Families
Public Housing
Municipal Land Use Planning/Enforcement
Local Law Enforcement
Public Education
Seniors
Individuals with Developmental Disabilities
Financial Support of Local, Regional Service
Providers
Departments of the City were also asked about what needs in the community they
had documented.
The advertised town-wide public meetings for public input were conducted as
follows:
o Norwalk City Hall in Norwalk March 4th 2010
o Norwalk City Hall in Norwalk April 1st 2010
The Agency is also involved in the planning process of the Norwalk/Fairfield County
CoC. This planning process also provides specific detail about the housing needs
and the needs of special populations especially the homeless.
Citizen Participation (91.200 (b))
1. Provide a summary of the citizen participation process.
2. Provide a summary of citizen comments or views on the plan.
3. Provide a summary of efforts made to broaden public participation in the
development of the consolidated plan, including outreach to minorities and nonEnglish speaking persons, as well as persons with disabilities.
4. Provide a written explanation of comments not accepted and the reasons why
these comments were not accepted.
*Please note that Citizen Comments and Responses may be included as additional files within the CPMP Tool.
3-5 Year Strategic Plan Citizen Participation response:
1.
Provide a summary of the citizen participation process.
Statement of Policy
The City has adopted a Citizen Participation Plan which establishes the process by
Norwalk
Page 31
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
which the 5 Year Consolidated Plan and Annual Action Plans are designed and
developed in consultation with the general public. The City of Norwalk also
encourages citizens of the City to participate in the development of any substantial
amendments to the Consolidated Plan and required Consolidated Annual
Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER). See Attachment C.
A concerted effort is made to increase the participation of low and moderateincome persons. Particular efforts are made to encourage participation by residents
of predominantly low and moderate income neighborhoods, which currently include
the following census tracts: 0432, 0434, 0437, 0438, 0439, 0440, 0441, 0442, and
0445.
Public Meetings in Development of the 5 Year Consolidated and Annual
Action Plan
The planning and citizen participation activities for these plans generally began,
January 2010, utilizing outreach interviews and public hearings.
The advertised town-wide public meetings for public input were conducted as
follows:
• Norwalk City Hall in Norwalk March 4th 2010
• Norwalk City Hall in Norwalk April 1st 2010
These meetings included
1. a brief explanation of the Consolidated Plan process, including the role of the
Plan in making allocations and guiding the selection of projects to be funded.
2. a forum for the general public to brainstorm and discuss priority needs for
the City for the coming years.
In addition attendees were invited to submit data and comments by email after the
meetings.
Public hearing minutes are available upon request and comments received (if any)
are summarized in the section below. In addition to these broader public forums,
additional technical assistance is provided to assist people with the preparation of
proposals for funding
Once proposals have been submitted, reviewed and tentatively selected, this
information is blended with the public-driven needs assessments for the City and a
draft 5 Year Consolidated Plan and Annual Action Plan is developed. These draft
plans are made available, in the Agency office, locations throughout the City and on
the City website for public review and comment for a period of thirty days. Any
comments received are addressed and where appropriate, included in the final
plans which are then submitted to HUD for approval in May of each year.
The City’s approach to citizen participation this year, where HUD requires both a 5
Year Consolidated Plan for 2010-2014 and an Annual Action Plan for 2010, has
Norwalk
Page 32
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
been to continue and where necessary, improve upon the process used in prior
years and described above.
Organizations and Municipal Departments Contacted and Consulted in
Preparation of the Plans
Groups active in areas which use or could use resources were made aware of the
process, by advertisements and public notices. Many different organizations and
agencies were sent a survey also and invited to an interview, seeking input on their
perception or knowledge of needs and their priority ranking of those needs, for the
purposes of planning.
In addition, 23 organizations serving many special populations were interviewed in
person or telephone and more specific questions were asked about the number and
characteristics of the populations the organization or agency was serving. In these
interviews the discussion was framed around the following questions:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
Changes in the clientele requesting services. “What changes (if any), have you
seen in the past year or two in the persons trying to access your services?”
Changes in your priorities. “Have you changed your priorities recently or plan on
changing your priorities in the coming year, in terms of who you serve?”
Changes in your approach. “Have you seen any need to change your strategies
or methods of doing business?”
Observations on other issues in the City. “Do you see anything which the City
should address in the next few years, which while outside your organizational
program, you believe is of high importance?”
Departments of the City were also asked about what needs in the community they
had documented.
The Agency is also involved in the planning process of the Norwalk/Fairfield County
CoC. This planning process also provides specific detail about the housing needs
and the needs of special populations especially the homeless.
An Executive Summary of the Plan was made available to members of the Planning
Committee of the Norwalk Common Council on March 4th, 2010. The draft Plan was
made available on March 18, 2010 to the members of the Norwalk Common
Council. The draft Plan was also available online at www.norwalkct.org, available
via a 30 day public comment period and placed at locations throughout the City.
2.
Provide a summary of citizen comments or views on the plan.
During the public hearings and planning process prior to the draft being issued, the
City received the following comments attached in Attachment D. (Note: Written
comments are included in Attachment D.)
Norwalk
Page 33
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
3.
Provide a summary of efforts made to broaden public participation in the
development of the consolidated plan, including outreach to minorities and nonEnglish speaking persons, as well as persons with disabilities.
In a continuing effortto broaden public participation, especially to minorities, non English speaking persons and persons with disabilities, the Agency has worked with
and will continue to work closely with the Human Services organizations, the
Norwalk Housing Authority and social service, housing and economic agencies and
others serving low income people in the City. These agencies serve as a
communication conduit to many of these populations, due to their established
relationships with their clients and other agencies which serve minority, disabled
and non-English speaking persons.
The Agency has always involved local organizations which have specific ties to or
whose members comprise minority, non-English speaking or disabled persons.
Sources utilized for this plan which fall into these categories are as follows:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
all jurisdiction-based non-profit organizations.
most jurisdiction-based public service agencies.
housing authorities.
faith-based organizations.
municipal website.
posted public notices in city hall.
4.
Provide a written explanation of comments not accepted and the reasons why
these comments were not accepted.
The Agency has made a good faith effort to incorporate the comments received
during the preparation and submission of the plan. Financial resources are limited,
therefore not all needs identified will be addressed. The cap of 15% for public
services, also further restricts the Agency from providing resources for necessary,
valuable public services to low and moderate income and special needs populations.
The citizen participation process including the schedule of meetings, consultations
throughout the year, and public hearings were conducted and publicized to
maximize participation. All comments were considered in the preparation of these
plans.
As noted in item 2 above, the public hearing and meeting comments receivedwere
addressed and/or incorporated into the Plan. See Attachment D.
Institutional Structure (91.215 (i))
1. Explain the institutional structure through which the jurisdiction will carry out its
consolidated plan, including private industry, non-profit organizations, and
public institutions.
2. Assess the strengths and gaps in the delivery system.
Norwalk
Page 34
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
3. Assess the strengths and gaps in the delivery system for public housing,
including a description of the organizational relationship between the jurisdiction
and the public housing agency, including the appointing authority for the
commissioners or board of housing agency, relationship regarding hiring,
contracting and procurement; provision of services funded by the jurisdiction;
review by the jurisdiction of proposed capital improvements as well as proposed
development, demolition or disposition of public housing developments.
3-5 Year Strategic Plan Institutional Structure response:
1. Explain the institutional structure through which the jurisdiction will carry out its
consolidated plan, including private industry, non-profit organizations, and
public institutions.
The Agency serves as the administrator of Norwalk’s annual entitlement of CDBG
funding under a sub-recipient contract. A Joint Committee, comprised of two
members of the Norwalk Redevelopment Agency Board of Commissioners and two
members of the Planning Committee of Norwalk Common Council, is convened to
offer recommendations for funding for the upcoming Program Year. These
recommendations are provided for review and approval bythe City of Norwalk
Common Council.
Effective program delivery has been made possible through the efforts of the
Agency and many other local, state, federal and private partners. Achieving this
partnership has required and will continue to require collaboration, in order to avoid
undue duplication of services and further leveraging of limited community
development funding. For example, the City and Agency will seek to foster a
continuum of organizations dedicated to addressing those High Priority Needs
identified within the Consolidated Plan and Annual Action Plan. This will require a
much closer collaboration and coordination between the City’s CDBG program and
the City’s use of General revenue for service agencies.
Additionally, the City will invest CDBG resources to support sustainable, tangible
improvements that will have lasting impacts within the City’s low and moderate
income neighborhoods. The City believes the preservation of economically diverse
housing opportunities exemplifies such sustainable improvements. More specifically,
the City has used CDBG funding in support of the City Neighborhoods initiative. This
initiative reflects a collaboration of multiple non-profit and governmental
organizations that will dedicate substantial financial resources to the planning and
implementation of neighborhood preservation and affordable housing rehabilitation
activities.
The institutional structure established to develop and manage the City’s CDBG
funds is broadly based and integrates the talents of key organizations.
The major areas of activities funded are described more fully elsewhere in the plan.
The partnering agencies responsible for delivery of these programs, are listed in the
Annual Action Plan, because they change from year to year.
Norwalk
Page 35
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
In addition, these key recipients receiving funds, work with and utilize services and
resources from other government agencies, private lenders, non-profit and forprofit organizations.
Federal, state and local government agencies provide a major portion of gap
funding and support for affordable housing and community development activities.
They guide these activities through their policies, program guidelines, and in the
case of the local housing authority, through the direct provision of housing units
and services.
The various government agencies typically act as “investors” in the housing and
community development services provided by nonprofit and for-profit
organizations.
The nonprofit and for-profit developers and service providers, in turn, develop
affordable housing projects, offer supportive services and influence the type of
affordable housing projects built and the services offered.
Private lenders also play an important institutional role within the delivery system
by providing primary financing and by acting as a conduit for the delivery of
housing services to low and moderate-income households.
The relationship among these three groups of stakeholders forms the basis of the
housing and community development delivery system and plays a significant role in
the housing and community development efforts.
2. Assess the strengths and gaps in the delivery system.
The strengths of this institutional structure are its size, and scope. Another strength
isthe degree to which the structure has been mapped out in the form of theNorwalk
Resource Directory. A weakness may be the inability to eradicate the duplication of
services that is apparent in the delivery of public service initiatives, whether funded
by the Agency’s CDBG program or by the City’s revenue funding of service
organizations. In this environment of restricted public resources it is vital to reduce
such duplication and mandate collaboration amongst local stakeholders in order to
leverage limited resources and expand the benefits of such funding to additional
beneficiaries. Additionally, while the area has a number of non-profit housing
developers (The Housing Development Fund, Mutual Housing Authority, Action
Housing, North Walke Housing Corp. etc.), there is a sensethat none have, in recent
years, produced enough additional affordable housingunits in Norwalk. This is
primarily because there is not a clear recognition of the need for affordable housing
and how it is an essential part of how the City created and maintains its economy.
Note, each year the City of Norwalk makes available funds available to local service
providers through a competitive grant process. In Fiscal Year 2010, the City
allocated approximately $3.0 million to local service organizations and municipal
departments to support housing and community development activities. The City
Norwalk
Page 36
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
should consider strategies for aligning the award of these funds with the CDBG
allocation process.
3. Assess the strengths and gaps in the delivery system for public housing,
including a description of the organizational relationship between the jurisdiction
and the public housing agency, including the appointing authority for the
commissioners or board of housing agency, relationship regarding hiring,
contracting and procurement; provision of services funded by the jurisdiction;
review by the jurisdiction of proposed capital improvements as well as proposed
development, demolition or disposition of public housing developments.
There is a legal relationship between the City and its PHA. The Norwalk Housing
Authority is a semi-independent agency governed by a Board of Commissioners.
The five members are appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the Common
Council; one must be a resident of public housing. The authority to budget funds
and expend them is contained within the statutes permitting the establishment of
the NHA and also in the regulations published by the Federal Government through
HUD and/or those published by the State of Connecticut. Operating funds, from
HUD, are provided by formula and expenditure decisions are made by the NHA
Board. Capital funds from HUD are also provided by formula and expenditure
decisions are made by the NHA Board with approval from HUD. The NHA also
receives HUD funding for Housing Choice Vouchers (HCV – Section 8). The NHA
also operates four other State developments - a Moderate Rental Housing Program
(with project based Section 8) for families, an Affordable Housing Program for
families, an Elderly Program and a Congregate Housing Program for the frail
elderly. The operation of these programs is managed by the PHA except for the
Congregate Housing Program which is contracted out. It should be noted that the
State also receives HCV funding which it then makes available to applicants.
The CDBG program has provided essential support for both capital improvements
and services, particularly for students attending NHA’s learning centers which
continues to be a critical need.
The City does not involve itself in the hiring, contracting and procurement practices
and processes of the PHA. Nor does it normally review proposed capital
improvements except through the PHA Plan process. If there were plans to
develop, demolish or dispose of public housing, it would become involved, as such
actions would affect the supply of affordable housing in the region. Moreover such
actions should be consistent with the Consolidated Plan.
As a matter of regulation and of practice, if the PHA was planning major changes to
its housing stock, it must consult with local government. The PHA would need City
approval for demolition, development or other major changes to its housing stock.
In fact, the NHA is planning to use the HOPE VI program and other mixed financing
for several redevelopment projects and has been bringing these to the City for
review, support and approval. It has recently completed a feasibility analysis of
HOPE VI and created a preliminary plan for Washington Village after extensive
Norwalk
Page 37
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
discussions with the City, residents and community representatives and social
service providers.
The City may consider efforts to assist NHA seniors remaining in their own
apartments under the CDBG Program which is more cost effective and desirable
than other options. Especially given Connecticut’s large population of aging seniors;
Between 2010 and 2014 the time covered by the Consolidated Plan NHA will be
redeveloping Washington Village possibly under HUD HOPE VI program and Colonial
Village and will need the partnership and financial support of both the City of
Norwalk and the Redevelopment Agency.
Although there is a close working relationship between NHA and Norwalk Police
Department additional collaboration is periodically needed to address safety
concerns.
Collaborating more closely with Norwalk Public Schools may facilitate a better
relationship between NHA parents and the Public Schools.
Part of the advocacy of the Agency may include advocating for policies in
Norwalk that are consistent with the City’s Housing Strategy (Agency edit
05/07/10). Particular attention must be paid to the City’s efforts to Affirmatively
Further Fair Housing.
During 2010 to 2014 NHA may redevelop both Washington Village and Colonial
Village and needs the partnership and financial support of the City to be able to
accomplish these activities.
The NHA has been and will continue to be a participant in the Mayor’s new initiative
to End Homelessness in 10 Years.
Monitoring (91.230)
1. Describe the standards and procedures the jurisdiction will use to monitor its
housing and community development projects and ensure long-term compliance
with program requirements and comprehensive planning requirements.
3-5 Year Strategic Plan Monitoring response:
There are two aspects to ensuring long-term compliance with program and
comprehensive planning requirements. One is the monitoring of sub-recipients; the
other is monitoring specific to completed CDBG funded projects for compliance
with any required inspections schedule, with any recapture and resale provisions,
beneficiary eligibility, as well as recertification monitoring for income and rent
compliance.
The Agency ensures compliance with federal CDBG regulations through a
comprehensive monitoring process. The Agency monitors all contractors and subNorwalk
Page 38
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
recipients/sub-grantees, by clearly delineating the outcome measures of programs
and by working collaboratively with each of the providers.
The following describes the standards and procedures the Agency uses to monitor
housing and community development projects to ensure long-term compliance with
program requirements and comprehensive planning requirements.
It should be noted that the Agency has contracted with the Connecticut Housing
Investment Fund of Hartford, Connecticut to administer the action items.
Overview:
Monitoring consists of start-up assistance to review the agreement requirements,
policies and procedures; reviewing payment documentation requirements; ongoing
monitoring during the contract period, which includes periodic reporting and
providing technical assistance; mid -year visits to public service providers and other
recipients of funds; long term monitoring of rental agreement compliance; and
internal monitoring of staff procedures.
Pre-Award Conferences:
The Agency utilizes a process of meeting with organizations applying for funds to
maximize a proposal’s compatibility with program regulations from inception.
Norwalk also conducts “Pre-Award Conferences” with successful applicants so that,
prior to signing a sub-recipient agreement, each organization is clear on its
responsibilities in complying with the regulatory requirements of the CDBG
Program. The Agency reviews both program and record keeping requirements with
the person, agency or business receiving Federal funding. A written agreement
that outlines the scope of the activities, performance criteria and length of funding
period is created. The contract is reviewed with the recipient and signed.
Payment Processing:
Payment requests must be submitted with supporting documentation that may
include time sheets, certified payroll records, affordable housing restrictions,
income documentation, corresponding bills and/or cash receipts. Reimbursement
requests are not processed without the required documentation. For projects
funded through the CDBG-seeded Residential Rehabilitation Program, the Agency
will conduct on-site inspections at the time of a progress payment to a contractor.
These inspections help to ensure the projects from the Residential Rehabilitation
Program comply with the local housing code.
Ongoing Monitoring:
The Agency conducts at least one on-site monitoring visit for each sub-recipient
during the program year – usually at mid-year. New sub-recipients may be visited a
second time in order to assist with questions and check on program progress. A
monitoring schedule is prepared and the sub-recipient visits are prioritized, by
determining if any organizations are considered high risk, i.e., new to the CDBG
program–first year as a sub-recipient; high staff turnover–especially in key
positions; previous compliance or performance problems; or carrying out high-risk
Norwalk
Page 39
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
activities, such as economic development and/or multiple CDBG activities for the
first time.
Annual Monitoring:
Housing Rehabilitation:
Proper documentation of income must be submitted prior to the execution of any
loan documents or expenditure of funds. Following periodic and final inspections
where the work has been completed to the satisfaction of the Agency, funds are
disbursed. All owners which utilize funds to upgrade rental units, are required to
maintain the rental units as affordable for the length of the loan.
In order to ensure compliance with stipulations of the rental agreements entered
into by landlords participating in Norwalk’s rehabilitation program, the following
procedures are followed:
•
•
•
•
During the period of the loan, an annual review of rental agreements is
undertaken and landlords are contacted by letter requesting a copy of the most
current lease(s).
At the same time landlords are contacted, tenants are mailed a brief
questionnaire to verify information obtained. Completed questionnaires are
filed.
In cases where tenants have moved, new tenants are required to verify income.
Monitoring compliance with rental agreements is the responsibility of the
Agency.
Any violations by a landlord of the stipulations put forth in the rental agreements
will be addressed as follows:
•
Any problems with enforcing rental agreements, may be turned over to the
Agency’s legal counsel.
First Time Homebuyer Program: Income eligibility documentation must be provided
prior to the approval of any down payment assistance. The applicant must be
determined eligible prior to the execution of loan documents and the release of
funds. First-time homebuyer funds are disbursed only following a unit inspection
for compliance with Housing Quality Standards.
Public Services:
The Agencyattempts to conducts at least one on-site monitoring visit for each
provider during the program year. During the actual visit, a thorough review of the
sub-recipient’s files is done to ensure that it complies with all regulations governing
its administrative, financial and programmatic operations and that it is achieving its
performance objectives within schedule and budget. A clear written record of the
on-site visit is completed by and maintained in the project file. At the end of the
visit, the monitor concludes the visit by reviewing the tentative conclusions from
the monitoring. At this point, there should be a clear understanding between the
monitor and provider of the areas of disagreement and agreement regarding the
monitoring results.
Norwalk
Page 40
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Following the on-site visit,a formal letter is prepared which outlines the results of
the visit, particularly any issues that may have been found and recommendations
and/or requirement to remedy the matter. The issues must be corrected by the
date specified in the letter and a follow up visit is scheduled. A copy of this letter is
kept on file.
Davis Bacon Compliance
In addition, the Agency oversees federally funded projects which require Davis
Bacon compliance. Written agreements include all necessary information that must
be included in a sub-recipient’s contract for construction projects including:
•
•
•
•
•
HUD Form 4010 – Federal Labor Standards Provisions
U.S. Department of Labor Payroll forms
the appropriate wage determination
reference to the “Notice to All Employees” poster, to be posted at job site
reference to the “Contractor’s Guide to Prevailing Wage Requirements for
Federally-Assisted Construction Projects”, which is to be provided to the
prime contractor
The Agency conducts site visits, conduct employee interviews and check the weekly
payroll forms for accuracy and compliance.
Fair Housing Compliance
The City is served by its Fair Housing Advisory Commission and its Fair Housing
Officer. Residents and/or property owners with questions, issues or complaints
associated with applicable Fair Housing laws and requirements may access the
technical services of the Fair Housing officer. The Fair Housing Officer is charged
with ensuring that education about fair housing is conducted and to manage
complaints which might be received.
Section 3 Compliance
The purpose of Section 3 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968, is to
provide economic and employment opportunities to low- and very-low income
individuals to the “greatest extent feasible” and businesses that are majority owned
by Section 3 residents or whose permanent, full-time employees are 30% Section 3
residents or are businesses that contract in excess of 25% of subcontracts to such
Section 3 businesses. Recipients of HUD funds in excess of $200,000 and individual
contracts or subcontracts in excess of $100,000 are subject to Section 3.
If the Agency issues a contract in excess of $100,000 it will require a Section 3 plan
from the contractor and will monitor that plan to ensure that businesses used and
individuals hired are used to the greatest extent possible as delineated in that plan.
The Agency is furthering this effort by requiring all construction contracts using
CDBG monies have at minimum 25% of the contract award go to Section 3-based
businesses, Small-Business Enterprises, Minority Based Enterprises (MBEs) and
Women-Owned Enterprises (WBEs).
Norwalk
Page 41
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Priority Needs Analysis and Strategies (91.215 (a))
1. Describe the basis for assigning the priority given to each category of priority
needs.
2. Identify any obstacles to meeting underserved needs.
3-5 Year Strategic Plan Priority Needs Analysis and Strategies response:
needs.
The Agency selected a consultant to complete the Plan. Once the goals and needs
are articulated via community input, staff draft strategies that set priorities based
upon this understanding of community needs. These priorities are then translated
into HUD’s CPMP tables and integrated into this Plan’s narrative sections.
Since late 2009, the consultant has undertaken a three-part strategy to assemble
the informational foundation of the new Consolidated Plan, including the identified
needs of the City.
First and foremost, the consultant has attempted to meet directly with the
community stakeholders, obtaining input from organizations and community
leaders. The consultant have asked
•
•
•
•
What are the needs of the low and moderate-income community?
What sources of information about local needs do people and organizations
have?
What is being done at this time?
What needs to be done in the future?
Secondly, the consultant reviewed a range of other data from sources such as HUD
and the Census as well as state organizations and also plans and reports detailing
the needs of low and moderate income individuals in the City.
Thirdly, assessments of past achievements and review of evaluations of the impact
of various programs have also been incorporated into the planning process.
As related above, the Agency and consultant received considerable input from the
community. The needs assessment was completed through a cooperative effort
with public and private agencies concerned with the needs of the community and
has included input from public meetings.
The needs of the target population of those below 80% of median are substantial
and therefore no one strategy stands out as being the best to use, especially with
the limited resources available. As the needs were analyzed, the following priorities
emerged:
Norwalk
Page 42
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
The City gives its highest priorities to the following needs:
Goal One: Support efforts to stabilize or reduce housing costs.
Objective One
Respond to the overwhelming percentage of Norwalk households that are housing
cost burdened by providing increased access to affordable housing opportunities by
fostering homeownership, providing those financial mechanisms needed to preserve
Norwalk’s existing housing stock, investing in the rehabilitation and increased
energy efficiency of sub-standard housing units and housing placement services.
Strategies
Preservation
Placement services
Priority
High
High
High
High
Medium
Medium
High
Target Units
150 Units
Total Over
Term of
ConPlan
Priority Two: Support efforts to create income stability.
Objective Two
Utilize community development resources to first invest in small businesses and
redevelopment activities within low/moderate income neighborhoods thus
generating employment opportunities while also providing literacy, job readiness
and placement services to prepare low/moderate income residents for entry into
the workforce.
Strategies
Business loans
Literacy/GED/
Customized Job Training
application
Priority
High
Target Units
5 Loans
High
High
Medium
150 Persons
250 Youth
1 Activity/Project
Medium
1 Application
Goal Three: Support efforts to ameliorate the impacts of this economic
depression on families.
Objective Three
Norwalk
Page 43
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Invest in programs and initiatives which strengthen those families impacted by the
recent economic recession including basic necessities (i.e. food, fuel and emergency
shelter), child care services, health care – including mental health services,
domestic violence prevention, drug-prevention education and after-school
programming.
Strategies
Child care services
Basic services
Priority
High
High
Medium
Medium
Medium
Medium
Target Units
150 Persons
500 Youth
250 Persons
250 Youth
100 Children
250 Persons
Funding resources will also support investments in facility projects designed to
address the Strategies associated with this Goal.
Identify any obstacles to meeting underserved needs.
[The following answer is referred to in all future sections regarding “obstacles to
meeting underserved needs.”]
The City notes that there are obstacles to addressing these priorities, the greatest
of which are:
•
•
•
•
A clear recognition of the need for affordable housing in order to sustain the
business employment health of the community
A need to integrate efforts funded by the Agency’s funds including CDBG and
the funds provided by others, especially those from the City’s general
revenues
A need to monitor and measure the effectiveness of the multiplicity of efforts
to address the priorities listed above.
The need for more substantial funding in order to scale efforts to match
needs
The obstacles to addressing under-served needs are a lack of money and resources
as well as the mechanisms to do so. The most obvious and powerful obstacle to
meeting underserved needs in the community remains lack of decent paying jobs
and the supply of affordable housing needed to meet growing needs. The current
economic turmoil emerged in the citizen planning process, as the background
reality for almost every other need which was mentioned. Participants in the
planning process drew attention to the following specific sub-populations and
issues:
•
•
•
moderate-income working families who have lost their jobs or have had wage
and salary and/or benefits cuts,
people with short term housing needs,
persons recovering from substance abuse,
Norwalk
Page 44
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
persons in need of supportive housing due to their inability to live
independently,
the need for economic and business development which can provide jobs,
the frail elderly, especially nutrition and transportation,
the home-life of children and youth struggling to close the achievement gap
in environments not conducive to school preparedness,
young people (18-24) unable to live at home any longer,
veterans,
immigrants trying to enter into full participation in communities, and
elderly homeowners who may have minimal mortgages still struggle to
manage on a daily basis, because of fixed incomes.
Lead-based Paint (91.215 (g))
1. Estimate the number of housing units that contain lead-based paint hazards, as
defined in section 1004 of the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction
Act of 1992, and are occupied by extremely low-income, low-income, and
moderate-income families.
2. Outline actions proposed or being taken to evaluate and reduce lead-based paint
hazards and describe how lead based paint hazards will be integrated into
housing policies and programs, and how the plan for the reduction of lead-based
hazards is related to the extent of lead poisoning and hazards.
3-5 Year Strategic Plan Lead-based Paint response:
1. Estimate the number of housing units that contain lead-based paint hazards, as
defined in section 1004 of the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction
Act of 1992, and are occupied by extremely low-income, low-income, and
moderate-income families
Lead paint was commonly used in construction before 1950 and was not banned
until 1978. Older houses, such as those built before 1950, are usually the source of
lead based paint poisoning. The number of old houses, coupled with the number of
low income and moderate income households is a good indicator of how many
families are likely to be at risk for lead-based paint poisoning. In Norwalk 82% of
the housing units were built before 1980 and 31% before 1950. This number of old
houses is comparable to the state of Connecticut where 31% of the housing units
were built before 1950 and 78% were built before 1980. The fact that the majority
of Norwalk’s housing units were built before 1980 emphasizes the importance of
continuing to identify lead hazards and de-lead older homes throughout the City.
Not only does the presence of lead contamination restrict housing choices for
families with children who are younger than six years of age, but it greatly
increases costs to homeowners. For the low and moderate-income homeowners in
the City this is an ongoing concern.
Norwalk
Page 45
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
In 2000 39% of households in Norwalk had incomes below 80% of median income
and 12% of households had incomes below 30% of median income. These lowmoderate income households are at risk for lead-based paint exposure as they are
more likely to occupy old houses built before 1980. Low-income households who
are under the poverty line (approximately 20% of median income) are thought to
be at particular risk. While we do not know the exact number of households which
actually occupy houses with lead paint contamination, there is ongoing evidence
that the problem has not been eradicated. We estimate that nearly 84% of
households in poverty in Norwalk occupy old homes built before 1980, putting 6%
of the City’s households at risk for lead-based paint poisoning. Note, a majority of
the City’s pre-1950s homes are concentrated within Norwalk’s low and moderate
income census tracts.
It should be noted however, that some LBP poisoning may be due to immigrants
who may have been poisoned in other localities prior to their residency in Norwalk.
It is important for the City to help households, especially those with low or
moderate incomes, take measures to remove lead-based paint from old houses that
are possibly at risk. Although the number of households in Norwalk who earn low
to moderate incomes is expected to remain about the same in the future, this does
not mean that the lead poisoning incidence rate will also stay the same or even
decrease, so the City must continue to take measures to reduce the risk of lead
poisoning.
Table 8: Households at Risk for Lead-Based Paint Poisoning, 200026
Norwalk
#
Population
Proportions
HHs In
Poverty
HHs in
pre-1980
Housing
also below
poverty
line
At Risk
Owning
%
#
Renting
%
#
Connecticut
Owning
Renting
%
#
%
20,277
61.99%
12,434
38.01%
869,742
66.82%
431,928
33.18%
649
1.98%
1,573
4.81%
26,400
2.03%
77,667
5.97%
586
586
90.29%
1.79%
1286
1,286
81.75%
3.93%
22,045
22,045
83.50%
1.69%
64,674
64,674
83.27%
4.97%
Chart 5: Elevated Lead Level Rate in Tested Children27
Number of Children Tested
Number of Children with Elevated Blood Lead Level >10 deciliters
Rate
26
US Census Bureau 2000. More recent comparable data is not available
27
Connecticut Department of Public Health
Norwalk
Page 46
3,012
18
0.6%
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
2. Outline actions proposed or being taken to evaluate and reduce lead-based paint
hazards and describe how lead based paint hazards will be integrated into
housing policies and programs, and how the plan for the reduction of lead-based
hazards is related to the extent of lead poisoning and hazards
The Agency administers a Residential Rehabilitation Program (Rehab Program)
which offers below-market rate loans to homeowners for completion of critical
renovations to the house. The Rehab Program is funded through an allocation of
CDBG funds. Homeowners may use these funds to complete renovations that result
in lead-safe environments. Through the activities of the Rehab Program, the Agency
intends to make several housing unitslead safe each year.
The Agency has purchased an XRF Lead Paint analyzer for use in collaboration with
the City of Norwalk’s Health Department. This instrument is used to detect lead in
paint and helps to reduce the time needed to conduct a lead inspection and risk
assessment because the analysis is immediate and does not require the transmittal
of samples to a lab for analysis. The Agency retains staff holding licenses in all
phases of the lead abatement process, including Inspector/Risk Assessor, Lead
Abatement Planner/Designer and Lead Abatement Supervisor. These licenses allow
the staff to perform functions for clients for little or no cost.
In addition to the Rehab Program, the City is a participant in a State-wide
consortium, Lead Action for Medicaid Primary Prevention (LAMPP), which funds
lead-safe rehabilitation for qualifying households and conducts lead-safe work
practice training for contractors in the housing construction and renovation trades
as well as property managers, landlords and homeowners.
A new regulation promulgated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency tales
effect on April 22, 2010 that will require contractors working in homes built prior to
1978 be certified in the sage handling of lead containing materials. Additionally,
before contractor begins work on a project that contractor must test the surface to
be disturbed for lead or assume the materials contain lead. Lead safe work
practices must be employed whenever lead surfaced or materials will be disturbed.
This regulation covers all contractors including carpenters, painters, electricians,
plumbers, HVAC personnel, property maintenance personnel and any other
professional working in a residential structure. This should further ensure that lead
is removed from older houses.
Other strategies for addressing the problem during the next five years are as
follows:
1.
2.
Norwalk
Provide local information booklets and outreach programs to make
residents aware of lead based paint hazards and to generate referrals for
lead based paint identification and abatement.
Make residents aware of programs which are available to low and
moderate income homeowners and investors who need financial
assistance with lead based paint abatement.
Page 47
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
3.
Encourage code enforcement which can lead to reduction of lead impacted
homes.
HOUSING
Housing Needs (91.205)
*Please also refer to the Housing Needs Table in the Needs.xls workbook
1. Describe the estimated housing needs projected for the next five year period for
the following categories of persons: extremely low-income, low-income,
moderate-income, and middle-income families, renters and owners, elderly
persons, persons with disabilities, including persons with HIV/AIDS and their
families, single persons, large families, public housing residents, victims of
domestic violence, families on the public housing and section 8 tenant-based
waiting list, and discuss specific housing problems, including: cost-burden,
severe cost- burden, substandard housing, and overcrowding (especially large
families).
2. To the extent that any racial or ethnic group has a disproportionately greater
need for any income category in comparison to the needs of that category as a
whole, the jurisdiction must complete an assessment of that specific need. For
this purpose, disproportionately greater need exists when the percentage of
persons in a category of need who are members of a particular racial or ethnic
group is at least ten percentage points higher than the percentage of persons in
the category as a whole.
3-5 Year Strategic Plan Housing Needs response:
This chapter of the Consolidated Plan presents an overall assessment of the housing
and community development needs in the City. In addition to the community
outreach results, the needs assessment provides the foundation for establishing
priorities and allocating resources to address the identified needs.
1. Describe the estimated housing needs projected for the next five year period for
the following categories of persons: extremely low-income, low-income,
moderate-income, and middle-income families, renters and owners, elderly
persons, persons with disabilities, including persons with HIV/AIDS and their
families, single persons, large families, public housing residents, victims of
domestic violence, families on the public housing and section 8 tenant-based
waiting list, and discuss specific housing problems, including: cost-burden,
severe cost- burden, substandard housing, and overcrowding (especially large
families).
Note: In the following discussion, Extremely Low Income [ELI] is =<30% median.
Very Low Income [VLI] is 30.1-50% median. Low Income [LI] is 50.1-80%
median. Moderate Income is 80.1-95% median and Middle Income is 95.1-120%
Norwalk
Page 48
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
median.
In addition, it should be noted, that for the most part our analysis in this section is
based on published CHAS 2009 data, which in turn is based on the US Census
American Community Survey (ACS) conducted 2006-2008. This ACS data is
generated from random surveys and has larger error rates than the Decennial
Census. Moreover, some of the definitions are different from the CHAS data of
2000 and some of the data which would be helpful is not available at all.
Important Note: For the CPMP needs.xls which is the file containing the Tables
required by the CDBG Consolidated Plan, it is only possible to use 2000 data due to
a number of mismatches and changed definitions in the ACS survey which was used
by HUD for the CHAS dataset issued in 2009. However, using that data from HUD,
we have developed a number of tables similar to those in the CHAS 2000 dataset.
Where there are significant conclusions drawn from these tables, we have included
the key findings. Otherwise we have placed all the detailed tables into Attachment
E.
The following tables outline the housing needs of groups such as extremely lowincome, very low-income, low-income, moderate income, mid-level income,
disabled, elderly, extra-elderly and family.
Housing Problems
Definition: A household is classified by HUD/US Census as experiencing housing
problems when one or more of the following four housing unit problems exist:
•
•
•
•
the unit lacks complete kitchen facilities,
lacks complete plumbing facilities,
more than one person per room,
a cost burden greater than 30%.
Housing Problems by Income
Definition: Renters and owners of extremely low-income, very low-income and lowincome households in the City are all at risk of suffering from one or more of the
housing problems described above.
Observation: In the analysis of Tables E1 and E2 in Attachment E, cost rather than
the physical condition of the housing or any overcrowding is the overwhelming
problem.
The ACS data indicates that68% of low income households which represents 55%
of all households in the Cityhave housing problems. Of that group, 38% are
extremely low income and 31% are very low income. Renters outnumber owners in
the ELI group, while owners outnumber renters in the VLI and LI groups.
Norwalk
Page 49
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
The following tables show the numbers of owners and renters with housing
problems.
Table 9a: Housing Problems by Income28
Total <=80% AMI
Total
80.1%-120%AMI
Owner
Owner
Renter
6,215
5,735
Renter
1,571
195
Total
120.1%+ AMI
Owner
Total
All
Renter
895
55
14,665
As is evident from the next table, approximately one-half of owners and almost
two-thirds of renters with housing problems are below 20% of AMI.
Table 9b: Housing Problems by Income <20% AMI Level29
<20% AMI
Housing
Problems
HHs with
Housing
Problems
HHs without
Housing
Problems
Owner
Renter
810
1,735
55
310
Housing Problems for the Disabled
Definition: A household is by definition, disabled households contain at least one
or more persons with a mobility or self-care limitation.
Observation: Among the City’s disabled population, a total of 58% have housing
problems. However, 95% of the disabled households with housing problems are low
income. (For additional details, see Attachment E Table E4).
Table 10: Housing Needs of the Low Income Disabled30
CHAS/ACS
2009
Housing
Problems
Disabled
Not-Disabled
Total
28
29
30
<=30% AMI
30.1-50% AMI
Own
475
1,180
1,655
Own
290
1,590
1,880
Rent
440
2,425
2,865
Rent
190
1,640
1,830
50.1%-80%
AMI
Own
210
2,470
2,680
Rent
55
985
1,040
Total <=80%
AMI
Own
975
5,240
6,215
Total
Rent
685
5,050
5,735
<=80%
AMI
1,660
10,290
11,950
Norwalk
Page 50
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Housing Problems of the Elderly
Definition: Elderly are aged 62-74 and extra-elderly are 75 and older.
Observation: Observation: Since 2000 the elderly population in the City has
increased by 4%, and is expected to continue to increase 10% in the next five
years.31
Table 11: Profile of Elderly in Norwalk.32
Elderly Profile –Norwalk
Total Elderly (62-74)
Total Elderly (62-74) <80%
Total Elderly (62-74) <80% With Housing Problems
Total Extra-Elderly (75+)
Total Extra-Elderly (75+) <80%
Total Extra-Elderly (75+) <80% with Housing Problems
Total all Elderly (62+)
Total all Elderly <=80% Median
Total all elderly <80% with housing problems
5,385
3,090
1,900
1,115
3,175
2,365
1,270
1,120
8,560
5,455
3,170
% of
Elderly
Group
% of
Elderly
group
<=80%
35%
21%
61%
36%
40%
35%
54%
47%
64%
37%
At this time 43% of the City’s elderly and extra-elderly population have housing
problems,but those at or below 80% of median, represent 86% of those elderly
with housing problems. (For additional details, see Attachment E Table E7).
Chart 6: Housing Problems for Low Income Elderly
31
ESRI Ibid.
32
Norwalk
Page 51
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Housing Problems for Families
Definition: Families are households with at least one child under the age of
18.Non-family households are composed of unrelated individuals.
Observations: The table below shows that small families (four or fewer persons)
dominate those with housing problems. (For additional details, see Attachment E
Table E8).
Table 12: Housing Problems by Family Type33
Family, 2
Family, 1 Parent
Parents
Non-Family
Total Family
Family Size with Housing Problems as a % of All Families in Type
Small -4
or fewer
Large - 5
or more
Total
Own
Rent
Own
Rent
Own
Rent
Own
Rent
All
21.88%
23.81%
22.85%
8.25%
24.01%
26.21%
22.60%
12.21%
40.41%
3.29%
3.19%
7.45%
1.89%
0.22%
0.22%
6.39%
2.22%
5.64%
Housing Problem Severity
Definition: Housing problem severity is defined as a housing unit which is
substandard: lacking complete plumbing or kitchen facilities, severely overcrowded: with 1.51 or more persons per room, or severely cost-burdened: housing
cost-burden over 50%.
Observation: Home renters and owners who are at income levels below 80% of
median income face housing problems defined as sub-standard housing, severe
over-crowding and severe cost-burden. The severity of problems is a natural target
for setting priorities for the HUD programs. 60% of the City’s ELI population is
severely cost burdened. As the Chart below shows clearly, the major problem facing
Norwalk is the severe cost burden for both owner and rental households. (For
additional details, see Attachment E Tables E9 and E10).
The City notes that the most cost effective programs for addressing these
households in need of deep subsidies, are public housing and HCV vouchers. Other
programs such as CDBG and HOME are more appropriate for targeting households
above 60% of median, which is where the Agency has allocated its resources.
Chart 7: Distribution of Housing Problem Severityby Type and Income Group
33
34
34
Norwalk
Page 52
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Cost-Burden and Severe Cost-Burden
Definition: As noted above, households that suffer severe cost-burden have a
housing cost burden of greater than 50%. Moderate cost-burden is considered to
be a housing cost burden that is greater than 30% but less than or equal to 50%.
Households that do not have a cost-burden have housing costs that are less than or
equal to 30% of their monthly gross income.
Observations: As noted above, the dominant housing problem facing Norwalk
residents, is housing cost-burden. Over 42% of Norwalk’s households have a
housing cost burden as defined by Congress and HUD.
In more detail, 18% of all households have severe cost burdens (5,870) and 24%
(7,550) have moderate cost burdens. These are distributed equally between owners
and renters. The following chart illustrates the cost burdens for all owners and
renters in Norwalk in 2008 at differing income levels. It is likely that any changes
since then will have resulted in higher rates of both moderate and severe cost
burden, given the further downturn in the economy. (For additional details, see
Attachment E Table E11).
Norwalk
Page 53
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Chart 8: Housing Cost Burdens for Owners and Renters in Norwalk35
The following tables analyze the cost burden distribution in terms of household
income.
The first table shows the moderate cost burden distribution and highlights the most
notable proportions of those paying between 30% and 50% of their income for
housing. These are very low, low, moderate, and mid level income owners, and
renters earning below 80% of median income.
Table 13a: Moderate Cost Burden by Tenure36
All HH
All Moderate Cost Burden (3050% of HH Income)
ELI (<=30% AMI)
VLI (30.1-50% AMI)
HVLI (50.1-60% AMI)
LI (60.1-80% AMI)
Mod (80.1-95% AMI)
Mid (95.1+%)
Own
20,875
%
Rent
10,965
%
All
31,840
%
4,500
365
710
430
1,245
450
1,305
21.56%
8.11%
15.78%
9.56%
27.67%
10.00%
29.00%
3,050
755
1,355
360
410
55
110
27.82%
24.75%
44.43%
11.80%
13.44%
1.80%
3.61%
7,550
1,120
2,065
790
1,655
505
1,415
23.71%
3.52%
6.49%
2.48%
5.20%
1.59%
4.44%
The second table shows the severe cost burden distribution and indicates that
owners earning less than 60% of median income and extremely low and very low
income renters comprise the greatest proportion of those paying over 50% of their
income for housing.
35
HUD ACS/CHAS 2009 Table 3
36
Ibid Table 3
Norwalk
Page 54
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Table 13b: Severe Cost Burden by Tenure37
All HH
All Severe Cost Burden (>50%
of HH Income)
ELI (<=30% AMI)
VLI (30.1-50% AMI)
HVLI (50.1-60% AMI)
LI (60.1-80% AMI)
Mod (80.1-95% AMI)
Mid (95.1+% AMI) as a % of all
Moderate Cost HHs
Own
20,875
%
Rent
10,965
%
All
31,840
%
3,410
1,260
1,030
495
285
135
16.34%
36.95%
30.21%
14.52%
8.36%
3.96%
2,460
1,995
290
85
0
90
22.44%
81.10%
11.79%
3.46%
0.00%
3.66%
5,870
3,255
1,320
580
285
225
18.44%
10.22%
4.15%
1.82%
0.90%
0.71%
210
6.16%
0
0.00%
210
0.66%
The following chart illustrates this cost burden distribution.
Chart 9: Households Paying more than 50% of Income for Housing by Income Group38
Substandard Housing
Definition: Substandard housing, another housing problem, is when a housing unit
lacks complete kitchen or plumbing facilities. Standard housing is when the
housing unit has both complete kitchen and complete plumbing facilities.
Observations: In general, families and non-familyhouseholdsdid not face
overcrowding in 2008. It should be noted that since 2008, when this data was
developed, there has been some loss of jobs, some loss of income and some loss of
housing. It would not be surprising for the Census 2010 to show an increase in
37
Ibid Table 3
38
Ibid. Table 3
Norwalk
Page 55
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
over-crowding as families “double up”, which has been reported anecdotally by local
service and housing organizations.(For additional details, see Attachment E Table
E15).
Overcrowding
Definition: No overcrowding is when there is one person or less per room.
Moderate overcrowding occurs when there is more than one person per room but
less than or equal to 1.5 people. Severe overcrowding occurs when there are more
than 1.5 people per room in the housing unit. A one-family household is a family
household with no subfamilies. However a 2+ family household is a multi-family
household composed of more than one family or subfamily. Non-family households
are composed of unrelated individuals.
Observations: In general, families and non-family households did not face
overcrowding in 2008. It should be noted that since 2008, when this data was
developed, there has been some loss of jobs, some loss of income and some loss of
housing. It would not be surprising for the Census 2010 to show an increase in
over-crowding as families “double up”, which has been reported anecdotally by local
service and housing organizations.(For additional details, see Attachment E Table
E15).
2. To the extent that any racial or ethnic group has a disproportionately greater
need for any income category in comparison to the needs of that category as a
whole, the jurisdiction must complete an assessment of that specific need. For this
purpose, disproportionately greater need exists when the percentage of persons in
a category of need who are members of a particular racial or ethnic group is at
least ten percentage points higher than the percentage of persons in the category
as a whole.
Utilizing CHAS/ACS data from HUD (2009) we have developed the following
information about the housing needs of racial and ethnic groups:
The City’s Hispanic population in 2009 is estimated to be approximately 20% and
its Black population is 17%. The Asian population in 2009 was 5% and is expected
to grow nearly 90% between 2000 and 2014. As the two largest minority groups in
the City, both the Hispanic and Black groups should be looked at closely in terms of
need and prospective demand on the limited CDBG resources of the Agency.
Norwalk
Page 56
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Table 14: Race and Ethnicity in Norwalk 2000, 2009, 201439
White Alone
Black Alone
American Indian Alone
Asian Alone
Pacific Islander Alone
Some Other Race Alone
Two or More Races
Hispanic Origin (Any Race)
2000
73.9%
15.3%
0.2%
3.3%
0.0%
4.3%
2.9%
15.6%
2009
68.9%
16.8%
0.3%
4.9%
0.1%
5.6%
3.5%
20.1%
Change
2000-2014
-8.78%
17.19%
37.93%
86.66%
37.50%
49.60%
29.20%
48.45%
2014
66.1%
17.5%
0.3%
6.0%
0.1%
6.3%
3.7%
22.7%
In Attachment E Table E16 it is apparent that as a whole, White owners and renters
and low income Black and Hispanic owners and renters have comparable housing
problems. A concern of HUD and of the City is when there is a disproportionate
need for any ethnic group. The only groups with a disproportionate share of
housing problems are extremely low income Black renters and very low income
Hispanic renters. 26% of ELI Black renters have housing problems compared to the
threshold of 23%, and 36% of VLI Hispanic renters have housing problems
compared to the threshold of 26%.
Table 15: Disproportionate Share of Housing Problems by Race40
CHAS/ACS
2009
<=30% AMI
Race with
Housing
Problems
White
Black
Asian
American
Indian
Pacific
Islander
Hispanic
Other
30.1-50% AMI
50.1%-80% AMI
80.1%- 95%
AMI
95.1%+ AMI
Owner
73.33%
6.40%
0.00%
Renter
25.38%
26.08%
4.04%
Owner
39.64%
6.51%
4.54%
Renter
22.75%
15.88%
3.65%
Owner
33.26%
9.09%
1.76%
Renter
20.65%
2.15%
0.00%
Owner
24.73%
3.02%
0.00%
Renter
3.17%
0.00%
9.50%
Owner
15.75%
1.33%
0.51%
Renter
3.38%
0.00%
3.38%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
2.37%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
5.07%
3.20%
0.00%
23.43%
0.84%
0.00%
23.67%
0.00%
0.00%
36.27%
0.00%
0.00%
10.95%
0.31%
0.00%
19.78%
0.00%
0.00%
7.14%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
1.07%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
The impact of severe housing problems including substandard housing, severe
overcrowding and severe cost-burden affect all ethnicities in Norwalk. When
examined closer by race and ethnic group, the distribution of severe housing
problems by race and ethnic group does not vary from that of the overall
population. (For additional details, see Attachment E Tables E18, E19 and E20).
As we noted above, housing cost-burden proved to be the most
39
ESRI Ibid
40
Ibid, Table 2
Norwalk
Page 57
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
significant housing problem in the City for low income households. ELI Black
renters and VLI Hispanic renters experienced a disproportionate share of housing
problems, and as can be seen from the distribution below, the same groups
experienced high rates of housing cost burden. Although the incidence rate of cost
burden by income group within each racial/ethnic group is not available, the
following table shows that Black and Hispanic renters experienced a
disproportionate share of severe cost burden, while Hispanic renters also
experienced a disproportionate share of households with moderate cost burden.
27% of Black renters experienced severe cost burden, compared to the threshold of
23%, and 27.3% of Hispanic renters were affected by severe cost burden, while the
threshold was 26.5%. 39% of Hispanic renters experienced moderate housing cost
burden, compared to the same threshold of 26.5%.
Table 16: Disproportionate Share of Housing Cost problems by Race41
CHAS/ACS
Race with
Cost Burden
White
Black
Asian
American
Indian
Pacific
Islander
Hispanic
Other
Severe Cost Burden
Moderate Cost Burden
No Cost Burden
Total Moderate a
Severe
Owner
64.66%
9.36%
0.56%
Renter
35.77%
27.08%
9.29%
Owner
70.68%
11.39%
4.40%
Renter
34.48%
21.00%
4.23%
Owner
85.61%
6.36%
3.26%
Renter
46.28%
19.37%
7.02%
Owner
68.06%
10.50%
2.73%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
1.72%
0.20%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
23.74%
1.68%
0.00%
27.27%
0.59%
0.00%
13.21%
0.32%
0.00%
38.56%
0.00%
0.12%
4.37%
0.08%
0.00%
26.18%
1.15%
0.00%
17.79%
0.91%
Summary Conclusion
The attached CPMP data tables42 and the tables in this document, quantify the
estimated number of households who have housing problems, especially rent and
ownership cost burdens. Clearly the need is greater than the supply and thus the
City is faced with thinking of how it can support production programs that can close
the gap. CDBG funds made available to Community Based Development
Organizations (CBDOs), would enable new construction.
The City has adopted inclusionary zoning. This tool may not be effective in the
immediate future due to the economic conditions. However it should have
significant success in producing additional affordable housing over the long term.
Inclusionary zoning can be combined with other programs, to reach down into
41
Ibid, Table 9
42
We have tried to show the HUD CHAS/ACS data in the narrative but due to questions about it and the
lack of full correspondence with the categories used in the CPMP tables, we are using 2000 in the
Housing Needs Tab in the CPMP Needs.xls table.
Norwalk
Page 58
Version 2.0
R
City of Norwalk
households at less than 80% median. Examples of such programs are HOME and
Project Based Section 8 programs of the NHA and DECD.
The Housing Needs Analysis shows that the most pervasive problem facing
households in Norwalk, is the cost burden of housing. Therefore the preservation of
existing rental units which are subsidized, as well as those affordable rental units
provided by private landlords, is an important strategy for the City. Rehab and
other preservation approaches can help tremendously.
The problems of cost are also faced by owners, who are almost equally affected by
moderate and severe housing cost burden as renters. There are several
approaches that might be explored to address this problem. Lowering utility costs
through retrofitting of energy and water improvements, can assist low income
owners. Assistance with repairs to properties, especially for the low income elderly,
can also be effective.
Priority Housing Needs (91.215 (b))
1. Identify the priority housing needs and activities in accordance with the
categories specified in the Housing Needs Table (formerly Table 2A). These
categories correspond with special tabulations of U.S. Census data provided by
HUD for the preparation of the Consolidated Plan.
2. Provide an analysis of how the characteristics of the housing market and the
severity of housing problems and needs of each category of residents provided
the basis for determining the relative priority of each priority housing need
category.
Note: Family and income types may be grouped in the case of closely related categories of residents where the
analysis would apply to more than one family or income type.
needs.
3-5 Year Strategic Plan Priority Housing Needs response:
1. Identify the priority housing needs and activities in accordance with the
categories specified in the Housing Needs Table (formerly Table 2A). These
categories correspond with special tabulations of U.S. Census data provided by
HUD for the preparation of the Consolidated Plan.
The priorities and specific objectives were developed from the 2009 CHAS data
supplied by HUD from the ACS census of 2006-2008, with additional data sources
from national data collection organizations (ESRI and the Warren Group), from
state agencies and from local data sources.
In addition, the consultant conducted interviews with organizations and
departments which provide housing and other services in the area and also
Norwalk
Page 59
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
conducted meetings with many of these to discuss needs and priorities from their
perspective.
The major points made by these people are summarized in the Citizen Participation
section above.
In addition, the City’s experience over the last five years has provided a detailed
understanding of the needs in the area and what strategies have been effective.
The following tables indicate how the High, Medium and Low descriptors were
assigned in the needs.xls section of the CPMP. When projects are proposed, part of
the assessment of an application, is examining the specific data and needs for the
City.
Table 17: Priorities Assigned
Goal One: Support efforts to stabilize or reduce housing
costs.
High
High
Preservation
High
High
Placement services
Medium
Medium
High
Goal Two: Support efforts to ameliorate the impacts of this
economic depression on families.
High
High
Medium
Medium
Child care services
Medium
Basic services
Medium
Priority Three: Support efforts Support efforts to create
income stability.
Business loans
High
Literacy/GED/Customized Job Training
High
High
Medium
HOPE VI/Choice Neighborhoods application
Medium
2. Provide an analysis of how the characteristics of the housing market and the
severity of housing problems and needs of each category of residents provided
the basis for determining the relative priority of each priority housing need
category
Norwalk
Page 60
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
The City recognizes the need to ensure that existing units contribute to and provide
a decent and safe living environment. It also recognizes that there is need to
produce affordable housing. It strives to educate the City about the need for
preservation and production of affordable housing.
To this end, the City uses local housing rehab programs funded from CDBG and
other funds. Additionally, the Agency will support programs that acquire and
rehabilitate foreclosed properties.
The City has developed its priorities from the data analysis described above
including the information in the Housing Needs Analysis, Market Analysis, Lead
Based Paint, Homeless, Non-Homeless Special Needs, Community development and
Anti-Poverty sections in this Plan.
In addition, during the time this Plan was developed (November 2009 – March
2010), it has become clear that the City’s households are continuing to experience
major changes in their incomes and housing costs. In general housing values
continue to decline, which makes it likely that acquisition, purchasing assistance
and rehabilitation may be more effective strategies than new construction.
However, this same economic crisis is resulting in stagnant incomes and in many
cases, loss of jobs and reduced job opportunities. While one cannot assume that
these conditions will continue for the next 5 years, they will affect the environment
for this plan.
needs.
Based on data analysis, the greatest problem is the housing cost burden
(households paying more than 30% of income for housing) for both renters and
owners. For those with incomes between 30% and 80% of median income, it is
primarily owners. Overall elderly owners and small family owners suffer from
severe cost burden. Addressing the impact of the recession on families in terms of
services needed, jobs needed and housing cost being reduced, was the basis for
assigning the three priorities delineated in prior sections. These groups will be the
focus of funding in the next 5 years unless new census 2010 and other data justify
changes.
As the result of the limited community development resources available, it is the
priority of the Agency to direct those resources to those households earning
between 50% - 80% of AMI. The priority housing activities are those dedicated to
preserving affordability, expanding homeownership opportunities and investing in
the physical quality of the City’s existing housing stock.
Norwalk
Page 61
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
As noted elsewhere in other sections of this plan, one obstacle to meeting
underserved needs is the disproportion between the need and the resources
available, which is being further exacerbated by the declining economy, loss of
jobs, declining state revenues for housing subsidies and the collapse of the
mortgage market. Another obstacle is the pressing need to coordinate programs
funded from different sources to minimize overlap and maximize impacts.
Housing Market Analysis (91.210)
*Please also refer to the Housing Market Analysis Table in the Needs.xls workbook
1. Based on information available to the jurisdiction, describe the significant
characteristics of the housing market in terms of supply, demand, condition, and
the cost of housing; the housing stock available to serve persons with
disabilities; and to serve persons with HIV/AIDS and their families. Data on the
housing market should include, to the extent information is available, an
estimate of the number of vacant or abandoned buildings and whether units in
these buildings are suitable for rehabilitation.
2. Describe the number and targeting (income level and type of household served)
of units currently assisted by local, state, or federally funded programs, and an
assessment of whether any such units are expected to be lost from the assisted
housing inventory for any reason, (i.e. expiration of Section 8 contracts).
3. Indicate how the characteristics of the housing market will influence the use of
funds made available for rental assistance, production of new units,
rehabilitation of old units, or acquisition of existing units. Please note, the goal
of affordable housing is not met by beds in nursing homes.
3-5 Year Strategic Plan Housing Market Analysis responses:
"Need" is difficult to define. The market forces of supply and demand have been
the engines that have created disparities from time to time. For example,
Connecticut encountered an economic recession in 1990-1993 which resulted in a
decline in housing production and an actual decline in market rents and housing
prices. The opposite was true in the period 1998-2007. Now we have entered a
period worse than the downturn in 1990-1993. The City has seen a decline in
residential construction, as financing has declined and housing foreclosures have
increased.
When one examines more closely who benefited from the recent housing ‘boom’
and who is now being impacted by its decline, it is clear that many households who
had been priced out of the market or who had been faced with increasing the
proportion of income they had to set aside for housing, are in mortgage trouble.
Moreover, as compensation is stagnant (7% decrease in real wages in the last 3
Norwalk
Page 62
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
years)43 or reduced and as many household members have lost their jobs, it has
become difficult to maintain mortgage payments. The first wave of foreclosures
were of houses purchased in many cases with sub-prime mortgages. The latest
wave are for houses which had adjustable rate mortgages and liberal underwriting
standards (so called alt-A mortgages). Rental housing has also been impacted by
foreclosures. Tenants have been evicted or live in unsafe conditions and in some
cases, properties are abandoned.
For those households above median income, although the cost of housing rose,
they still had sufficient income for other basic needs. In housing economics, we
refer to this phenomenon as incomeelasticity. Low- income families have less
elasticity than higher income families. Thus for the lower income households
spending 50% of income on housing results in neglect of other more basic needs.
General Population Characteristics
The following tables summarize the basic characteristics of the City’s population.
Table 18: Population Characteristics44
2000 Total
Households
2009 Total
Households
2014 Total
Households
32,711
33,202
33,307
Norwalk
Table 19: 2000-2009 & Estimated 2014 Population Change45
Norwalk
Connecticut
2000 Total
Population
82,951
3,405,565
2009 Total
Population
84,386
3,534,265
% Change
2000-2009
1.73%
3,78
2014 Total
Population
84,656
3,574,550
%
Change
20092014
0.32%
0.23%
Since 2000 Norwalk has been experiencing an upward trend in its population
growth. The population in the state of Connecticut has also been increasing since
2000 but both Norwalk and the State are expected to plateau in their growth rates
between the years of 2009 and 2014.
43
44
45
National data
ESRI forecasts for 2009 and 2014
ESRI ibid.
Norwalk
Page 63
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Housing Characteristics
Table 20: Overview of Population and Housing Characteristics46
Summary
2000
2009
2014
Population
82,951
84,386
84,656
Households
32,711
33,202
33,307
12,747
12,807
12,835
3,825
3,924
3,684
20,963
21,065
20,935
Low Income
Extremely Low Income
Families
Average Household Size
2.51
2.51
2.51
Owner Occupied Housing Units
20,280
20,680
20,544
Renter Occupied Housing Units
12,431
12,522
12,763
36.7
39.0
39.7
Norwalk
State
National
Population
0.32%
1.14%
0.91%
Households
0.32%
1.37%
0.94%
-0.62%
-0.66%
0.53%
0.60%
0.74%
Median Age
Trends: 2009-2014 Annual Rate
Families
Owner Households
1.19%
Table 21: Racial/Ethnic Composition47
White Alone
Black Alone
American Indian
Alone
Asian Alone
Pacific Islander
Alone
Some Other Race
Alone
Two or More Races
Hispanic Origin (Any
Race)
2000
73.9%
15.3%
2009
68.9%
16.8%
2014
66.1%
17.5%
0.2%
0.3%
0.3%
3.3%
4.9%
6.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.1%
4.3%
5.6%
6.3%
2.9%
3.5%
3.7%
15.6%
20.1%
22.7%
The City has comparable diversity to the US as a whole, but is not as diverse as
Bridgeport and Stamford.
46
47
ESRI Ibid.
ESRI 2009
Norwalk
Page 64
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
48
Chart 10: Diversity Index
The Diversity Index summarizes racial and ethnic diversity. The index shows the
likelihood that two persons, chosen at random from the same area, belong to
different race or ethnic groups. The index ranges from 0 (no diversity) to 100
(complete diversity). For example, the diversity score for Norwalk is 66 which
means there is a 66 percent probability that two people randomly chosen from the
Norwalk population would belong to different race or ethnic group. The US has a
diversity rating of 61.
Ownership and Rental Housing
The table below indicates that while a decline in owner occupied units is expected
between 2000 and 2014, most of it can be accounted for by the increase in vacant
units. This may be due to the 2007-2009 spate of foreclosures, but may also
include unsold units of new construction and families who have voluntarily moved
out of their unit without selling.
Table 22: Trends in Tenure for Norwalk49
Occupied
2000
96.9%
2009
95.3%
2014
95.1%
Owner
60.1%
59.3%
58.7%
Renter
36.8%
35.9%
36.5%
3.1%
4.7%
4.9%
Vacant
48
49
ESRI Ibid.
ESRI Ibid.
Norwalk
Page 65
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Table 23: Tenure Characteristics50
2009 Total
Housing
Units
Norwalk
Connecticut
Total US
2009 Owner
Occupied HU
2009 Renter
Occupied HU
2009 Vacant
Housing Units
34,845
#
20,680
%
59%
#
12,522
%
36%
#
1,643
%
5%
1,462,874
131,278,867
904,204
77,088,155
62%
59%
448,820
39,435,001
31%
30%
109,850
14,755,711
7%
11%
Note: The data in this table does not reflect the changes which have been
occurring since early 2009.
The table above shows that in general the vacancy rate in Norwalk, although higher
than its 2000 rate, was less than both the state and national average. Generally,
housing economists state that a 7% vacancy rate is necessary for an efficient rental
market. It is not possible to generate current (2009) data separately for renters
versus owners. Renter and owner occupancy rates for the City did not experience
significant changes between 2000 and 2009. Renter occupancy experienced a
0.73% increase and owner occupancy a 1.97% increase.
Housing Supply
There has been a significant decline in the annual rate of housing production over
the last 5 years, which has the potential of causing a tightening of the housing
market. In the years of 2001, 2004 and 2005 a number of housing units, mostly
multi-family, were issued building permits in Norwalk. After 2006 however, the
number of building permits issued steadily declined. Although the most current
data is not available, we can assume that this number has continued to decline
through 2009.
Chart 11: Building Permits issued in Norwalk per year (2000-2008)51
50
51
ESRI Ibid.
HUD Building Permits Database
Norwalk
Page 66
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Table 24: Norwalk Building Permits by Category 52
Single Family
Multi-Family
Total
2005
81
252
333
2006
55
52
107
2007
51
44
95
2008
24
181
205
Affordable Housing Production
Norwalk has a number of large-scale development projects that are moving forward
that, if built as planned, will add approximately 1,600 units to Norwalk housing
base. Of these total residential units, approximately 12% are proposed to be placed
into service as “affordable.” However, four of these large developments are located
in the urban renewal areas of the City and the affordability provisions were
negotiated with each of the developers as part of the land disposition agreements
(LDA) with the Agency. In other words, the affordability provisions of these
redevelopments are more a function of the negotiated LDA and less to do with the
Workforce Housing Regulation of the City.
Several redevelopment projects are in the planning stage including the proposed
$500 million mixed use 95/7 redevelopment project in South Norwalk (241 units),
POKO’s project in the Wall Street area (of which approximately 25% of the planned
370 units would be affordable) and Stanley Seligson Properties’ Waypointe
redevelopment along the West Avenue corridor (350 units). A multi-phase
development called “Head of the Harbor” by M.F. DiScala at the southern Smith
Street site and the northern High Street site proposes 150 residential units, about
20% of which would be affordable.
There are two larger rental developments that are already under construction and
expected to be placed into service in 2010. Avalon is under construction for its
planned 314 unit apartment complex along Belden Avenue just north of Wall Street.
At the site of the former Pepperidge Farm offices near the Post Road, a 235-unit
high-end residential complex is under construction.
The following table summarizes the potential affordable housing production in
Norwalk based on developments described above.
Table 25: Affordable Housing Production
Name
95/7 Redevelopment
POKO’s Project
Waypointe
Head of the Harbor
Avalon
Former Pepperidge Farm
Offices
Total Units
52
Location
South Norwalk
Wall Street
West Avenue
Smith Street
Belden Avenue
Post Road
Total Units
241
370
350
150
314
235
1,660
Affordable
Units
18
92
30
140
HUD Ibid.
Norwalk
Page 67
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
As acknowledged previously, between the increased number of residential units
added to Norwalk’s housing stock since the last Census and the number of
affordable units that have been placed in service, Norwalk’s supply of affordable
housing as a percentage of all housing units, maychange once the new Census data
is available.
Table 26: Subsidized Housing Inventory53
2000 Census
Year Round
HU
33,753
ESRI est.
2009 Year
Round HU
Recent
Potential
SHI Units
(through
2010)
33,202
1,660
Total 2010
SHI Units
including
new
production
estimate
4,982
Total SHI
Units
3,322
Table 27: Public Housing and Voucher Lists
Agency
Federal
Public
Housing
Units
Norwalk
Housing
Authority
823
State
Public
Housing
Units
Federal
Vouchers
200
State
Vouchers
680
108
Total
1,811
The CHAS/ACS survey of 2008 analyzed the occupancy characteristics of
households in Norwalk. The focus of this analysis was to determine the extent to
which there were mismatches between the cost of the housing and incomes of the
occupant families.54 In an ideal world , households would be occupying housing
whose cost was such that they were neither over-paying or underpaying ( although
underpaying is not a critical problem).
The following tables show how households are distributed in terms of income and in
terms of whether the cost of that unit being occupied is affordable to a household in
that income bracket. For example, if a house which is affordable to a low income
household (50.1%-80% AMI) was being occupied by anyone whose income was
extremely low income (<=30% AMI), then one would say, that that extremely low
income family was being cost burdened because they are living in a house which is
NOT affordable to them (see green highlighted cells below). Conversely, if that
53
DECD Survey
54
The creation of the Owner Affordability dimension requires a series of assumptions, in order to
determine the relationship between a housing unit’s value and the monthly mortgage payment required to
54
purchase it. HUD assumed a 31% monthly payment standard, 96.5% loan-to-value rate, a 5.5%
interest rate, a 1.75% upfront insurance premium, a .55% annual insurance premium, and 2% annual
taxes and insurance. Based on these assumptions, HUD estimated value to income ratio of 3.36 for an
“affordable” home. Renter Affordability assumes that a 30% monthly payment standard is the threshold
for affordability.
Norwalk
Page 68
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
house was being occupied by someone above 80.1% AMI, that household is underburdened (see yellow highlighted cells below).
Table 28a: Number of Owner Housing Units with and without Mortgages Affordable to
Households in 200855
Occupied
by HHs
<=30%
AMI
Affordable to HHs
<=30% AMI
Affordable to HHs
30-50% AMI
Affordable to HHs
50-80% AMI
Affordable to HHs
>80% AMI
Total
Occupied
by HHs
30.1-50%
AMI
Occupied
by HHs
50.1-80%
AMI
Occupied
by HHs
>80.1%
AMI
Total
Occupied
190
145
185
155
675
315
590
760
555
2,220
545
435
1,000
1,860
3,840
795
1,845
1,345
2,515
2,755
4,700
8,765
11,335
13,660
20,395
The same analysis is repeated for rental units below.
Table 28b: Number of Rental Housing Units Affordable to Households in 200856
Occupied
by HHs
<=30%
AMFI
Affordable to HHs
<=30% AMFI
Affordable to HHs
30-50% AMFI
Affordable to HHs
50-80% AMFI
Affordable to HHs
>80% AMFI
Total
Occupied
by HHs
30.1-50%
AMFI
Occupied
by HHs
50.1-80%
AMFI
Occupied
by HHs
>80.1%
AMFI
Total
Occupied
1,585
220
185
275
2,265
1,100
1,220
585
760
3,665
860
865
1,330
1,285
4,340
25
3,570
25
2,330
220
2,320
410
2,730
680
10,950
72% of owner and 30% of renter occupied houses that are affordable to households
below 30% AMI, are occupied by households who earn above 30% AMI. Similarly,
38% of owner and 23% of renter occupied housing units that are affordable to
households below 80% of median income in the City are occupied by households
earning above 80% of median.
Households move in and out of the non-subsidized housing stock, so that at any
one time, mismatch analysis such as we have done above, is just a snapshot in
time. During the period of 1995 through 2007, when housing prices soared, there
was significant conversion of rental housing to ownership and also a rise in rental
55
HUD ACS Tables 15A, 15B and 15C
56
Bid.
Norwalk
Page 69
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
rates. This became a loss of affordable housing. HUD conducted a study in 2007.57
This study concluded that the three most affordable categories—non-market units,
extremely low rent units, and very low rent units—posted large decreases in the
number of units between 2005 and 2007. The three categories combined declined
by between 1.5 and 2.0 million units nationally.
The study above, showing how many affordable units there are in Norwalk,
including subsidized and unsubsidized housing units. There are two categories of
subsidies – deep subsidies such as Public Housing, that ensure a household is not
cost burdened, while other subsidy mechanisms, such as Tax Credits and HOME
typically reduce housing cost, but do not ensure that the household is limited to
paying 30% of their income.
At this time Norwalk’s subsidized housing units of all types account for 11.38% of
the total housing stock. These total approximately 2,500 rental units and 550
owner units. There are 788 other units in the City which have been made
affordable, due to the use of vouchers (HCV and VASH), which are used to occupy
housing units which are not subsidized.
The analysis of the tables above, indicate that in 2008 there were approximately
8,700 owners and 5,700 renters below 80% of median who were occupying houses
affordable to them and yet receiving no subsidy.
A preservation strategy, would therefore be entirely appropriate, as it could enable
these households to continue to reside in that affordable housing and avoid the
phenomenon of loss of affordable housing, noted in the HUD study above.
If we do the same analysis as above, but for housing units which were vacant in
2008, there are 115 vacant housing units in standard condition that are not
subsidized but are affordable to households below 30% of the median.
Table 29a: Number of Vacant Owner Units Affordable to Households in 200858
Vacant Ownership Units Standard Condition
Affordability
Affordable to HHs at 50% AMI
Affordable to HHs above 100% AMI
Total
Substandard Vacant Units
57 HUD PD&R:
58
Bedroom #
2
0
0
35
0
15
0
0
100
50
100
0 or 1
Total
3+
0
0
45
60
105
0
35
60
160
255
0
Rental Market Dynamics: 2005-2007
Ibid.
Norwalk
Page 70
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Table 29b: Number of Vacant Renter Units Affordable to Households in 200859
Vacant Rental Units - Standard
Condition
Affordability
Affordable to HHs at 30% AMFI
Affordable to HHs above 80% AMFI
Total
Substandard Vacant Units
Bedroom #
0 or 1
2
55
60
35
185
110
305
40
0
240
550
Total
3+
0
60
0
70
130
115
280
415
110
920
105
Matching these severely cost-burdened rental households to these affordable units,
could help ameliorate problems for them. A similar approach could be taken for
low income owner households with severe cost burdens. In addition, as there were
105 vacant sub-standard rental units in 2008, a strategy of acquiring and rehabbing
these would provide some additional affordable housing.
Ownership Affordability
Contributing to affordability problems for owner occupants, was the large increase
in housing values from 1995 through 2006, and the subsequent increases in costs
such as taxes and insurance. Since 2006 there has been a decline in housing
values, but this decline is hard to analyze in terms of how it has affected the target
CDBG population – namely, households below 80% of median income.
Chart 12: Single Family Median Housing Prices 1995-200460
59
Ibid.
60
2005 Consolidated Plan Norwalk
Norwalk
Page 71
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Chart 13: Home Prices in Norwalk 2004-200961
Whether one looks at medians (which can be distorted by extreme pricing
differentials) or averages, the trend is similar, as the chart below illustrates.
Chart 14: Median and Average Housing Values in Norwalk62
61
62
City Data.com
ESRI Ibid.
Norwalk
Page 72
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Another illustration of housing affordability is to look at the cost of housing divided
by household income, which generates an indicator ratio which illustrates the
growing cost burden of ownership housing.
Table 30: Median Housing Price as a Multiple of Median Household Income63
1980
1990
2000
2009
US
2.79
2.64
2.66
2.97
Table 31: Median and Average Housing Values as a Multiple of Median and Average
Household Income for Norwalk64
Norwalk
2000
2009
2014
4.16
5.10
5.96
Median Housing Value to Median
Income Ratio
3.65
4.49
5.12
Average Housing Value to Average
Income Ratio
These tables illustrate the multiple of household income divided into the value or
cost of housing in Norwalk and compares that with the US. Historically the US
average has been around 2.75, but after 1980 it rose to a value of 2.97 in 2009.
The ratio is a better measure, in that it accounts for differences in income and
housing costs in any city or town. These ratios illustrate that households entering
the homeownership market in 2009 needed substantially more of their income to
purchase a home than they did in 2000. Most importantly, it illustrates the higher
relative cost of housing in Norwalk compared with the nation as a whole.
If the median housing value in Norwalk in 2009 dropped by about $174,000, then
the ratio would equal that of the US as a whole.
This has had and will continue to have significant implications for the future of
businesses in the area, which rely on or employ middle and lower income people.
The Chart below shows how the relative cost of housing in terms of income rose
substantially between 2000 and 2009 in Norwalk. In the US the ratio rose 12%,
while Norwalk’s rose 23%, and Connecticut’s rose 30%. This has severe
consequences for homebuyers as home prices are rising steeply whereas the
residents’ incomes are not.
63
64
ESRI Ibid.
ESRI Ibid.
Norwalk
Page 73
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Chart 15: Median Housing Value as a Ratio of Median Household Income65
When one examines households that are at or below 80% of median income, it
becomes clear that the number of affordable housing units (either single-family
homes or condominiums) available is seriously limited. For a family of four in
Norwalk to pay 31% of its income for housing, the cost of the home cannot exceed
$220,329. Out of 300 single family homes for sale, only 15 meet this criteria. Less
than one third of the 297 condominiums available would be considered affordable
and there are none in the affordable category that have more than two bedrooms.66
Table 32: 2009 Monthly Owner Maximums for Low Income HHs67
ELI
VLI
LI
Median HH
Income
$81,968
$81,968
$81,968
Group Median
Income
$24,590
$40,984
$65,574
Monthly Max
at 31% of
Income
$635
$1,058
$1,694
HUD
Affordable
Unit at 3.36
Income to
Value Ratio
$82,622
$137,706
$220,329
In addition, we examined home sales prices in the City to see what was available as
of February 24th, 2010.
65
ESRI Ibid.
66
Raveis Real Estate
67
ESRI Ibid
Norwalk
Page 74
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Table 33: Home Sales Listings at 2/28/201068
Income Group
Extremely Low
Income (<=30%
AMI
Very Low
Income (30.1%
-50% AMI
Low Income
(50.1% -80%
AMI
Number
of Listings
below
Maximum
Lowest
Single
Family
Home
Offered
Lowest
Single
Family
Home as a
% of HUD
Affordable
HU
Affordable
to HH with
Income of
__
Percentage
of Median
0
0
N/A
N/A
N/A
1
$99,900
36.27%
$26,854
66%
7
$149,900
68.03%
$40,296
61%
The high cost of housing relative to income led many buyers to take out
questionable loans with “teaser” rates and adjustable rate mortgages. This in turn
was a key factor in the recent real estate troubles, evidenced by the rising rate of
lis pendens (mortgages being placed into the process of foreclosure) and in
foreclosure.
Chart 16a: Foreclosure Rates in Norwalk and Nearby Cities and Towns69
Chart 16b: Foreclosure Rates in Norwalk and Nearby Cities and Towns70
68
69
ESRI Ibid, Raveis Real Estate
RealtyTrac 3-16-2010
Norwalk
Page 75
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
One of the factors driving these high housing prices over recent years has been the
increase in the size of the average house. In 1970 the average home was 1,500
square feet. Now it is 2,300 square feet. Moreover, the number of bathrooms,
kitchen appliances and other amenities has also increased. Construction costs have
also escalated, so that the combination of rising land costs, increasing size of
homes, multiplication of amenities and the rising cost of construction, were
reflected in the rising value of housing.
Table 34: Average Total Square Footage and 1993-2001 Change for U.S.71
Total Square Footage
Percentage
Change
1993
2001
All Housing Units
1,875
2,066
10.6
Single-Family Housing Units
2,278
2,527
10.9
-Single-Family Detached
2,337
2,553
9.2
-Single-Family Attached
1,799
2,373
31.9
Apartments
972
1,043
7.3
-In 2-4 Unit Buildings
1,198
1,393
16.3
-In 5 or more Unit Buildings
861
847
-1.6
Mobile Homes
975
1,062
8.9
In addition, those who secured their homes prior to 1995 were able to lock in lower
housing costs. Purchasers since then have seen (until late 2007), a large growth in
housing costs. One of the key factors in this has been the required revaluation of
70
RealtyTrac 3-16-2010
71
Department of Energy
Norwalk
Page 76
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
property by tax assessors to regularly reassess all property at full market value.
The adjustments made to all housing valuations since 1995 (when courts nationwide began forcing cities and towns to go to full market valuation for assessment
purposes), have particularly impacted owners whose assessed housing values were
artificially low.
Any increase in housing valuation would result in an increase in taxes and insurance
(which tends to track housing valuations). This impacts poorer households
disproportionately, because it increases their cost of housing as a percentage of
income and they benefit less financially from income deductions available to
homeowners.
The group most impacted are those on fixed or declining incomes, of which the
elderly form the most significant segment. Although, in the last year, the recession
has caused loss of jobs and in some cases reduction in salaries, wages and benefits,
impacting the non-elderly in the workforce. The most recent CHAS/ACS data from
2009 demonstrates that the number of elderly and family households paying more
than 30% of their monthly income for housing is high, particularly amongst small
families. A significant proportion of the low-income elderly households in the City
are also troubled by housing problems
Rental Affordability
The real estate changes over the past 5 years are also reflected in the rental
market. The following table illustrates HUD’s own analysis of rent levels for modest
housing affordable to households with incomes at or below 80% of median income.
Chart 17: HUD FMRs for a Modest 2BR Unit 1990-201072
72
HUD FMRs 1983-2010
Norwalk
Page 77
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Table 35: 2009 Monthly Rental Maximums for Low Income HHs73
Norwalk
Median
HH
Income
$81,968
80%
Median
Income
$65,574
Monthly
Max at
30% of
Income
$1,639
HUD
FMR
2BR
2009
$1,703
%
Above/Below
HUD 2BRFMR
3.76%
In addition, we examined the rental listings in the City to see what was available as
of February 22nd,2010.
Table 36: Rental Listings at 2/22/201074
Norwalk
Listings
below
Monthly
max at
80%
Median
8
Lowest 2
Bedroom
Unit
Rent
Offered
$1,542
HUD
FMR
2BR
2010
$1,800
Lowest
rent
available
as a %
of HUD
FMR
85.67%
Affordable
to HH
with
Income of
__
$61,680
Percentage
of Median
75%
*Note that available units had to be within jurisdictional boundaries for this
analysis, even though Federal vouchers can be used anywhere in the US.
4. Describe the number and targeting (income level and type of household served)
of units currently assisted by local, state, or federally funded programs, and an
assessment of whether any such units are expected to be lost from the assisted
housing inventory for any reason, (i.e. expiration of Section 8 contracts).
HUD’s Hartford Regional Field Office has provided a listing of all housing units produced with
Federal financial resources and whose resale prices are restricted to ensure these units remain
available to low- and moderate-income households. Staff made a similar request to the
Connecticut Housing Finance Authority (CHFA) to secure a listing of those affordable units
financed with State housing resources. In its review of this inventory the Agency recognizes
that sixty-five (65) units will experience the expiration of their associated deed restrictions within
the next five years and that 543 units in 9 developments have Section 8 contracts expiring
between 2010 and 2014. These contracts are likely to be renewed, but they do require
monitoring. Note, although these projects may face a reduction or elimination of governmental
subsidy, the units within each project may remain affordable as a result of local or project
specific restrictions.
5. Indicate how the characteristics of the housing market will influence the use of
funds made available for rental assistance, production of new units,
rehabilitation of old units, or acquisition of existing units. Please note, the goal
of affordable housing is not met by beds in nursing homes.
The profile of the Norwalk population and estimates of those with housing problems
and needs show that the housing cost burden has increased and is expected to
73
74
Norwalk ESRI DemographicandIncome.xls
ESRI Ibid, MyApartmentMap
Norwalk
Page 78
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
continue to increase through 2014. This housing cost burden, decreasing
proportion of owner-occupied housing units and increased vacancy rate shows the
need for more home-buyer assistance programs and efforts to reduce housing cost
burdens for low and moderate-income homeowners.
The City can also take measures to preserve existing rental units that are
subsidized, as well as affordable rental units provided by landlords. Rehab and
other preservation tactics can also be effective.
Measures that can benefit both renter and owner households include the City
enhancing affordable housing incentive zoning, such as inclusionary zoning or
density bonuses, that will help provide more housing choices for low and moderate
income households.
Although Norwalk’s population is forecasted to plateau by 2014, this does not mean
that the number of households with housing problems and needs will also stay the
same or even decrease. Efforts to provide more and better affordable housing
options and incentives to increase the rate of home-ownership in the City will not
only create a better housing climate, but also attract new households to possibly
combat the leveling-off in the population.
Specific Housing Objectives (91.215 (b))
1. Describe the priorities and specific objectives the jurisdiction hopes to achieve
over a specified time period.
2. Describe how Federal, State, and local public and private sector resources that
are reasonably expected to be available will be used to address identified needs
for the period covered by the strategic plan.
3-5 Year Strategic Plan Specific Housing Objectives response:
The priorities and specific objectives for the 5 Year Plan 2010-2014 are as tabulated
below.
Table 38: Priorities and Objectives 2010-2014
Activity
Target
Populations
Estimated
Number
Benefiting
Goal One: Support efforts to
stabilize or reduce housing costs.
Norwalk
Priority
High
High
Page 79
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Activity
Target
Populations
Estimated
Number
Benefiting
Preservation
Placement services
Total 2010-2014
Goal Two: Support efforts to
ameliorate the impacts of this
economic depression on families.
Child care services
Basic services
Total 2010-2014
Priority Three: Support efforts
Support efforts to create income
stability.
Business loans
Literacy/GED/Customized Job
Training
application
Total 2010-2014
Priority
High
High
Medium
Medium
High
150
Households
150
500
250
250
100
250
Persons
Youth
Persons
Youth
Children
Persons
High
High
Medium
Medium
Medium
Medium
5 Loans
High
150 Persons
250 Youth
1 Activity
Project
High
High
Medium
1 Application
Medium
The City recognizes the importance of leveraging Norwalk’s limited CDBG resources
with those resources of other Federal, State and municipal resources. Further the
City and Agency have attempted, not only to pursue other resources, but also
combine these resources in targeted programming such as the City Neighborhoods
initiative in order to maximize the benefit of these funds.
Within the past five years, the City, Agency and North Walke Housing Corporation
have aggressively pursued funding from the State of Connecticut in order to expand
its affordable housing offerings. Specifically, North Walke, acting on behalf of the
City, has applied for, and received, Norwalk’s first infusion of HOME Investment
Norwalk
Page 80
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Partnership Programming to establish the Norwalk Homeownership Assistance
Program. This Program is providing income eligible applicants with down payment
and closing cost assistance in order to purchase their first homes. North Walke
partners with a Fairfield County-based affordable housing service provider to
leverage the resources of area banks and the Connecticut Housing Finance
Authority in order to provide all required financing for first-time homebuyers.
Further North Walke has now closed on an assistance agreement with the State’s
Department of Economic and Community Development that will make $715,000 in
funding from the State’s Housing Trust Fund in order to create a residential
rehabilitation program targeted to the South Norwalk neighborhood.
Further the Agency, on behalf of the City, securedTechnical Assistance Grant of
$20,000 from the State of Connecticut Office of Policy and Management’s (OPM)
Housing for Economic Growth Program (Public Act 01-07). The City will utilize these
funds to identify possible locations within Norwalk for the creation of an Incentive
Housing Zone or Zones.
The City will seek to build this relationship with DECD in order to access additional
funds for local affordable housing initiatives.
The Agency works closely with the National Development Council, Inc. (NDC), a
national non-profit dedicated to providing economic and community development
finance in client communities, to access available debt and equity financing from
the Federal and State governments as well as Community Development Financial
Institutions. NDC will remain in active partnership with the Agency to assist in
accessing the benefits of Low-Income Housing Tax Credits and New Markets Tax
Credits.
To supplement those resources available for affordable housing the Agency pursue
an annual allocation of municipal Capital Budget funding, Such funding affords the
Agency a flexible source funding to provide pre-development and construction
financing to both for-profit and non-profit affordable housing developers.
It should be noted that within the past five years the Agency secured a Brownfields
Assessment Grant from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to assist in
inventorying, prioritizing and assessing known or suspect brownfields in Norwalk.
Such funding will assist the City and Agency in overcoming barriers to private
investment within the City’s urban core resulting from environmental concerns. Like
its relationship with DECD, the Agency will pursue additional sources of funding
from the USEPA in order affect the redevelopment of underutilized brownfields.
During the term of the City’s new Plan, the City will look to purse those resources
that will assist in building a sustainable, economically-healthy environment within
its urban core. With that objective in mind, the City and Agency may explore new
and established programming through HUD including HOPE VI as well as the
Sustainable Communities initiative.
Norwalk
Page 81
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Needs of Public Housing (91.210 (b))
In cooperation with the public housing agency or agencies located within its
boundaries, describe the needs of public housing, including the number of public
housing units in the jurisdiction, the physical condition of such units, the restoration
and revitalization needs of public housing projects within the jurisdiction, and other
factors, including the number of families on public housing and tenant-based
waiting lists and results from the Section 504 needs assessment of public housing
projects located within its boundaries (i.e. assessment of needs of tenants and
applicants on waiting list for accessible units as required by 24 CFR 8.25). The
public housing agency and jurisdiction can use the optional Priority Public Housing
Needs Table (formerly Table 4) of the Consolidated Plan to identify priority public
housing needs to assist in this process.
3-5 Year Strategic Plan Needs of Public Housing response:
The housing market analysis of the Norwalk Housing Authorityis in the CPMP
needs.xls file and are also described below.
The following Table summarizes the Federal and State funded public housing and
voucher programs for the PHA as of April 2010.
Table 39: PHA Programs75
Federal Public
Housing
Federal
HCV
State Moderate
(Project Based Sn 8)
Housing
823
680
200
State
Housing
108
Any PHA receiving HUD funds is required to submit a 5 year and annual PHA Plan to
HUD each year after a public planning and hearing process. One of the
requirements of the process is that the PHA Plan has to be coordinated with and
approved by the local Consolidated Plan agency. Additionally this Consolidated
Plan, has to be developed with the assistance of the PHA.
Not only has data been collected from the PHA but it has been invited to meetings
and to submit proposals for funding.
In a survey of the Norwalk Housing Authority, the capital and operating needs of
the agency were documented by it as in the table below. Note that as HUD fully
funds the Capital Needs of Federal Public Housing, we have only inserted those
needs for other housing that does not receive a regular stream of capital
investment.
75
NHA PHA Plan 2010
Norwalk
Page 82
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Table 40: NHA Declared Agency Needs76
Category & Description
General Physical Improvements
Section 504 Corrections
Social Service Needs
Homeownership Assistance
Needs
Other Critical Needs Including
Management and Operations
Other Critical Needs Including
Management and Operations
Needs
Colonial Village, 16 School
Street, Ludlow Village,
Ludlow Commons
None
See Table below
Resources
Needed
$4,204,554
$0
$TBD
TBD
$TBD
None
$0
None
$0
Table 41: Housing Authority Special Needs Survey77
Category
Elderly
Total Elderly Units
Est # in Need of SH
Est # in Need of SS
Number
Est # of these receiving SS
Elderly Congregate
Accessible Congregate
Disabled
Total Disabled Units
Est # in Need of SH
Est # in Need of SS
Family
Total Family Units
Est # in Need of SH
Est # in Need of SS
293
82
82
N/A
44
89
81
3
29
784
0
35
78
Notes: SH = Supportive Housing (as compared with independent living) e.g. an elderly person
who should be in congregate housing
SS = Supportive Services. These could be delivered by the PHA or by some other organization
76
77
OKM Survey: NHA Declared Agency Needs 2010
OKM Associates Survey: Housing Authority Special Needs 2010
Norwalk
Page 83
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Public Housing Strategy (91.210)
1. Describe the public housing agency's strategy to serve the needs of extremely
low-income, low-income, and moderate-income families residing in the
jurisdiction served by the public housing agency (including families on the public
housing and section 8 tenant-based waiting list), the public housing agency’s
strategy for addressing the revitalization and restoration needs of public housing
projects within the jurisdiction and improving the management and operation of
such public housing, and the public housing agency’s strategy for improving the
living environment of extremely low-income, low-income, and moderate families
residing in public housing.
2. Describe the manner in which the plan of the jurisdiction will help address the
needs of public housing and activities it will undertake to encourage public
housing residents to become more involved in management and participate in
homeownership. (NAHA Sec. 105 (b)(11) and (91.215 (k))
3. If the public housing agency is designated as "troubled" by HUD or otherwise is
performing poorly, the jurisdiction shall describe the manner in which it will
provide financial or other assistance in improving its operations to remove such
designation. (NAHA Sec. 105 (g))
3-5 Year Strategic Plan Public Housing Strategy response:
1. Describe the public housing agency's strategy to serve the needs of extremely
low-income, low-income, and moderate-income families residing in the
jurisdiction served by the public housing agency (including families on the public
housing and section 8 tenant-based waiting list), the public housing agency’s
strategy for addressing the revitalization and restoration needs of public housing
projects within the jurisdiction and improving the management and operation of
such public housing, and the public housing agency’s strategy for improving the
living environment of extremely low-income, low-income, and moderate families
residing in public housing.
Needs: The major focus of the agency has been on quality management of its
programs, whether it is properties or vouchers and especially to ensure that
turnover time is fast, so that vacancies are reduced and families on the waiting list
can be housed quickly.
In addition, it has identified the need to foster education and potential employment
through child and youth enrichment programs. A June 2009 assessment of student
reading skills/performance showed a 73% increase in scores versus a baseline
assessment conducted the previous fall.A March 2009 survey of Learning Center
students ages 12-18 showed that 58.5% of respondents had a desire to attend
college or some other post-secondary institution, an increase of 15.5% from a
survey done in 2008.
Norwalk
Page 84
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
From 2005 through 2009, the number of employed family head of households,
spouses or co-heads increased yearly from 403 to 533.
The NHA has also adopted a two tier voucher payment system, whereby households
encouraged to rent in low poverty areas of Norwalk, have the right to rent at higher
rental rates. This program of deconcentration has had significant results.In 2007,
18.5% of voucher holders resided in higher income census tracts.Since then, this
has increased to 31%.
Revitalization: Although agencies with federal public housing have had the
advantage of a regular stream of capital funding and have used this stream to
modernize and maintain their public housing Norwalk Capital Needs are
approximately 35 million dollars, therefore it is difficult for Norwalk Housing
Authority to compete in the market place. They also have had revitalization
sources such as HOPE VI. The Norwalk Housing Authorityhas been planning to
redevelop public housing projects into mixed income developments. Feasibility
studieshave been completed and Washington Village has been set as the first
priority in collaboration with Agency. A study is being conducted on substantial
rehabilitation feasibility for Roodner Court. In addition, the NHA is continuing to
look at other options for all of its properties which need revitalization.
This year the plan to develop 85 homeownership units on approximately 7 vacant
acres at Colonial Village was revised. The new plan is to replace all of the 200
existing units with new units and build market rate rental or homeownership units
or tax credit units creating a mixed income community. Approval to use the existing
project based Section 8 on the new units has been received from HUD.
Living Environment: In addition to housing management and modernization, the
PHAhas also tried to identify needs for specialized housing and services, to support
those who have needs which are not easily met in an independent living
environment. The survey done of theNHA identified the needs in the Table above in
the prior section.
2. Describe the manner in which the plan of the jurisdiction will help address the
needs of public housing and activities it will undertake to encourage public
housing residents to become more involved in management and participate in
homeownership. (NAHA Sec. 105 (b)(11) and (91.215 (k)).
The Agency has limited resources to assist the needs of the NHA and its clients,
especially when compared with the needs of those who do not have access to
affordable housing. However, as the quality of the living environment for residents
is critical to the neighborhoods within which public housing is placed, the Agency
will do everything it can to support revitalization efforts.
It continues to support the NHA’s residents and participants who apply for
homeownership assistance, focusing on those coming out of Family Self Sufficiency
programs. The NHA has a HCV homeownership program and so far, 24 households
have become homeowners. Some were assisted with City funds as well as NHA
Norwalk
Page 85
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
funds. NHA encourages the City to continue to fund down payment subsidies
through the Housing Development Fund. While the NHA has not adopted a Section
32 homeownership program, it is looking at it and the Agency will encourage them
to do so, especially as a recent HUD study indicated that one of the more successful
homeownership production collaborations has been between PHAs and Cities in
developing homeownership.
The Agency will also work with the State and the NHA to develop project based
Section 8 projects. As the HUD regulations permit up to 20% of the allocation to be
used for this purpose, this has the potential for developing more than 126
affordable housing units. The NHA at this time wishes to reserve most of these for
the redevelopment of Washington Village, but it will consider the program for some
small housing projects.
3. If the public housing agency is designated as "troubled" by HUD or otherwise is
performing poorly, the jurisdiction shall describe the manner in which it will
provide financial or other assistance in improving its operations to remove such
designation. (NAHA Sec. 105 (g))
The NHA has not been designated as troubled by HUD and there are no indications
that it has been performing poorly.
Barriers to Affordable Housing (91.210 (e) and 91.215 (f))
1. Explain whether the cost of housing or the incentives to develop, maintain, or
improve affordable housing are affected by public policies, particularly those of
the local jurisdiction. Such policies include tax policy affecting land and other
property, land use controls, zoning ordinances, building codes, fees and charges,
growth limits, and policies that affect the return on residential investment.
2. Describe the strategy to remove or ameliorate negative effects of public policies
that serve as barriers to affordable housing, except that, if a State requires a
unit of general local government to submit a regulatory barrier assessment that
is substantially equivalent to the information required under this part, as
determined by HUD, the unit of general local government may submit that
assessment to HUD and it shall be considered to have complied with this
requirement.
3-5 Year Strategic Plan Barriers to Affordable Housing response:
1. Explain whether the cost of housing or the incentives to develop, maintain, or
improve affordable housing are affected by public policies, particularly those of
the local jurisdiction. Such policies include tax policy affecting land and other
property, land use controls, zoning ordinances, building codes, fees and charges,
growth limits, and policies that affect the return on residential investment.
In general, public policies affecting the cost and production of affordable housing
Norwalk
Page 86
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
are modified by specific zoning by-laws. Production is enhanced in Connecticut
through the following:
•
•
•
•
inclusionary zoning (a percentage of housing developed in the marketplace
being set aside for affordable use and usually placed within mixed income
developments);
accessory apartments (particularly effective in enabling low income elderly
owners to continue living in the community);
overlay districts permit increased density and state funding support and
enable affordable units within mixed income developments;
C.G.S. Section8-30g is a state law which permits it to override local zoning
for a specific development if local government does not meet minimum
affordable housing goals.
The City is utilizing such features as density bonus provisions and inclusionary
zoning. Inclusionary Zoning was established in the City to enhance the public
welfare through increasing the production of housing affordable to persons of very
low, low and moderate income. The City requires new, converted or renovated
housing development to include 10% of housing units that shall be affordable to
persons of very-low, low and moderate income one 20 or more units have been
built. Accordingly, the provisions of this section are designed to:
•
•
•
increase the supply of rental and ownership housing in the City of Norwalk
that is available and affordable to low and moderate income households;
exceed the 10% affordable housing threshold established by the State of
Connecticut;
encourages greater diversity and distribution of housing to meet the needs of
families and individuals of all income levels.
Promising solutions to local affordable housing development include a greater
willingness to plan for affordable housing. The City has illustrated its readiness to
take steps in that direction. The Table below summarizes the current state of such
initiatives in the City.
Table 42: Status of Major Initiatives Affecting Affordable Housing78
Inclusionary
Accessory
Overlay
Section
Other Affordable
Zoning
Apartment
Districts
30g
Housing
Incentive Zoning
Yes, minimum of
20 units, must
provide 10%
affordable units
78
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes, density
bonuses
OKM Associates Barriers to Affordable Housing Survey, 11/2009
Norwalk
Page 87
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
In 2001, Connecticut developed the Affordable Housing Program (AHP), the DECD’s
primary affordable housing production program. Also known as ‘Flex’, this program
provides grants and loans for the development and preservation of affordable
housing.
Since 1990, Connecticut has had a form of Section 8-30g, an affordable housing
land use appeals procedure that requires 25% of units be affordable for thirty years
to people or families with an income of 80% or less of the state median income. In
2009 Norwalk had 3,840 8-30g units, accounting for approximately 11% of the
City’s year round housing units. As can be seen from the table below the base
number of year round units in the City has decreased almost 2% since 2000,
allowing the supply of affordable housing units to remain above the 10% level.
Table 43 Title 8-30g Affordable Housing Inventory79
2000
Census
Year
Round HU
Governmentally
Assisted
Units
33,753
3,055
CHFA
Mortgages
299
Deed
Restricted
Units
556
Total 2009
8-30g HU
3,840
% 8-30g
Units
11.38%
2. Describe the strategy to remove or ameliorate negative effects of public policies
that serve as barriers to affordable housing, except that, if a State requires a
unit of general local government to submit a regulatory barrier assessment that
is substantially equivalent to the information required under this part, as
determined by HUD, the unit of general local government may submit that
assessment to HUD and it shall be considered to have complied with this
requirement.
The state law, Section 8-30g requires local governments to have at least 10% of its
housing stock affordable to households below 80% of the median income in order
to retain full control over the zoning permit process when affordable units are
proposed. Another state program, AHP or the Flex program, helps finance
affordable housing production or preservation projects.
While the City has been able to maintain an affordable housing stock of over 10%
throughout the past decade, it must continue its efforts as the number of low and
extremely low income households is not expected to decline over the next five
years. Also, minority groups that report the greatest rate of housing problems and
housing cost burdens are expected to rise during this same time period.
At this time, the production of new housing supply seems constrained. To combat
this trend, the City can make exceptions for the production of affordable housing.
For example, the zones in which multi-family housing can currently be built can be
expanded. Also, more housing cost assistance programs could be created to assist
low income renters and potential home-owners to occupy the increasingly vacant
79
ESRI Ibid., DECD Affordable Housing Appeals List (2009)
Norwalk
Page 88
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
housing in the City.
HOMELESS
Homeless Needs (91.205 (b) and 91.215 (c))
*Please also refer to the Homeless Needs Table in the Needs.xls workbook
Homeless Needs— The jurisdiction must provide a concise summary of the nature
and extent of homelessness in the jurisdiction, (including rural homelessness and
chronic homelessness where applicable), addressing separately the need for
facilities and services for homeless persons and homeless families with children,
both sheltered and unsheltered, and homeless subpopulations, in accordance with
Table 1A. The summary must include the characteristics and needs of low-income
individuals and children, (especially extremely low-income) who are currently
housed but are at imminent risk of either residing in shelters or becoming
unsheltered. In addition, to the extent information is available, the plan must
include a description of the nature and extent of homelessness by racial and ethnic
group. A quantitative analysis is not required. If a jurisdiction provides estimates
of the at-risk population(s), it should also include a description of the operational
definition of the at-risk group and the methodology used to generate the estimates.
3-5 Year Strategic Plan Homeless Needs response:
The data on the homeless is in the CPMP file needs.xls.
The Norwalk/Fairfield County Continuum of Care (CoC) is the primary decision
making group that manages the overall planning effort for the entire CoC.The lead
organization is the Human Services Council. The communities served by the CoC
include Norwalk, Weston, Wilton and Westport. In response to identified need and
the location of the population served, the vast majority of beds, housing units and
services funding through the CoC are provided within the City of Norwalk.
The problems of homelessness are complex, but the state, regional and local
agencies that fund services for many homeless families and individuals, categorizes
the root causes as:
•
structural issues such as high housing costs or low household income
• personal issues such as mental illness, substance abuse or other physical and
mental disabilities, and/or
•
social policies such as the availability and effectiveness of assisted housing,
mental health programs, substance abuse treatments, and other service
interventions.
Norwalk
Page 89
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
For virtually all homeless individuals and families, decent, safe, affordable housing
is a critical step in ending homelessness. In some cases, this is their only need.
However, often, in addition to affordable housing, homeless families and individuals
also need supportive services to make the transition to independent living or to deal
with other problems, including substance abuse or mental illness. Finally, in order
to maintain themselves, these individuals and families may require assistance with
childcare, transportation, life skills, job training and other basic life skills.
In addition, the continuing loss of affordable housing, the foreclosure crisis, in
conjunction with the significant growth in unemployment, underemployment and
low paying jobs, has exacerbated the problem of at-risk homeless individuals and
families. In situations reported by service providers, the lowest income households
frequently are living in overcrowded and substandard conditions that are likely to
be providing short-term housing solutions. Young families and young adult
individuals are living with other family members and are likely to be displaced due
to family issues or the need of the primary occupant to rent the room that the atrisk household is living in. Two and three-family homes that once provided
inexpensive housing are disappearing from the marketplace. When the house is
sold, increased costs force the new owner to increase the rents, forcing existing
tenants out. The increase in unemployment and underemployment has caused a
significant rise in the homelessness among individuals and families with long-term
work histories. Finally, expiring use properties continue to increase the risk of
homelessness for existing tenants as well as remove a source of future affordable
units from the market. In addition to those properties in Norwalk that have already
been removed through expiring uses, additional expiring use properties that will
come into play over the next five years contain 65 units.
From a financial standpoint, the households most susceptible to becoming homeless
are households who are at less than 30% median income and are severely costburdened (paying more than 50% of their income for rent). Other populations
disproportionately at risk of becoming homeless are victims of domestic violence,
substance abuse, those with severe mental health problems and people leaving
prison.
In order to address this at-risk population, there is a need for long-term permanent
affordable housing and supportive transitional and permanent housing for the subpopulations that are over-represented among the at-risk and homeless.
Counseling, health-care, life-skills training and sustainable employment at an
adequate wage are all critical to reducing homelessness within the City.
On January 28, 2009, The Connecticut Commission to End Homelessness in accord
with the Continuum of Care planning process, conducted its annual point-in-time
survey of its homeless population. Based on this census, it was determined that the
number of homeless persons totaled 225.
The data on the homeless is in the CPMP file needs.xls.
Norwalk
Page 90
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Priority Homeless Needs
1.
Using the results of the Continuum of Care planning process, identify the
jurisdiction's homeless and homeless prevention priorities specified in Table
1A, the Homeless and Special Needs Populations Chart. The description of
the jurisdiction's choice of priority needs and allocation priorities must be
based on reliable data meeting HUD standards and should reflect the
required consultation with homeless assistance providers, homeless persons,
and other concerned citizens regarding the needs of homeless families with
children and individuals. The jurisdiction must provide an analysis of how the
needs of each category of residents provided the basis for determining the
relative priority of each priority homeless need category. A separate brief
narrative should be directed to addressing gaps in services and housing for
the sheltered and unsheltered chronic homeless.
2.
A community should give a high priority to chronically homeless persons,
where the jurisdiction identifies sheltered and unsheltered chronic homeless
persons in its Homeless Needs Table - Homeless Populations and
Subpopulations.
3-5 Year Strategic Plan Priority Homeless Needs response:
1. Using the results of the Continuum of Care planning process, identify the
jurisdiction's homeless and homeless prevention priorities specified in Table 1A,
the Homeless and Special Needs Populations Chart. The description of the
jurisdiction's choice of priority needs and allocation priorities must be based on
reliable data meeting HUD standards and should reflect the required consultation
with homeless assistance providers, homeless persons, and other concerned
citizens regarding the needs of homeless families with children and individuals.
The jurisdiction must provide an analysis of how the needs of each category of
residents provided the basis for determining the relative priority of each priority
homeless need category. A separate brief narrative should be directed to
addressing gaps in services and housing for the sheltered and unsheltered
chronic homeless.
The Continuum of Care identified individuals and families (both sheltered and
unsheltered), who were chronically homeless on January 28, 2009 using a one
night census of both sheltered and unsheltered homeless people, along with
documentation from administrative records. The full results of the census and
records analysis are in Tables 1 and 2 of the CPMP file needs.xlshomeless
tab/sheet.
The Continuum of Care process identified 196 households (159 sheltered and 37
unsheltered) and a total of approximately 225 people, who were homeless at a
single point in time based on the one-night census of both sheltered and
unsheltered homeless conducted in 2009, with further documentation from
Norwalk
Page 91
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
administrative records. In addition, it was reported from other sources that there
were likely additional persons from Norwalk were placed in motels outside of the
CoC area and thus were not included in the count. The Continuum used the
following definitions for emergency and transitional housing:
Emergency Shelter: “A supervised public or private facility designed to provide
temporary living accommodations to persons (individuals and families) who lack
a fixed, regular and adequate nighttime residence, for which they pay no rent or
fees”. Given HUD’s definition, families placed by the state in motels are being
counted as in emergency shelter. However, the Continuum deems this a
completely inappropriate response to family homelessness and these families
are a top priority for relocation to more appropriate settings.
Transitional Housing: “A longer-term residence (up to 24 months) for
individuals or families coming from emergency shelters, or having no fixed,
regular nighttime residence”. These programs are designed to offer appropriate
case management and supportive services to prepare residents for transition to
permanent housing and independence in the community. Residents may pay
program fees.
This annual ‘point-in-time’ update serves as the data source for completion of the
“Current Inventory in 2009” section of the HsgNeeds Table in needs.xls. This
update will be coordinated by the planning group. The methods used to collect the
data were on the ground counting and surveys of police departments. The day of
the point-in-time count, staff and other participating agencies conducted a followup phone survey to verify that all information concerning shelter, transitional and
permanent supportive housing inventory was accurate as of February 2010. The
information for the “Under Development” column was determined through a review
with the of fully funded projects to be targeted to homeless people.
The Connecticut Commission to End Homelessness will determine the annual
inventory, based upon a ‘point-in-time’ survey in the last week of each January
from 2010 through 2013. They will use the same methodology as before, to gather
information about the inventory of housing data and service data.
The CPMP needs.xls documents the status of homeless individuals and families in
accord with the annual ‘point-in-time’ survey and details the choice of priority
needs and allocation priorities based on acceptable HUD standards.
The Continuum of Care application articulates it homeless and homeless prevention
strategies, based on the data collected, its consultation with homeless assistance
providers, homeless persons and other organizations collecting and analyzing
relevant information. These strategies include the ongoing development and
maintenance of a funnel-shaped continuum, beginning with outreach and
assessment efforts, aimed at identifying homeless in the community and assessing
their needs; connecting them to their most urgent shelter and service needs;
assisting them to transition from emergency shelter to transitional, permanent
supportive or independent housing; and aggressively pursuing methods and
Norwalk
Page 92
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
strategies to prevent homelessness-both for the chronic homeless and for those at
risk of homelessness.
2. A community should give a high priority to chronically homeless persons, where
the jurisdiction identifies sheltered and unsheltered chronic homeless persons in
its Homeless Needs Table - Homeless Populations and Subpopulations.
A fact sheet provided by the CCEH, based on its 2009 count indicated that 47% of
sheltered adults and 44% of unsheltered adults were considered chronically
homeless. In Norwalk, the January 28, 2009 count identified 70 people who were
classified as chronically homeless. Additional data are included in the numbers
above are in tables 1 and 2 of the homeless tab/sheet in the needs.xls file.
In addressing the needs of the chronically homeless, there is a multi-pronged
approach; prevention, aggressive outreach, assessment and case management,
mainstreaming benefits and resources and housing. Housing must be linked to
stabilization and community-based services that will ensure successful tenancies.
Permanent supportive housing is a high priority for the chronically homeless
population.
Homeless Inventory (91.210 (c))
The jurisdiction shall provide a concise summary of the existing facilities and
services (including a brief inventory) that assist homeless persons and families with
children and subpopulations identified in Table 1A. These include outreach and
assessment, emergency shelters and services, transitional housing, permanent
supportive housing, access to permanent housing, and activities to prevent
low-income individuals and families with children (especially extremely low-income)
from becoming homeless. The jurisdiction can use the optional Continuum of Care
Housing Activity Chart and Service Activity Chart to meet this requirement.
3-5 Year Strategic Plan Homeless Inventory response:
A summary of the existing facilities and services that assist homeless persons and
families with children and the subpopulations are provided in the homeless tab in
the CPMP needs.xls where we have used the Housing Activity Table 3 and the
Service Activity Table 4, to meet this requirement.
Homeless Strategic Plan (91.215 (c))
1. Homelessness— Describe the jurisdiction's strategy for developing a system to
address homelessness and the priority needs of homeless persons and families
(including the subpopulations identified in the needs section). The jurisdiction's
Norwalk
Page 93
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
strategy must consider the housing and supportive services needed in each
stage of the process which includes preventing homelessness,
outreach/assessment, emergency shelters and services, transitional housing,
and helping homeless persons (especially any persons that are chronically
homeless) make the transition to permanent housing and independent living.
The jurisdiction must also describe its strategy for helping extremely low- and
low-income individuals and families who are at imminent risk of becoming
homeless.
2. Chronic homelessness—Describe the jurisdiction’s strategy for eliminating
chronic homelessness by 2012. This should include the strategy for helping
homeless persons make the transition to permanent housing and independent
living. This strategy should, to the maximum extent feasible, be coordinated
with the strategy presented Exhibit 1 of the Continuum of Care (CoC) application
and any other strategy or plan to eliminate chronic homelessness. Also
describe, in a narrative, relationships and efforts to coordinate the Conplan,
CoC, and any other strategy or plan to address chronic homelessness.
3. Homelessness Prevention—Describe the jurisdiction’s strategy to help prevent
homelessness for individuals and families with children who are at imminent risk
of becoming homeless.
4. Institutional Structure—Briefly describe the institutional structure, including
private industry, non-profit organizations, and public institutions, through which
the jurisdiction will carry out its homelessness strategy.
5. Discharge Coordination Policy—Every jurisdiction receiving McKinney-Vento
Homeless Assistance Act Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG), Supportive Housing,
Shelter Plus Care, or Section 8 SRO Program funds must develop and implement
a Discharge Coordination Policy, to the maximum extent practicable. Such a
policy should include “policies and protocols for the discharge of persons from
publicly funded institutions or systems of care (such as health care facilities,
foster care or other youth facilities, or correction programs and institutions) in
order to prevent such discharge from immediately resulting in homelessness for
such persons.” The jurisdiction should describe its planned activities to
implement a cohesive, community-wide Discharge Coordination Policy, and how
the community will move toward such a policy.
3-5 Year Homeless Strategic Plan response:
1. Homelessness— Describe the jurisdiction's strategy for developing a system to
address homelessness and the priority needs of homeless persons and families
(including the subpopulations identified in the needs section). The jurisdiction's
strategy must consider the housing and supportive services needed in each
stage of the process which includes preventing homelessness,
outreach/assessment, emergency shelters and services, transitional housing,
and helping homeless persons (especially any persons that are chronically
homeless) make the transition to permanent housing and independent living.
Norwalk
Page 94
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
The jurisdiction must also describe its strategy for helping extremely low- and
low-income individuals and families who are at imminent risk of becoming
homeless.
The ultimate goal in providing shelter for homeless households is to maximize those
who are able to secure and maintain themselves in permanent housing. There are
no transitional housing units in the CoC area. However, the CoC continues to
increase access to affordable permanent housing by making certain that service
providers have access to information regarding available permanent units and/or
subsidies to make these units affordable. The CoC’s work in expanding communitybased services increase the opportunities for people to feel comfortable making that
change to permanent housing, knowing that there will be necessary supports
available, should they need them. Within the City of Norwalk, the Family &
Children’s Agency has a daytime drop in center, which firstly serves as a safe place
for homeless to come but also acts as a gateway to services.
See the Continuum of Care Submission for further detail.
2. Chronic homelessness—Describe the jurisdiction’s strategy for eliminating
chronic homelessness by 2012. This should include the strategy for helping
homeless persons make the transition to permanent housing and independent
living. This strategy should, to the maximum extent feasible, be coordinated
with the strategy presented Exhibit 1 of the Continuum of Care (CoC) application
and any other strategy or plan to eliminate chronic homelessness. Also
describe, in a narrative, relationships and efforts to coordinate the Conplan,
CoC, and any other strategy or plan to address chronic homelessness.
The strategies identified are central to the focus of addressing chronic
homelessness. Chronically homeless individuals are likely to also suffer from the
effects of substance abuse and/or mental illness. A national homeless study
conducted by the National Coalition for the Homeless indicated that 25 percent of
the homeless suffer from mental illness and that 60 percent of homeless individuals
are drug dependent. In fact, according to the Connecticut Coalition to End
Homelessness, based on their 2009 counts, 33% of homeless single adults in the
CoC area had been hospitalized for mental illness at some point.
A cornerstone in the eradication of chronic homelessness is the provision of
permanent supportive housing. For long term success, the CoC realizes that it
must expand the base and increase the capacity of current homeless housing
providers to create and operate housing for this population. The second way to
achieve success is to engage the larger affordable housing community to
incorporate chronically homeless housing in their own housing plans. Finally, an
increase in rental subsidies that are teamed with supportive services are a priority.
Currently, through the PILOT Initiative, the Norwalk Housing Authority has provided
24 vouchers which are used in scattered site apartments for homeless individuals.
Forty South Main Street, developed using Federal 811 funds, is a 40 unit enhanced
SRO, It currently has a waiting list 0f 30-40 eligible individuals. Reaching Home, a
statewide campaign launched in 2004, promotes civic and political support for
Norwalk
Page 95
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
ending homelessness. Its goal is to establish 10,000 units of permanent supportive
housing through rehabilitation, new construction and rental subsidies by 2014. To
date, 3,000 units have been opened. Fairfield 08, as part of this statewide initiative,
servicing Fairfield County has set a goal of creating 1,735 new supportive housing
units by 2014. Within the next year, the CoC anticipates that Fairfield 08’s efforts
combined with a private developer will have provided 10 units in Norwalk. It is also
anticipated that additional units will be available for homeless veteran’s through the
HUD VASH program. The CoC hopes to create an additional 112 units for
chronically homeless over the next ten years. Norwalk’s Consolidated Plan staff
attends the Norwalk CoC meeting to ensure coordination in the city’s planning
efforts concerning homelessness.
3. Homelessness Prevention—Describe the jurisdiction’s strategy to help prevent
homelessness for individuals and families with children who are at imminent risk
of becoming homeless.
The breadth of the population dealing with the potential of homelessness has
grown. Agencies throughout the area have seen an increase in those with longterm work histories at significant risk of losing their housing, due to unemployment
and underemployment. There has also been an increase in family homelessness.
Food pantries note an increase in those using their resources. An increasing
number of households have been at risk of foreclosure, either as part of the subprime loan crisis or due to economic hardship. As of February 1, 2010, there are
84 bank-owned properties due to foreclosure and 145 in default in the City of
Norwalk. Key to addressing issues related to preventing homelessness has been
the availability of Homeless Prevention and Rapid-Rehousing Program services
(HPRP). CTE. Inc, the Community Action Program for the Greater Stamford Area
received funds to provide HPRP Services to the Southwest Region of Connecticut.
In turn, Norwalk Economic Opportunity, Now (NEON), the local Community Action
Agency, as a sub-contractor, has been awarded HPRP funds which it is using for
case management to assist households at risk of evictions, who have issues related
to outstanding mortgages or other housing issues which put them at risk of
homelessness. By advocating affordable housing on all fronts, the Agency and the
CoC increases the opportunities for those most vulnerable to becoming homeless.
4. Institutional Structure—Briefly describe the institutional structure, including
private industry, non-profit organizations, and public institutions, through which
the jurisdiction will carry out its homelessness strategy.
The primary decision-making group is the Norwalk/Fairfield County Continuum of
Care, which meets at least monthly. Approximately seventy percent of the
members are non-profit providers, homeless or formerly homeless persons,
advocates and those representing consumers. Local businesses have been engaged
in and supportive of the efforts of the CoC. The CoC is volunteer in nature. All
agencies/organizations/individuals who are interested in addressing and solving
the issues of homelessness are welcome to join the group. The meetings are well
advertised. As part of outreach to non memberagencies/organizations/individuals,
CoC members reach out to non members toengage them in the CoC as well.
Norwalk
Page 96
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Agencies/organizations assign their ownrepresentative(s). There is only one vote
per organization when votes are taken.This process was established so that
membership in the CoC is inclusive of any part of the community wishing to work
on ending homelessness. The CoC not only welcomes new members but actively
seeks new members to work on ending homelessness. Additional detail regarding
the operation of the CoC can be reviewed in their submission.
For a list of participating groups, please refer to the Continuum of Care submission.
5. Discharge Coordination Policy—Every jurisdiction receiving McKinney-Vento
Homeless Assistance Act Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG), Supportive Housing,
Shelter Plus Care, or Section 8 SRO Program funds must develop and implement
a Discharge Coordination Policy, to the maximum extent practicable. Such a
policy should include “policies and protocols for the discharge of persons from
publicly funded institutions or systems of care (such as health care facilities,
foster care or other youth facilities, or correction programs and institutions) in
order to prevent such discharge from immediately resulting in homelessness for
such persons.” The jurisdiction should describe its planned activities to
implement a cohesive, community-wide Discharge Coordination Policy, and how
the community will move toward such a policy.
The Continuum of Care which serves the homeless in the area, has adopted formal
discharge protocols for facilities discharging people from foster care, health care,
mental health care and correctional facilities. These policies can be examined in the
CoC program documents.
Emergency Shelter Grants (ESG)
(States only) Describe the process for awarding grants to State recipients, and a
description of how the allocation will be made available to units of local
government.
3-5 Year Strategic Plan ESG response:
N/A
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Community Development (91.215 (e))
*Please also refer to the Community Development Table in the Needs.xls workbook
1. Identify the jurisdiction's priority non-housing community development needs
eligible for assistance by CDBG eligibility category specified in the Community
Development Needs Table (formerly Table 2B), − i.e., public facilities, public
improvements, public services and economic development.
Norwalk
Page 97
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
needs.
4. Identify specific long-term and short-term community development objectives
(including economic development activities that create jobs), developed in
accordance with the statutory goals described in section 24 CFR 91.1 and the
primary objective of the CDBG program to provide decent housing and a suitable
living environment and expand economic opportunities, principally for low- and
moderate-income persons.
NOTE: Each specific objective developed to address a priority need, must be identified by number and contain
proposed accomplishments, the time period (i.e., one, two, three, or more years), and annual program year
numeric goals the jurisdiction hopes to achieve in quantitative terms, or in other measurable terms as
identified and defined by the jurisdiction.
3-5 Year Strategic Plan Community Development response:
Introduction to Norwalk Economic Conditions
The City of Norwalk similar to most of Connecticut’s cities, has historically been a
manufacturing city. Over the last 50 years it has slowly but inexorably been
transformed into a service economy.
The following table summarizes the employment in Norwalk. It should be noted
that 64% of all jobs in Norwalk are held by Norwalk residents.80
As can be seen from this table, the services industry dominates. However, the
manufacturing and construction industry combined is the second largest trade
group.
Table 44: Business and Employees in Norwalk 2009 – Organized by Trade Group81
Agriculture & Mining
Construction
Manufacturing
Transportation
Communication
Utility
Wholesale Trade
Retail Trade Summary
Home Improvement
General Merchandise Stores
80
ESRI BAO 2009
81
ESRI BAO 2009
Norwalk
BUSINESSES
Number Percent
163
3.4%
539
11.1%
210
4.3%
118
2.4%
37
0.8%
25
0.5%
176
3.6%
937
19.4%
49
1.0%
36
0.7%
Page 98
EMPLOYEES
Number Percent
779
1.4%
2,145
4.0%
8,892
16.5%
2,220
4.1%
514
1.0%
152
0.3%
4,569
8.5%
8,790
16.3%
728
1.4%
803
1.5%
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Food Stores
Auto Dealers, Gas Stations, Auto Aftermarket
Apparel & Accessory Stores
Furniture & Home Furnishings
Eating & Drinking Places
Miscellaneous Retail
Finance, Insurance, Real Estate Summary
Banks, Savings & Lending Institutions
Securities Brokers
Insurance Carriers & Agents
Real Estate, Holding, Other Investment Offices
Services Summary
Hotels & Lodging
Automotive Services
Motion Pictures & Amusements
Health Services
Legal Services
Education Institutions & Libraries
Other Services
Government
Other
Totals
BUSINESSES
Number Percent
2.0%
97
1.7%
81
52
1.1%
2.9%
140
254
5.2%
228
4.7%
392
8.1%
86
1.8%
76
1.6%
63
1.3%
167
3.5%
38.3%
1,852
15
0.3%
111
2.3%
121
2.5%
266
5.5%
59
1.2%
65
1.3%
1,215
25.1%
107
2.2%
284
5.9%
4,840
100.0%
EMPLOYEES
Number Percent
1,545
2.9%
638
1.2%
391
0.7%
1,246
2.3%
1,857
3.5%
1,582
2.9%
3,792
7.1%
628
1.2%
695
1.3%
1,103
2.1%
1,366
2.5%
19,779
36.8%
226
0.4%
375
0.7%
898
1.7%
5,148
9.6%
232
0.4%
2,791
5.2%
10,109
18.8%
1,710
3.2%
421
0.8%
53,763
100.0%
The table below illustrates the current employers by type and by occupation. As
can be seen, the services industry dominates the employment scene. This has
implications for education and business development.
Table 45: Number of Businesses by Industry Group 2009 Sorted by Size82
Number of Businesses by Industry Group
Other Services
Construction
Other
Health Services
Manufacturing
Wholesale Trade
Transportation
Automotive Services
Government
82
Number
1,215
539
284
266
254
228
210
176
167
163
140
121
118
111
107
ESRI BAO 2009
Norwalk
Page 99
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Number of Businesses by Industry Group
Food Stores
Securities Brokers
Legal Services
Home Improvement
Communication
Utility
Hotels & Lodging
Number
97
86
81
76
65
63
59
52
49
37
36
25
15
Table 46: Employment by Industry 2009 Sorted by Size83
Total Employees by Industry Group
Other Services
Manufacturing
Health Services
Wholesale Trade
Transportation
Construction
Government
Food Stores
Home Improvement
Securities Brokers
Communication
Other
Automotive Services
Legal Services
83
Number
10,109
8,892
5,148
4,569
2,791
2,220
2,145
1,857
1,710
1,582
1,545
1,366
1,246
1,103
898
803
779
728
695
638
628
514
421
391
375
232
ESRI BAO 2009
Norwalk
Page 100
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Total Employees by Industry Group
Hotels & Lodging
Utility
Number
226
152
The following table analyzes employers in order of the ratio of employees to
business. The higher the ratio, the more leverage the City can get if that type of
business establishment can be retained or attracted to Norwalk. As the ratio table
shows, education and manufacturing businesses have the highest ratio of
employees per business. This would argue for a twin strategy of attracting and
retaining these two types of industry. The professional degrees needed for the
education sector are very high and for the most part tertiary level; for the
manufacturing industry, technical skills are most in demand and are also usually
post-secondary.
Table 47: Type of Industry by Ratio of Employees per Business84
Employees per Business by Industry Group
Manufacturing
Wholesale Trade
Health Services
Transportation
Government
Food Stores
Hotels & Lodging
Home Improvement
Communication
Securities Brokers
Other Services
Utility
Construction
Legal Services
Ratio
42.94
42.34
25.96
22.31
19.35
18.81
17.51
15.98
15.93
15.07
14.86
13.89
9.14
8.90
8.32
8.18
7.88
7.52
7.42
7.31
7.30
6.94
6.08
4.78
3.98
3.93
A recent study by the Center for Labor Market Studies at Northeastern University,
states that the employment picture in the nation and in the region is quite
84
ESRI BAO 2009
Norwalk
Page 101
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
disturbing.85 There has been a growing gap between the available jobs in industry
and the unemployed.
As the Northeastern report states: “The existence of these large labor surpluses,
especially for blue collar workers, reduces real output, employment, earnings,
and incomes, and contributes to fiscal problems at the local, state, and national
level. Jobless workers do not pay social security, federal income, or state income
taxes; they pay less in sales taxes, and frequently require large transfer
payments in the form of unemployment insurance benefits, disability payments,
food stamps, and health care assistance. A variety of short-term and long-term
job creation and re-training strategies will be needed to reduce the size of these
problems and improve their future employability and the state’s economic
competitiveness. Our nation’s main strategy thus far has been to extend the
length of their unemployment benefits with little to no efforts to create new job
prospects for them. Long unemployment spells have adverse physical and
mental health effects on these jobless workers that can lead to their exit from
the labor force”.86
A recent compilation of studies noted the following:
“The unemployment rate hit 10 percent in October [2009], and there are good
reasons to believe that by 2011, 2012, even 2014, it will have declined only a little.
Late last year, the average duration of unemployment surpassed six months, the
first time that has happened since 1948, when the Bureau of Labor Statistics began
tracking that number. As of this writing, for every open job in the U.S., six people
are actively looking for work.
All of these figures understate the magnitude of the jobs crisis. The broadest
measure of unemployment and underemployment (which includes people who want
to work but have stopped actively searching for a job, along with those who want
full-time jobs but can find only part-time work) reached 17.4 percent in October,
which appears to be the highest figure since the 1930s. And for large swaths of
society—young adults, men, minorities—that figure was much higher (among
teenagers, for instance, even the narrowest measure of unemployment stood at
roughly 27 percent). One recent survey showed that 44 percent of families had
experienced a job loss, a reduction in hours, or a pay cut in the past year”.87
This has implications for the Agency as it plans for the use of CDBG resources
for economic development.
85
The Depression in Blue Collar Labor Markets in Massachusetts and the U.S.: Their Implications For
Future Economic Stimulus and Workforce Development Policies. Prepared By: Andrew Sum With Joseph
McLaughlin Misha Trubskyy Center for Labor Market Studies Northeastern University Boston, MA
December 2009
86
Ibid
87
“How a New Jobless Era Will Transform America”, Don Peck, The Atlantic Monthly March 2010
Norwalk
Page 102
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
The current educational characteristics of the population, indicate that residents of
Norwalk have a range of educational achievements that may match the current
business demand. However, it would be important to determine whether this will
be the case in the future, especially in light of the foregoing discussion.
Table 48: Educational Achievements 2009 88
% of 25+
Population
Graduated
High School
Only 2009
25.5%
Norwalk
% of 25+
Population
with Some
College Only
2009
16.2%
% of 25+
Population
Graduated
College and/or
Post-College
2009
38.5%
Total % with
Post High
School
Education
62.0%
The table above shows that 25% of Norwalk’s residents have no more than a high
school diploma. This shows Norwalk’s challenge of supporting efforts to get more
people through high school and into post secondary education. The Agency has
supported a variety of youth enrichment programs in past years, which are aimed
at improving graduation rates especially for low income youth. These should be
continued.
However, as the discussion above shows, there will be a need to review the
financial health of existing employers and the prospect not only for retaining them
in Norwalk but also enticing new businesses to locate in the City. The Census
Bureau notes that 87% of all businesses employ less than 20 people; that 10% of
all employment is by these small businesses; and that these same small businesses
only account for 7% of the nation’s payroll.89 However, other studies have shown
that the real growth of employment comes with start-up businesses. So there is a
strong argument for fostering the establishment of new or start-up businesses.
However, preservation of the larger employers will likely sustain higher payrolls and
strengthen the purchasing power of residents.
When we examine the income characteristics of Norwalk, we can see that through
2008, the income distribution is relatively stable.Of course the continued
unemployment and stagnant wages the economy is experiencing at this time might
portend significant changes in these projections.
Table 49: Norwalk Income Distribution 2000-2014 by Households
2000
< $15,000
$15,000 $24,999
$25,000 $34,999
88
ESRI Ibid.
89
US Census
Norwalk
2009
2014
#
3,040
%
9.3%
#
2,103
%
6.3%
#
1,893
%
5.7%
2,649
8.1%
1,899
5.7%
1,719
5.2%
3,336
10.2%
1,915
5.8%
1,740
5.2%
Page 103
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
2000
#
$35,000 $49,999
$50,000 $74,999
$75,000 $99,999
$100,000 $149,999
$150,000 $199,999
$200,000+
2009
%
#
2014
%
#
%
4,329
13.2%
3,912
11.8%
4,216
12.7%
6,600
20.2%
4,780
14.4%
4,459
13.4%
4,675
14.3%
5,711
17.2%
5,343
16.0%
4,425
13.5%
7,327
22.1%
8,143
24.4%
1,799
5.5%
2,627
7.9%
2,669
8.0%
1,850
5.7%
2,928
8.8%
3,125
9.4%
Note: The green shaded cells above indicate the income range in which 80%
median income falls and the blue shaded cells indicate the income range in which
30% median income falls.
As noted in prior sections of the plan, there has been a small decrease from 2000
to 2009 in the proportion of low-income households [less than 80% median] and a
small increase in extremely low-income households [less than 30% median].
Projections for 2014 suggest that there will be a slight decline in extremely lowincome households.
1. Identify the jurisdiction's priority non-housing community development needs
eligible for assistance by CDBG eligibility category specified in the Community
Development Needs Table (formerly Table 2B), − i.e., public facilities, public
improvements, public services and economic development.
Priority community development needs are shown in the Community Development
sheet in needs.xls in CPMP and on the following page. Community development
priorities were based on the Agency’s ongoing evaluation of public infrastructure
and programmatic needs among low and moderate income households, slums and
blight in targeted areas and key initiatives designed to improve quality of life and
economic opportunities. In addition, the Consolidated Plan planning process has
engaged Norwalk residents and public service providers, experts and other officials
to identify priority community development needs. Some neighborhoods in the City
have outdated and aging infrastructure in need of repairs. Programs to improve
small businesses and neighborhood centers through storefront improvements and
commercial area improvements serve to expand privately available services,
expand employment and improve community life.
Job creation is highest for start-up businesses and so supporting such start-ups can
pay job dividends. Microenterprise support and small business loan pools are also
an effective use of CDBG funds.
The Agency continues to support expanded recreational opportunities and
necessary public facilities which meet the diverse needs of the population,
especially children, youth, elders and households with low and moderate incomes.
Norwalk
Page 104
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
The Agency places a high priority on continued support to public service agencies
and organizations which provide essential services.
The Agency has also engaged in extensive, collaborative and public planning to
improve economic opportunity, housing choices, parks and recreational facilities
and overall quality of life. The envisioned community improvements and
investments will utilize public and private resources to address the needs identified
through the planning process.
Table 50: Community Development Needs – Summary from Needs.xls
Economic
Housing
Develop.
Public Services
Public Facilities
and
Improvements
CDBG
Category
Priority Rank
Source of
Funds
03A Senior Centers 570.201(c)
M
C
03B Handicapped Centers 570.201(c)
M
C
03D Youth Centers 570.201(c)
H
C
03E Neighborhood Facilities 570.201(c)
H
C
05 Public Services (General) 570.201(e)
M
C
05D Youth Services 570.201(e)
H
C
05F Substance Abuse Services 570.201(e)
M
C
05H Employment Training 570.201(e)
H
C
05L Child Care Services 570.201(e)
M
C
05T Security Deposits (if HOME, not part of 5% Admin cost)
H
C
14B Rehab; Multi-Unit Residential 570.202
H
C
14C Public Housing Modernization 570.202
H
C
14H Rehabilitation Administration 570.202
H
C
18C Micro-Enterprise Assistance
M
C
21A General Program Administration 570.206
H
C
Rental assistance
H
C
needs.
In drafting the ConPlan the Agency conducted an evaluation of the needs of
Norwalk’s low and moderate income households based on a review of relevant
empirical data sources as well as extensive outreach to local service providers and
stakeholders. Three broad themes emerged from this research. The most dramatic
theme that emerged from this process was that of the impact of elevated housing
Norwalk
Page 105
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
costs in Norwalk. Empirical research revealed that a substantial percentage of
Norwalk household are cost burdened or face difficulty achieving homeownership.
In identifying this theme it has become apparent the community should deploy its
CDBG resources in order to preserve the quality of the City’s existing stock of
affordable housing while also helping to facilitate homeownership for incomeeligible, first-time homebuyers.
A second theme of this ConPlan results from the income and economic instability
faced by Norwalk’s households as a result of the deep economic downturn in which
the nation is engulfed. Empirical research reveals Norwalk’s low and moderate
income households are disproportionately impacted by the consequences of this
recession. To address this theme, the City and Agency gave priority to those uses
of CDBG funds that (1) provide programming that prepares low and moderate
income individuals to enter the workforce while (2) also incentivizing job creation
and retention.
ConPlan research also revealed that the loss of income increases the likelihood that
Norwalk’s household will face other forms of instability that threaten the strength of
the family. Such instability may take the form of increased domestic violence or
mental illness or reduced academic achievement as the result of reduced access to
academic enrichment programming. To address this theme, the City and Agency
gave priority to those uses of CDBG funds that address symptoms of household
instability.
When assigning priority, the City and Agency were cognizant of the limited financial
resources available to address identified needs. As a result of this circumstance the
City and Agency attempted to identify needs associated with these themes. Further,
the City and Agency have determined to target resources to households on the
upper end of the CDBG eligible beneficiary scale so the subsidy from CDBG is
available to a wider range of households.
The City has identified multiple obstacles to underserved needs. The first such
obstacle is the limited resources available to address the high priority needs of
Norwalk’s low and moderate income population. Over the term of this ConPlan, the
City and Agency will seek to leverage its CDBG resources with those resources
available through the Federal, State and municipal government as well as private
institutions such as Community Development Financial Institutions.
In addition to the challenge of limited financial resources the City will work to
mitigate any duplication of services amongst local service providers. To do so the
City and Agency will purse mechanisms that foster collaboration amongst service
providers in order to reduce the overlap of service delivery thus expanding the
universe of beneficiaries of CDBG funds.
The process to create the Plan identified a limited number of Norwalk-based
organizations that have capacity to create or preserve affordable housing
Norwalk
Page 106
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
opportunities. Over the term of the new Plan the City will seek to initiate
partnerships that will aid in bridging this gap in the capacity needed to deliver
affordable housing services.
4. Identify specific long-term and short-term community development objectives
(including economic development activities that create jobs), developed in
accordance with the statutory goals described in section 24 CFR 91.1 and the
primary objective of the CDBG program to provide decent housing and a suitable
living environment and expand economic opportunities, principally for low- and
moderate-income persons.
This Plan identifies three themes that encapsulate the needs of Norwalk’s
low/moderate income households. Based on assessment of these needs, and in
recognition of the limited resources available to address these needs the City will
direct its community development resources to three broad objectives. First, the
City will commit to investing in the preservation of existing stock of affordable
housing while providing those services that will assist in opening homeownership to
first-time homebuyers. Further, the City will use its CDBG funds to counter the
economic instability resulting from the current economic downturn by structuring
financial mechanism that generate or retain employment opportunities for
low/moderate income individuals. Finally, the City will invest in those services
needed to address the indirect impacts of this economic downturn on local
households. These indirect impacts include the increased likelihood of domestic
violence, mental and physical illness and reduced services available to at-risk
youth.
Antipoverty Strategy (91.215 (h))
1. Describe the jurisdiction's goals, programs, and policies for reducing the number of
poverty level families (as defined by the Office of Management and Budget and revised
annually). In consultation with other appropriate public and private agencies, (i.e. TANF
agency) state how the jurisdiction's goals, programs, and policies for producing and
preserving affordable housing set forth in the housing component of the consolidated
plan will be coordinated with other programs and services for which the jurisdiction is
responsible.
2. Identify the extent to which this strategy will reduce (or assist in reducing) the number
of poverty level families, taking into consideration factors over which the jurisdiction has
control.
3-5 Year Strategic Plan Antipoverty Strategy response:
Most activities undertaken by the Agency with CDBG and other federal and state
funds for low income families are efforts to reduce persons in poverty and improve
the quality of life for Norwalk residents, either directly or indirectly. Staff also work
in partnership with citizens, other City departments and the public and private
sectors to accomplish its goal of reducing poverty.
Norwalk
Page 107
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
CDBG programs which can be used and which directly influence the household
income level include: job training, job counseling and placement, education and
business development. In the near future and possibly for the next 5 years, the
focus will be on job development and economic stabilization.
CDBG programs can be used and can indirectly influence the impact of household
living by those at or below the poverty level, by reducing other costs include,
affordable housing, energy efficiency, public transportation and health care
assistance.
In the near future and possibly for the next 5 years the Agency will be funding the
following indirect activities:
•
•
•
•
Housing rehabilitation including energy efficiency improvements
Transportation assistance
Health services – both physical and mental
Revitalization and economic development activities
In so far as most households being provided housing assistance end up with a
reduced level of cost, they are more able to allocate their scarce resources to other
needs such as nutrition, education and other activities which can help lead them out
of poverty. The estimates of poverty for Norwalk on the 2000 census is as follows:
Table 51: Poverty Percentage [2000 vs 2009]90
Community
Norwalk
Total
Population in
poverty
5,944
Poverty %
Census
2000
Total
Population
in poverty
ACS 2008
7.23%
5,435
Poverty
% ACS
2008
6.92%
According to ESRI data from 2009, there may have been a slight decline in poverty
rates.91
Table 52: Poverty Estimations 2000, 2009, 2014
Year
2000
2009
30% Median $17,962
$24,590
Estimated # of
Households below 30%
AMI
3,825
3,924
2014
$25,610
3,684
From ACS data in 2008, we can note that while it does not have poverty data, it
does provide information on households below 20% of AMI, which is close to the
poverty level. In 2008, 3,200 or 10% of the households in Norwalk were in
90
US Census 2000 SF3. . Both the CHAS and the ESRI estimates for population in poverty are in terms of
households, while the US Census data is in terms of individuals. Thus the comparison is somewhat
suspect.
91
ESRI Ibid.
Norwalk
Page 108
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
poverty.
If we use HUD low-mod area data (See Attachment B), we can see how the City has
especially needy areas (in terms of poverty) and could benefit from focused CDBG
funds.
The following table shows the more information about the Census tracts in Norwalk
from the 2000 Census.
Table 53: Norwalk Tract Level Poverty Census 200092
Poverty Rate
(2000)
Child Poverty
Rate (2000)
Elderly
Poverty Rate
(2000)
Norwalk Tracts
0425
0426
0427
0428
0429
0430
0431
0432
0433
0434
0435
0436
0437
0438
0439
0440
0441
0442
0443
0444
0445
0446
1.71%
5.08%
3.06%
3.83%
3.45%
3.74%
2.42%
5.56%
7.58%
10.64%
2.71%
7.02%
9.31%
8.29%
4.07%
11.43%
22.31%
8.11%
3.69%
14.85%
12.10%
5.13%
0.27%
1.43%
0.75%
0.56%
1.09%
0.76%
0.36%
2.96%
2.91%
4.49%
0.52%
1.64%
2.15%
2.57%
1.32%
3.92%
5.78%
1.25%
0.65%
6.06%
3.44%
1.25%
0.49%
0.48%
1.01%
0.50%
0.32%
0.89%
0.36%
0.53%
0.20%
0.91%
0.26%
1.71%
0.00%
0.36%
0.08%
1.56%
1.72%
1.23%
0.97%
0.89%
0.76%
1.43%
Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) Coordination (91.315
(k))
1. (States only) Describe the strategy to coordinate the Low-income Housing Tax
Credit (LIHTC) with the development of housing that is affordable to low- and
moderate-income families.
92
ESRI Ibid.
Norwalk
Page 109
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
3-5 Year Strategic Plan LIHTC Coordination response:
The City and Agency will work with the state and developers to the assistance of
Low Income Housing Tax Credits if the City and Agency can identify projects in
which tax credit equity may assist in preserving the affordability of existing units.
NON-HOMELESS SPECIAL NEEDS
Specific Special Needs Objectives (91.215)
3-5 Year Non-homeless Special Needs Analysis response:
Specific Special Needs Objectives (91.215)
Throughout the City, there are households in various subpopulations who are not
homeless but have specific housing needs and may also require special attention
due to their current or prospective service needs. These subpopulations include:
elderly, frail elderly, persons with severe mental illness, victims of domestic
violence, developmentally disabled, physically disabled, substance abusers, and
persons with HIV/AIDS.
The Agency is aware of the needs of special populations and is committed to
supporting initiatives which target these populations. As part of its strategy,
through its rehabilitation programs, the Agency has provided assistance to a variety
of programs that provide shelter and support services to low income households,
who also may either health issues, substance abuse and/or mental health concerns,
are victims of domestic violence or are physically or developmentally disabled.
Norwalk
Page 110
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
The approach to addressing the needs posed by these populations has changed
over the past twenty years. In response, a variety of public and private sector
resources are available to address some of the current approaches to housing and
service needs for these groups. These resources are limited and insufficient to
meet all the needs identified. The members of these subpopulations frequently
require assistance from multiple sources in order to succeed in daily life.
In addition to the availability of federal public housing and other federally assisted
housing programs for the elderly (primarily Section 202) and for the disabled, there
are affordable elderly developments, both congregate and independent, financed by
the State Department of Economic and Community Development (DECD). At the
State level, there is the Connecticut Commission on Aging, an independent agency
committed to critical concerns of the elderly. The Senior Services Coordinating
Council is the local entity that works primarily with low-income elderly and disabled.
It provides both direct services, including financial relief and home visits and also
serves as an umbrella organization. It works closely with the Senior Center, which
provides an array of educational and recreational activities as well as a meals
program. The City is also serviced by Southwestern Connecticut Agency on Aging , its
Area Agency on Aging. Programs implemented to meet the needs of elderly
residents include subsidized housing; adult day care; home care; congregate
housing; nutrition; guardianship; legal services; transportation; assistance with
health care and financial issues; social activities and coordination services for the
disabled elderly.
In addition to affordability, a key issue for the physically disabled has been the
inaccessibility of housing units. The Disability Resources Center of Fairfield County is
an advocacy organization which provides assistance to the disabled in Norwalk as
well as other local communities in achieving independent living to the fullest extent.
The number of adults with mental illness or developmental disabilities who are
treated in institutions, has continued its dramatic decline. Correspondingly, the
number receiving community-based services has significantly increased. DMHAS and
DDS, are the primary service systems for providing services and housing (through
the use of state and private housing providers), to these populations.
At the level of local government, the City has a Public Housing Authority, Human
Relations departments, and a Senior Services Coordinating Council, all of which
concentrate at least some of their services on these populations, utilizing funds
from various private, state and federal sources. Norwalk is not entitled to HOME
funds but may compete for funds from the State of Connecticut HOME. These
funds can be used for providing assistance in the acquisition, development and
rehabilitation of supported housing. In addition, local and regional non-profit
organizations, typically administer programs targeted to these populations, some of
Norwalk
Page 111
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
which are funded through the state agencies listed above and others which are
funded with federal resources or through public and private grants or a combination
of these sources.
The City does not receive HOPWA funds directly.
Non-homeless Special Needs (91.205 (d) and 91.210 (d))
Analysis (including HOPWA)
*Please also refer to the Non-homeless Special Needs Table in the Needs.xls workbook.
1. Estimate, to the extent practicable, the number of persons in various
subpopulations that are not homeless but may require housing or supportive
services, including the elderly, frail elderly, persons with disabilities (mental,
physical, developmental, persons with HIV/AIDS and their families), persons
with alcohol or other drug addiction, victims of domestic violence, and any other
categories the jurisdiction may specify and describe their supportive housing
needs. The jurisdiction can use the Non-Homeless Special Needs Table
(formerly Table 1B) of their Consolidated Plan to help identify these needs.
*Note: HOPWA recipients must identify the size and characteristics of the population with HIV/AIDS and their
families that will be served in the metropolitan area.
2. Identify the priority housing and supportive service needs of persons who are
not homeless but may or may not require supportive housing, i.e., elderly, frail
elderly, persons with disabilities (mental, physical, developmental, persons with
HIV/AIDS and their families), persons with alcohol or other drug addiction by
using the Non-homeless Special Needs Table.
needs.
5. To the extent information is available, describe the facilities and services that
assist persons who are not homeless but require supportive housing, and
programs for ensuring that persons returning from mental and physical health
institutions receive appropriate supportive housing.
6. If the jurisdiction plans to use HOME or other tenant based rental assistance to
assist one or more of these subpopulations, it must justify the need for such
assistance in the plan.
1. Estimate, to the extent practicable, the number of persons in various
subpopulations that are not homeless but may require housing or supportive
services, including the elderly, frail elderly, persons with disabilities (mental,
physical, developmental, persons with HIV/AIDS and their families), persons
Norwalk
Page 112
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
with alcohol or other drug addiction, victims of domestic violence, and any
other categories the jurisdiction may specify and describe their supportive
housing needs. The jurisdiction can use the Non-Homeless Special Needs Table
(formerly Table 1B) of their Consolidated Plan to help identify these needs.
See the Needs.xls Table in the CPMP. In summary, these tables indicate a
significant need for housing and a significant need for supportive services.
2. Identify the priority housing and supportive service needs of persons who are
not homeless but may or may not require supportive housing, i.e., elderly, frail
elderly, persons with disabilities (mental, physical, developmental, persons with
HIV/AIDS and their families), persons with alcohol or other drug addiction by
using the Non-homeless Special Needs Table.
Elderly include persons who are 65 or older, except where noted otherwise.
Between 2000 and 2009, there has been an increase in the elderly population of
approximately 3.5%. There is a further projected increase between 2009 and 2014
of nine percent93. Proportionately, the increase from 2000-2014 in the 65-74 age
group is significant, at 13% whereas the 65-74 age cohort is virtually unchanged.
The largest increase of close to 20% occurs in those over the age of 85. This group
is the one that typically requires the most services and support. Although many
elderly households require no supportive services to live independently, housing
costs continue to be excessive for a large percentage of elderly. In 2009, 64% of
elderly households in the City are at less than 80% AMI. Equally significant is that
of that 80%, 41% are extremely low-income, at less than 30% AMI. The elderly
housing waiting list for public housing is currently open and has 85 elderly
households on it. In terms of various services, of the estimated 10989 elderly in the
City, approximately 1500 are served between the Senior Services Council and the
Senior Center. The Coordinating Council serves only lower income elderly. Those
receiving financial relief services also include the disabled non-elderly.
Frail elderly are defined as those elderly with mobility or self-care limitations.
Typically, this population requires some assistance in daily living. This assistance
may include adaptive housing and/or supportive services. The Senior Services
Coordinating Council estimate that twenty-five percent of the population that it
serves, are frail elderly. For the purposes of this following data analysis, frail elderly
include extra elderly (>75 yrs.) at less than 80 percent of median income. HUD has
defined this population as most likely to require ‘extra care’ and has based its 2009
data on this. Seventy-five percent of these frail elderly households are below 80
percent of median income. One of the key direct services provided by the Senior
Services Coordinating Council to frail elders, are home visits.
Disabledhouseholds in the City are disproportionately low income. The 2009
CHAS/ACS census reports that the overall percentage of disabled households is
close to 10%. However, 72% of all disabled households in the City are low income.
76% of these households also report housing problems. Affordable, accessible
93
ESRI
Norwalk
Page 113
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
housing is identified as a critical need for these households. There are reports of
instances of physically disabled individuals remaining in nursing homes (many
middle-aged and young) or being housed in shelters because of the lack of
adequate affordable housing. In conjunction with housing, accessible, affordable
transportation such as that provided through the Norwalk Para-Transit program is
needed.
Mentally ill are typically treated through the State Department of Mental Health
and Addiction Services(DMHAS) that currently services adults through its residential
and counseling programs. In general, virtually all individuals who apply and meet
the clinical criteria of DMHAS, are receiving at least one mental health service.
However, this does not mean that all mentally ill are accounted for through the
system, nor that those in the system are able to have all their needs met. The
overwhelming majority of DMHAS clients are very low income, relying on
Supplemental Security Income and/or Social Security. The PHA does not have any
housing designated for mentally ill. However, through the Greater Norwalk PILOT
Initiative, the Norwalk Housing Authority provides 24 vouchers which are used as
rental subsidies for scattered site apartments for individuals who are mentally ill
and/or have substance abuse problems. Services are provided through DMHAS.
Hall-Brooke Behavioral Services, a wholly owned subsidiary of St. Vincent’s Health
Services, provides both outpatient services and supported housing in Norwalk.
Regardless of their housing setting, consumers receive services through DMHAS to
support their tenure in accordance with their individual needs. The continuing shift
from institutionalization to community based services and living options has placed
an increasing need to create additional affordable housing in a setting that provides
an opportunity for supervision and service provision.
Approximately 25% of the individuals who were determined to meet DMHAS’s
clinical criteria also had a substance abuse disorder diagnosis.
Developmentally Disabled are serviced throughthe Department of Developmental
Services (DDS). DDS works with housing providers to develop community-based
housing for its clients, ranging from group homes to independent apartments. DDS
estimates that 80 percent of its consumers are below the poverty line. Employment is
also an increasing concern. With the increase in unemployment, jobs that are
appropriate for the developmentally disabled have become more and more competitive
among the general population. Workshops that traditionally provided employment and
activity for older developmentally disabled have been reduced with the reduced volume
of work available from local employers. The availability of appropriate affordable
housing in Norwalk is of paramount concern. There have been no group homes
established since 1992. The cost of housing and code requirements makes it virtually
impossible to create residences for this population. The State bases it expenses on
average costs, not taking into consideration the variability which dramatically affects
costs in Fairfield County. The statewide waiting list for housing continues to grow and is
exacerbated by an increasing number of individuals who have lived with parents who
are now elderly and no longer able to provide care for them. Currently, only individuals
on the emergency-priority 1 category of the wait list can even be considered for
housing. If a resident in Norwalk is considered on the wait list, it is extraordinarily
Norwalk
Page 114
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
unlikely that he/she will be housed in Norwalk, contrary to the mission of DDS. There
are currently eight group homes in Norwalk, servicing forty-six individuals. In addition,
there are twelve individuals in apartments, living independently, using rental subsidies
to make the apartments affordable.
Substance Abuse:
Households with substance abuse problems are at a high risk of homelessness. They
are often dual diagnosed with Mental Illness, exacerbating their ability to successfully
access services and shelter independently. Those who undergo treatment for addiction,
frequently require a transitional setting and supportive services in order to fully recover.
Victims of Domestic Violence:
When a woman leaves an abusive relationship, she often has nowhere to go. This is
most commonly the case for women with few resources. Lack of affordable housing
and long waiting lists for assisted housing mean few choices for these families.
Approximately 63% of homeless women have experienced domestic violence in their
adult lives (National Coalition for the Homeless, 2009). In a national survey of
homeless people, domestic violence was the second most frequently stated cause of
homelessness for families. (National Alliance to End Homelessness, 2007). Emergency
shelters are an important safe haven for domestic violence victims. Ultimately, these
victims and their families need safe, sanitary affordable housing. Only with this option,
can these domestic violence victims leave the shelter system and minimize the risk of
returning to their abuser. The Domestic Violence Crisis Center is the only domestic
violence agency serving the cities and towns of Stamford, Norwalk, Westport, New
Canaan, Darien, Wilton and Weston and is part of an 18 member state coalition, the
Connecticut Coalition Against Domestic Violence. DVCC provides the only emergency
domestic violence shelters in Norwalk. During the past year, it provided shelter for
255 adults and children. Direct services such as counseling, hotline and legal
advocacy were provided to 2,457 individuals in the past year. DVCC also runs a
prevention and education program in the schools. In summary DVCC provided a
crisis or prevention service to 7,780 unduplicated residents of Norwalk during the
past year.
HIV/AIDS:
As of 2009, according to the State DPH, there were 340 individuals living with
HIV/AIDS based on their residence in Norwalk at diagnosis. Norwalk ranked in
sixth in the State in number of cases. 63.2% were male, 36.8% female. In terms
of race and ethnicity, 37.4% were white, 41.5% were black, 18.2% were Hispanic
and 23.5% were of some other ethnicity.
Frequently, those with HIV/AIDS find themselves unemployed and dependent on
disability income.The majority of these individuals are low-income and typically
receiving SSI, or SSDI. Mid Fairfield AIDS Project(MFAP), based in Norwalk
provides housing assistance, mental health assistance and other case management
services. They provide services to approximately 130 clients annually and serve 20
individuals in scattered site units located primarily in Norwalk. In addition to rental
subsidies, they provide housing related assistance in the form of short term rental
assistance, security deposits and emergency payments. Individuals living with
Norwalk
Page 115
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
HIV/AIDS frequently have other issues. In addition to being disproportionately lowincome, it is estimated that 20% of the clientele of MFAP are dually diagnosed with
mental illness and/or substance abuse. There is limited affordable housing
available for persons with AIDS in the Norwalk area. MFAP does work with
Bridgeport which has HOPWA funding as well as various other federal and state
funds.
needs.
In drafting the ConPlan the Agency conducted an evaluation of the needs of
Norwalk’s low and moderate income households based on a review of relevant
empirical data sources as well as extensive outreach to local service providers and
stakeholders. Three broad themes emerged from this research. The most dramatic
theme that emerged from this process was that of the impact of elevated housing
costs in Norwalk. Empirical research revealed that a substantial percentage of
Norwalk household are cost burdened or face difficulty achieving homeownership.
In identifying this theme it has become apparent the community should deploy its
CDBG resources in order to preserve the quality of the City’s existing stock of
affordable housing while also helping to facilitate homeownership for incomeeligible, first-time homebuyers.
A second theme of this Plan results from the income and economic instability faced
by Norwalk’s households as a result of the deep economic downturn in which the
nation is engulfed. Empirical research reveals Norwalk’s low and moderate income
households are disproportionately impacted by the consequences of this recession.
To address this theme, the City and Agency gave priority to those uses of CDBG
funds that (1) provide programming that prepares low and moderate income
individuals to enter the workforce while (2) also incentivizing job creation and
retention.
Plan research also revealed that the loss of income increases the likelihood that
Norwalk’s household will face other forms of instability that threaten the strength of
the family. Such instability may take the form of increased domestic violence or
mental illness or reduced academic achievement as the result of reduced access to
academic enrichment programming. To address this theme, the City and Agency
gave priority to those uses of CDBG funds that address symptoms of household
instability.
When assigning priority, the City was cognizant of the limited financial resources
available to address identified needs. As a result of this circumstance the City
attempted to identify needs associated with these themes. Further, the City have
determined to target resources to households on the upper end of the CDBG eligible
beneficiary scale so the subsidy from CDBG is available to a wider range of
households.
Norwalk
Page 116
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Adequately serving the needs of elderly and frail elderly is a substantial challenge.
Affordability is an issue for both owners and renters. Based on market rents, there
are a limited number of apartments available for households at less than 80% of
area median income. Many elderly homeowners are on fixed incomes and,
although the asset value of their homes may be significant, they are unable to
make necessary repairs, pay utilities or taxes. In addition, their housing is no
longer appropriate for an aging household. Availability of supportive services is
increasingly limited, both in scope and in the population served. In Norwalk, as in
the surrounding communities, transportation is noted as a problem. The demand
for transportation, in terms of frequency and locations served, is greater than the
programs can meet. Transport to medical appointments is a critical problem.
Assistance in navigating the health benefits network is a significant need that has
increased with changes in the Medicare program.
Disabled households, including the physically disabled, developmentally disabled
and those with mental health challenges, face many obstacles in their efforts to
access adequate housing and supportive services. Affordability is a key barrier,
since the majority of these households are low and very low income. Their
dependence on rental assistance and its limited availability exacerbates this
problem. Availability of accessible housing units poses a further challenge. The
stigma attached to a range of disabilities also impacts the ability of this population
to secure housing in locations which are safe and convenient to the services that
are required. As more of these individuals continue to be mainstreamed into the
community, the services themselves have continued to be reduced because of
funding cutbacks and are inadequate to meet the needs of this population.
5. To the extent information is available, describe the facilities and services that
assist persons who are not homeless but require supportive housing, and
programs for ensuring that persons returning from mental and physical health
institutions receive appropriate supportive housing.
There are a variety of governmental and non-profit agencies which service the
housing and supportive needs of the non-homeless populations described above.
Connecticut Counseling Centers, Inc., provides a full range of outpatient
substance abuse and mental health prevention, education and treatment services to
adults.
Domestic Violence Crisis Center,includes the following services: hotline,
safehouses, legal services, counseling and educational programs
Family & Children’s Agency, Inc., is a non-profit human service agency that
meets the needs of more than 10,000 individuals--including children, adults, and
families--throughout Fairfield County. Services are provided in seven primary
impact areas: youth development, family strengthening, foster care, adoption,
behavioral health, homeless service, and services for seniors.
Norwalk
Page 117
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Hall-Brooke Behavioral Health Services, is a subsidiary of St. Vincent’s Health
Services and provides outpatient behavioral health care to individuals in Norwalk.
Keystone House, Inc., is an organization that provides services for individuals
who experience disabilities associated with mental illness. Services include
behavioral, housing and vocational assistance.
Mid Fairfield AIDS Project, provides assistance to individuals with HIV/AIDS and
their families including case management, short term financial assistance, housing
and mental health assistance.
NEON, Inc., is one of twelve community action agencies designated by the State of
Connecticut to provide community development and emergency assistance services
to economically disadvantaged persons residing in the greater Norwalk area.
Services include children and youth programs, employment and training,
homelessness prevention services, case management information and referral,
senior employment and volunteer program.
Norwalk Housing Authority, The Norwalk Housing Authority
providesindependent and assisted housing for the elderly and disabled and rental
subsidies for special populations.
Senior Services Coordinating Council,a local department under the City of
Norwalk, serves as an umbrella organization for multiple service providers and also
provided direct services, specifically related to financial relief and home visits
STAR, Inc., is an organization that services individuals of all ages with
developmental disabilities as well as providing services to their families,
6. If the jurisdiction plans to use HOME or other tenant based rental assistance to
assist one or more of these subpopulations, it must justify the need for such
assistance in the plan.
The Agency does not plan to use TBRA during the period 2010-2014.
Housing Opportunities for People with AIDS (HOPWA)
*Please also refer to the HOPWA Table in the Needs.xls workbook.
1. The Plan includes a description of the activities to be undertaken with its HOPWA
Program funds to address priority unmet housing needs for the eligible
population. Activities will assist persons who are not homeless but require
supportive housing, such as efforts to prevent low-income individuals and
families from becoming homeless and may address the housing needs of
persons who are homeless in order to help homeless persons make the
transition to permanent housing and independent living. The plan would identify
any obstacles to meeting underserved needs and summarize the priorities and
Norwalk
Page 118
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
specific objectives, describing how funds made available will be used to address
identified needs.
2. The Plan must establish annual HOPWA output goals for the planned number of
households to be assisted during the year in: (1) short-term rent, mortgage and
utility payments to avoid homelessness; (2) rental assistance programs; and (3)
in housing facilities, such as community residences and SRO dwellings, where
funds are used to develop and/or operate these facilities. The plan can also
describe the special features or needs being addressed, such as support for
persons who are homeless or chronically homeless. These outputs are to be
used in connection with an assessment of client outcomes for achieving housing
stability, reduced risks of homelessness and improved access to care.
3. For housing facility projects being developed, a target date for the completion of
each development activity must be included and information on the continued
use of these units for the eligible population based on their stewardship
requirements (e.g. within the ten-year use periods for projects involving
acquisition, new construction or substantial rehabilitation).
4. The Plan includes an explanation of how the funds will be allocated including a
description of the geographic area in which assistance will be directed and the
rationale for these geographic allocations and priorities. Include the name of
each project sponsor, the zip code for the primary area(s) of planned activities,
amounts committed to that sponsor, and whether the sponsor is a faith-based
and/or grassroots organization.
5. The Plan describes the role of the lead jurisdiction in the eligible metropolitan
statistical area (EMSA), involving (a) consultation to develop a metropolitanwide strategy for addressing the needs of persons with HIV/AIDS and their
families living throughout the EMSA with the other jurisdictions within the EMSA;
(b) the standards and procedures to be used to monitor HOPWA Program
activities in order to ensure compliance by project sponsors of the requirements
of the program.
6. The Plan includes the certifications relevant to the HOPWA Program.
3-5 Year Strategic Plan HOPWA response:
Not Applicable. The City does not receive HOPWA funds.
Specific HOPWA Objectives
Norwalk
Page 119
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
3-5 Year Specific HOPWA Objectives response:
Not Applicable. The City does not receive HOPWA funds.
OTHER NARRATIVE
Include any Strategic Plan information that was not covered by a narrative in any
other section.
Norwalk
Page 120
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
ATTACHMENTS
ATTACHMENT A: OTHER RESOURCES
Federal
• HUD CDBG funds from the state Department of Economic and Community Development
(DECD) for the “mini-entitlement” communities.
• HUD CDBG funds from the state for non-entitlement communities.
• HUD CDBG funds from the state under its Housing Development Support Program.
• Federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Program
• HUD HOME funds administered by CHFA.
• Federal HUD Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation Program for SRO’s.
• Federal Housing Administration (FHA) Insured Rehabilitation Loans (Section 203k)
• HUD’s Lead Paint Demonstration Program
• Federal Veteran’s Affairs Specially Adapted Housing Programs
• HUD’s Supportive Housing for the Elderly Program (Section 202)
• HUD’s Section 811 Supportive Housing Program for Persons with Disabilities
• Federal Department of Energy/DHCD Weatherization Assistance Program
• Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) Community Homebuyer’s
Programs
• Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac) Mortgage and Rehabilitation
Programs
• Freddie Mac’s Affordable Housing Program
• Freddie Mac’s Community Investment Program and New England Fund
• McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Funds (Apply for Competitive funds)
• American Recovery & Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Funds
o Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSPI) Funds
o HPRP Funds
• Federal Public Housing Operating Funds
• Federal Public Housing Capital Fund Program
• Federal HCV Vouchers
State and Other Resources
Business Programs and Services
The Connecticut Clean Tech Fund provides investments in seed- and early-stage
companies focused on innovations that conserve energy and resources, protect the
environment, or eliminate harmful waste.
Dry Cleaning Establishment Remediation Fund.
Economic Development and Manufacturing Assistance Act (MAA) Program
allows DECD to provide loans, loan guarantees, extensions of credit and grants to
eligible applicants that are embarking on eligible business development projects..
Enterprise Zone (EZ) Program allows eligible companies in eligible communities
to receive local property tax abatements on both real and personal property.
Norwalk
Page 121
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Export Assistance provides assistance for Connecticut companies entering the
global market, including foreign market analysis, trade shows, trade missions,
market data and export statistics.
Municipal Development Program provides planning and development funding
assistance statewide to renovate or demolish vacant industrial and commercial
buildings, and to assist municipalities in developing industrial and business parks
and remediating/renovating Brownfield and commercial sites. Municipalities also
use this program to plan urban revitalization activities.
IFS Center for Educational Excellence is a partnership between the U.S.
Department of Labor (USDOL), DECD, Capital Community College, Norwalk
Community College, The Workplace, Inc. and the Insurance and Financial Services
Cluster. With a $2.7 million grant from USDOL, DECD created the IFS Center for
Educational Excellence.
Insurance Reinvestment Fund Credit provides tax credits for investments made
in Connecticut companies engaged in the insurance business or providing services
to insurance companies.
Job Creation Tax Credit establishes a credit against the insurance premium,
corporation or utility company tax for Connecticut companies that create at least 10
new, full-time jobs, hire new employees for those jobs, and keep them employed
for at least 12 months. The credit equals up to 60% of the state income tax
withheld from the new employees’ wages.
Micro Loan Guarantee Program for Women- and Minority-Owned
Businesses is a special loan guarantee program, offered in conjunction with the
Community Economic Development Fund (CEDF) that helps women- and minorityowned businesses obtain flexible financing for start- up of a new business or the
growth of an existing one.
Small Business Credit Assistance Fund was established to assist small
businesses in Connecticut that have had difficulty obtaining credit due to the
national economic crisis.
Special Contaminated Property Remediation and Insurance Fund (SCPRIF)
is a Brownfields revitalization program that provides loan assistance for
investigating the environmental conditions of a site to ultimately encourage
redevelopment that is beneficial to the community.
Turnaround Management Assistance provides technical assistance for
businesses experiencing significant difficulties.
Urban Action Grant Program (UA) provides funds to improve and expand state
activities that promote community conservation and development and improve the
quality of life for urban residents of the state.
Urban and Industrial Site Reinvestment Tax Credit Program allows for a
dollar-to-dollar tax credit of up to 100% of an investment made by an eligible
investor in an urban or industrial site development project.
Urban Sites Remedial Action Program is the state’s primary Brownfields
redevelopment program that provides funds for site investigations, remedial action
plans and implementation of the site remediation.
Workforce Development promotes the linkage between economic and workforce
development on behalf of the agency.
Norwalk
Page 122
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Housing Programs and Services
Affordable Housing (AHP) Program (Flex) provides financial assistance for a
variety of housing development activities.
Congregate Facilities Operating Cost Program provides grants to housing
authorities and nonprofit corporations who own and/or operate state- financed
congregate rental housing for the elderly to offset the cost of social and
supplementary services.
Elderly Rental Assistance Payments Program (ERAP) provides rental
assistance to low-income elderly persons residing in state-financed rental housing
for the elderly.
Energy Conservation Loan Program (ECL) provides low-interest loans to
homeowners of one to four unit residential buildings for energy conservation.
HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) Program
Housing Trust Fund provides financing annually on a competitive basis to eligible
developers for the development and/or preservation of safe, quality housing for
low- and moderate-income families and persons at affordable prices.
Incentive Housing Zone Program provides funds to nonprofit housing
development organizations for technical assistance planning and other housing
development related activities within approved incentive housing zones.
Moderate Rental Payment In Lieu Of Taxes (PILOT) Program provides grants
to municipalities in which state-financed moderate rental housing developments are
operated by local housing authorities.
Pre-Development Loan Program provides funds to eligible applicants for predevelopment costs associated with constructing, rehabilitating or renovating
affordable housing for low- and moderate-income households.
Resident Service Coordinator (RSC) Program, also known as the Elderly
Rental Registry and Counselor Program, provides grant funds to sponsors of
state-financed rental housing for the elderly to hire a Resident Services Coordinator
to perform an evaluation of all tenants and to assist them with other matters
related to their stay in elderly housing.
State-Assisted Housing Sustainability Fund (SHSF), may provide financial
assistance in the form of grants, loans and deferred loans at below market-rates to
the owners of eligible housing for the maintenance, repair, rehabilitation and
modernization of eligible housing.
Surplus Property Program examines excess state land holdings, or interests
therein, for their use as transitional facilities for the homeless, or for the
construction or rehabilitation of housing for families of low and moderate incomes.
Tax Abatement Program is designed to assist privately owned nonprofit and
limited dividend low and moderate-income housing projects by providing
reimbursement for taxes abated up to $450 per unit per year for as long as a tax
abatement agreement is in place and active.
Weatherization Assistance Program provides for a $19.1 million set-aside under
the State Department of Social Services Weatherization Assistance Program,
specifically targeted to assist low and very low income elderly and disabled persons
living in state-financed housing.
Norwalk
Page 123
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Community Development Programs and Services
The Brownfield Municipal Pilot Program is a new program to identify and fund
projects that are complicated by Brownfields but will upon completion make a
significant economic impact.
Connecticut Brownfield Revolving Loan Fund and the Statewide Brownfield
Revolving Loan Fund are Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)-funded
programs that provide funds for the environmental clean-up of Brownfields located
in Hartford and throughout Connecticut.
Connecticut Main Street Program provides services and training for the
revitalization of downtown districts to spur economic development within the
context of historic preservation.
Urban Action Grant (UA) Program provides funds to improve and expand state
activities that promote community conservation and development and improve the
quality of life for urban
Local Resources
City Service Grants
Norwalk
Page 124
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
ATTACHMENT B: LOW-MOD % BY CENSUS TRACT AND BLOCK GROUP
Tract
Block Group
Low Mod #
Universe
Low Mod %
044100
043800
2
5
1158
1414
1418
1767
81.7
80
044000
044500
2
2
915
1192
1188
1577
77
75.6
044000
044100
5
1
1240
1249
1710
1781
72.5
70.1
043700
044000
2
4
567
410
812
621
69.8
66
043700
044500
1
1
639
1101
983
1711
65
64.3
043200
043800
3
1
1311
416
2045
661
64.1
62.9
043400
044200
2
3
1162
649
2004
1158
58
56
043400
044000
3
1
778
587
1391
1061
55.9
55.3
044400
044000
3
3
1413
719
2565
1332
55.1
54
043800
043800
2
3
772
389
1475
755
52.3
51.5
044200
043400
2
1
428
537
846
1114
50.6
48.2
044400
044200
1
4
498
711
1033
1477
48.2
48.1
043800
043500
4
2
431
311
950
720
45.4
43.2
043000
043900
2
1
332
835
798
2092
41.6
39.9
043300
043600
1
3
667
508
1771
1386
37.7
36.7
042600
043900
3
2
197
478
565
1411
34.9
33.9
044300
042600
4
4
275
356
824
1087
33.4
32.8
043300
043800
2
6
418
508
1286
1593
32.5
31.9
042800
042800
2
3
381
344
1211
1105
31.5
31.1
043000
044300
3
2
346
340
1130
1143
30.6
29.7
044300
043900
1
4
334
195
1159
685
28.8
28.5
042600
042800
2
1
282
329
999
1214
28.2
27.1
Norwalk
Page 125
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Tract
Block Group
Low Mod #
Universe
Low Mod %
042700
042800
2
4
508
235
1902
913
26.7
25.7
043600
043500
2
1
218
154
851
605
25.6
25.5
043200
042900
1
1
97
212
382
838
25.4
25.3
044200
044600
1
2
131
202
526
845
24.9
23.9
042700
043100
3
3
172
310
724
1332
23.8
23.3
042500
043500
3
3
260
206
1188
953
21.9
21.6
043600
043100
1
4
147
272
684
1271
21.5
21.4
043000
042500
1
1
227
293
1089
1431
20.8
20.5
042500
043900
2
3
206
167
1068
899
19.3
18.6
043200
042600
2
1
107
211
612
1257
17.5
16.8
042900
044300
2
3
120
109
743
679
16.2
16.1
043100
043100
2
1
74
155
479
1087
15.4
14.3
044600
042700
1
1
184
205
1330
1525
13.8
13.4
044600
044400
3
3
157
0
1257
0
12.5
0
Norwalk
Page 126
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
ATTACHMENT C: CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLAN
Introduction
The City of Norwalk (City) considers the involvement and input of the City’s low/moderate
income residents, including those residents of public housing, to be essential to the creation
and implementation of its 2010-2014 Consolidated Plan for Housing and Community
Development (Plan). In order to ensure the involvement from those who will derive the
greatest benefit from the Plan, the City has created a formal Citizen Participation Plan.
Drafted in accordance with 24 CFR 91.105, this Citizen Participation Plan outlines the
strategy and formal processes for securing comment regarding the goals, objectives and
content of the Plan. This strategy will detail:
• The
• The
• The
• The
• The
• The
process for submitting public comment;
steps used to publicly notice the draft document;
duration of public comment periods;
locations for accessing copies of the draft Plan;
dates and times of public hearings and
criteria for amending the Plan.
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLAN
The City has moved proactively to encourage participation of all its citizens including
minorities and non-English speaking persons, as well as persons with disabilities.
Information and records related to the Plan and use of assistance received under the United
States Department of Housing and Community Development’s (HUD) Community
Development Block Grant Program (CDBG) are available at the Agency offices. The City will
make the Citizen Participation Plan accessible to persons with disabilities, upon request
(e.g., providing oral, Braille, electronic, or large print copies for the visually impaired; and
delivering copies to the homebound). The City will make online versions of each document
compatible with web readers for the visually impaired.
Requirements of the Consolidated Plan for Housing and Community Development
(Plan) and Annual Action Plans (AAPs) Prior to the City’s approval of the Plan and
subsequent AAPs, the City and Agency will make available to residents – particularly those
living in low-and moderate-income neighborhoods, slum and blighted areas and in areas
where CDBG funds are proposed to be used – and by residents of predominantly low- and
moderate- income neighborhoods, governmental agencies, social service organizations and
other interested stakeholders information that includes (1) the amount of financial
assistance the City expects to receive from the CDBG Program, (2) the range of activities
that may be undertaken (3) the estimated amount that will benefit persons of low/moderate
income, (4) the local government's plans to minimize displacement of persons and to assist
any persons displaced, specifying the types and levels of assistance the local government
will make available (or require others to make available) to persons displaced, even if the
local government expects no displacement to occur; (5) and when and how the local
government will make this information available.
The City will make this information available as part of the annual Notice of Funding
Availability (NOFA) process associated with the dissemination of program funds to
subgrantees.
Note, for the purposes of this Citizen Participation Plan the definition of residents of
predominately low-and moderate-income neighborhoods’ are those residents of low and
moderate income census tracts as identified within the current Plan.
Norwalk
Page 127
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
The NOFA will contain the value, if known at the time, of the City’s annual allocation of HUD
funding and budget for these funds.
Minimization of Displacement
Projects and activities funded using CDBG Program monies will be planned in order to
minimize the displacement of low/moderate income residents. In the event
displacement occurs, the City will notify affected persons and provide assistance
consistent with the provisions of the Federal Uniform Relocation Act and all other
applicable governmental regulations.
Publication of the Plan
The City will publish and make public all versions of the Plan and subsequent AAPs. The
publication of these documents will afford the opportunity to provide comment regarding
content.
The City will place copies of the draft and final versions of these documents at the following
locations:
• The Norwalk Public Library,
• The South Norwalk Branch Library,
• The Norwalk Redevelopment Agency,
• The administrative offices of the Norwalk Housing Authority and
• Norwalk Economic Opportunity Now, Inc. (NEON)
In addition the City will make these documents available to other area funders, and on the
City’s website: www.norwalkct.org. The City will also make free copies of the Plan and
subsequent AAPs available to those groups or individuals that request the document.
A summary of the proposed Plan and subsequent AAPs including a listing of sites where the
document is available will be published in a periodical of general circulation (presently, the
Norwalk Hour). This summary will contain a description of the contents and purpose of the
Plan. The City will place a final copy of the document, as adopted or amended by the
Common Council and in the format to be submitted to HUD, at the previously mentioned
sites.
Public Hearings
The City will conduct at least one public hearing during the drafting and development of the
Plan and subsequent AAPs. At a minimum, published Notices of Public Hearing will appear in
the legal notices sections of the Norwalk Hour twice prior to each hearing. The City will
publish the first such notice no earlier than fourteen (14) days prior to any public hearing.
The City will also schedule a thirty (30) day period in order to accept comments
regarding the near complete version of the draft document. The City will consider any
comments or views of citizens received in writing, in preparing the final Plan and
subsequent AAPs. The City will produce a summary of the comments and a summary of any
comments not accepted and the reasons for their exclusion and attach this summary to the
final Plan and subsequent AAPs.
Access to Records
The City will provide residents, social service organizations and stakeholders with
reasonable and timely access to information and records relating to the City’s use of
assistance under the programs covered by this part during the preceding five (5) years.
Norwalk
Page 128
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Technical Assistance
The City will provide for technical assistance to groups representative of
persons of low/moderate income that request such assistance in developing proposals for
funding assistance under any of the programs covered by the Plan and subsequent AAPs,
with the level and type of assistance determined by the City.
Complaints
The City will provide timely, substantive written response to every written citizen complaint,
within fifteen (15) working days.
Development of Annual Plans and Release of Notices of Funding Availability (NOFAs)
At least annually, the City will announce the availability of funding under the
Community Development Block Grant program, following the procedures outlined in
this section for notices, public hearings, and information sharing. The NOFAs will
include an application form for receiving a sub-grant of CDBG funds.
Applicants are asked to submit proposals addressing needs and themes, discussed in
this Plan.
Substantial Amendments
According to 24 CFR 91.105(c) the Citizen Participation Plan must identify a process
for obtaining public comment when a substantial amendment is proposed for the Plan.
Substantial amendments including the reprogramming of funds left unexpended from
previous activities and are defined in 24 CFR Section 91.505 as:
• Any changes in the uses of CDBG funds from one eligible activity to another,
• Any change in the allocation priorities or the method of distribution of funds,
Funding an activity using funds from any program covered by the Consolidated Plan,
not previously described in the action plan
• Any modification not previously identified in the Plan that results in a 25%
increase or decrease in level of funding to program,
• A change in the purpose, location or beneficiaries of a previously approved
Activity.
In order to comply with requirements for public comment, any substantial amendment to
the Plan will require a public hearing and a public comment period of at least 30 days. The
City will publish the notice of the public hearing and public comment period in the legal
notices sections of the Norwalk Hour twice prior to the hearing. The City will publish the first
such notice no earlier than fourteen (14) days prior to any public hearing. The proposed
amendment must receive approval from the Norwalk Common Council.
The City will consider any comments or views of citizens received in
writing, or orally during at the public hearing, in preparing the substantial amendment to
the Plan. The City will produce a summary of those comments or views, and a summary of
any comments or views not accepted and the reasons for their exclusion and attach said
summary to the substantial amendment.
Performance Reports – Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report (CAPER)
The City will provide citizens with the opportunity to comment on the
annual CAPER that measures the annual expenditure of CDBG funds and the progress of
activities and projects funded with CDBG monies. The City will provide a period of fifteen
days during which residents, social service organizations and stakeholders may comment on
the performance report that the City will submit to HUD. The City will publish a notice for
Norwalk
Page 129
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
the public comment period in the legal notices sections of the Norwalk Hour twice prior to
the start of the comment period. The City and Agency will publish the first such notice no
earlier than fourteen (14) days prior to the start of the comment period.
Public Hearings Related to Annual Administration of Program
The City will provide for two public hearings each year to entertain
comments and questions from residents, social service organizations and stakeholders.
The City will hold all hearings in Norwalk City Hall, a public building fully accessible to
individuals with physical disabilities. Notices for each public hearing will appear in the legal
notices sections of a periodical of general circulation, the Norwalk Hour twice prior to each
hearing. The City and Agency will publish the first such notice no earlier than fourteen (14)
days prior to any public hearing.
For those hearings where a significant number of non-English speaking residents can be
reasonably be expected to participate, the City will provide translation services.
Norwalk
Page 130
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
ATTACHMENT D: CITIZEN COMMENTS AND AGENCY RESPONSES
Enclosed are comments received following the close of the public comment period
(May 5, 2010). The City will take these comments under advisement.
Norwalk
Page 131
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
ATTACHMENT E: HOUSING NEEDS ANALYSIS HUD 2009 CHAS/ACS TABLES
Important Note: For the CPMP needs.xls which is the file containing the
Tables required by the CDBG Consolidated Plan,it is only possible to use
2000 data due to a number of mismatches and changed definitions in the
ACS survey which was used by HUD for the CHAS dataset issued in 2009.
However, using that data from HUD, we have developed a number of tables
similar to those in the CHAS 2000 dataset.
Table E1: Housing Problems by Income Level94
<=30% AMI
Housing
Problems
HHs with
Housing
Problems
HHs
without
Housing
Problems
HHs N/A95
Total
Owner
30.1-50% AMI
Renter
Owner
Renter
50.1%-80% AMI
Total <=80% AMI
Owner
Owner
Renter
Renter
1,655
2,865
1,880
1,830
2,680
1,040
6,215
5,735
11,950
155
65
1,875
485
245
3,595
645
0
2,525
465
35
2,330
2,165
0
4,845
1,180
100
2,320
2,965
65
9,245
2,130
380
8,245
5,095
445
17,490
Table E2: Housing Problems by Income Level96
80.1%-95%AMI
Housing
Problems
HHs with
Housing
Problems
HHs
without
Housing
Problems
HHs N/A
Total
94
95
96
Owner
Renter
95.1%-120% AMI
Owner
Renter
120.1%+ AMI
Owner
Total
Renter
All
635
140
935
55
895
55
14,665
1,185
0
1,820
965
0
1,105
1,995
0
2,930
635
30
720
5,985
0
6,880
790
70
915
16,650
545
31,860
N/A means that the status of these households could not be determined
Norwalk
Total
<=80
% AMI
Page 132
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Table E3: Housing Problems by Income <20% AMI Level97
<20% AMI
Housing Problems
Owner
HHs with Housing Problems
HHs without Housing Problems
HHs N/A
% of ELI Group
Renter
Owner
Renter
810
1,735
49%
61%
55
65
310
225
35%
100%
64%
92%
Table E4: Housing Problems of the Low Income Disabled98
CHAS/ACS 2009
Housing
Problems
Disabled
Not-Disabled
Total
No Housing
Problems
Disabled
Not-Disabled
Total
ALL DISABLED
HHs
<=30% AMI
30.1-50% AMI
50.1%-80% AMI
Total <=80% AMI
Total
Owner
475
1,180
1,655
Renter
440
2,425
2,865
Owner
290
1,590
1,880
Renter
190
1,640
1,830
Owner
210
2,470
2,680
Renter
55
985
1,040
Owner
975
5,240
6,215
Renter
685
5,050
5,735
Owner
45
110
155
Renter
45
435
480
Owner
70
580
650
Renter
15
450
465
Owner
240
1,920
2,160
Renter
35
1,150
1,185
Owner
355
2,610
2,965
Renter
95
2,035
2,130
<=80%
AMI
1,660
10,290
11,950
<=80%
AMI
450
4,645
5,095
520
545
360
205
450
90
1,330
840
2,170
% of Disabled
HHs with
Housing
Problems
91%
81%
81%
93%
47%
61%
73%
82%
76%
Disabled with
Housing
Problems as a %
of Owner or
Rental
Population
25%
12%
11%
8%
4%
2%
11%
8%
9%
Table E5: Housing Problems of the Disabled above 80% AMI99
CHAS/ACS 2009
Housing Problems
Disabled
Not-Disabled
Total
97
98
99
80.1%+ AMI
Owner
85
2,380
2,465
Renter
0
250
250
Total
All
1,745
12,920
14,665
Norwalk
Page 133
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
CHAS/ACS 2009
80.1%+ AMI
No Housing Problems
Disabled
Not-Disabled
Total
Total
Owner
665
8,500
9,165
Renter
70
2,315
2,385
All
1,185
15,460
16,645
TOTAL ALL DISABLED HHs
750
165
3,465
% of Disabled HHs with Housing
Problems
11%
0%
50%
Table E6: Profile of Elderly in Norwalk.100
Elderly Profile - Norwalk
Total Elderly (62-74)
Total Elderly (62-74) <80% With Housing Problems
Total Extra-Elderly (75+)
Total Extra-Elderly (75+) <80% with Housing Problems
Total all Elderly (62+)
Total all Elderly <=80% Median
Total all elderly <80% with housing problems
5,385
3,090
1,900
1,115
3,175
2,365
1,270
1,120
8,560
5,455
3,170
% of
Elderly
Group
% of
Elderly
group
<=80%
35%
21%
61%
36%
40%
35%
54%
47%
64%
37%
Table E7: Housing Problems for the Elderly and Extra-Elderly101
With
Housing
Problems
Elderly 62-74
Extra
Elderly75+
Total Elderly
with Housing
Problems by
Income Level
100
101
Extremely
Low-Income
(<=30%
AMI)
Very LowIncome
(30.1-50%
AMI)
Low-Income
(50.1%80% AMI)
Moderate
Income(80.
1%-95%
AMI)
Mid-Level
Income(95.
1%-120%
AMI)
Own
Own
Own
Own
Own
Rent
Rent
Rent
Rent
Rent
All
370
415
415
270
375
55
15
0
380
0
2295
725
140
295
40
70
0
0
0
100
0
1370
785
685
430
15
380
Norwalk
Total
Page 134
Version 2.0
2295
City of Norwalk
Extremely
Low-Income
(<=30%
AMI)
Very LowIncome
(30.1-50%
AMI)
Low-Income
(50.1%80% AMI)
Moderate
Income(80.
1%-95%
AMI)
Mid-Level
Income(95.
1%-120%
AMI)
865
335
70
0
100
Total ExtraElderly with
Housing
Problems by
Income Level
Total
1370
Table E8: Housing Problems by Family Type102
Family, 1 Parent
Own
Rent
All
1,425
1,530
2,355
1,335
6,645
20
470
105
0
0
865
1,960
595
1,425
1,530
Family Size with No Housing Problems
410
5,240
700
1,905
1,595
560
2,915
125
1,460
685
7,330
6,250
1,110
10,860
735
0
735
1,060
410
5,925
700
1,905
1,595
6,985
1,110
845
1,490
490
1,425
1,530
2,355
1,335
865
Family Size with Housing Problems as a % of All Families in Type
11,595
6,645
90
955
1,010
Small -4
or fewer
Large - 5
or more
Total
Rent
Rent
Own
845
865
Small -4
or fewer
Large - 5
or more
Total
Total Family
Own
Own
Small -4
or fewer
Large - 5
or more
Total
Family, 2
Parents
Non-Family
Family Size with Housing Problems
50
0
Rent
1,490
490
685
0
0
0
Own
Rent
Own
Rent
Own
Rent
Own
Rent
All
25.63%
25.04%
16.15%
5.31%
21.35%
22.92%
18.69%
10.60%
34.47%
2.67%
0.59%
5.09%
1.14%
0.00%
0.00%
4.44%
0.99%
3.55%
Table E9: Housing Problem Severity103
Sever
e
Housi
ng
Probl
ems
Extremely Low
Income <=30% AMI
Seve
rely
Over Severe
Subly Cost
stand
crow
Burde
ded
ard
ned
Own
102
103
30
0
1,260
Very Low Income 30.150% AMI
Substand
ard
Sever
ely
Overcrowd
ed
Severe
ly Cost
Burden
ed
15
0
1,030
Low Income 50.1%80% AMI
Substan
dard
Sever
ely
Overcrowd
ed
Sever
ely
Cost
Burde
ned
140
45
780
Total <=80% AMI
Substan
dard
Sever
ely
Overcrowd
ed
Severe
ly Cost
Burden
ed
185
45
3,070
Norwalk
Page 135
Total
All
<=80%
AMI
Version 2.0
3,300
City of Norwalk
Sever
e
Housi
ng
Probl
ems
er
Rent
er
Extremely Low
Income <=30% AMI
Seve
rely
Over Severe
Subly Cost
stand
crow
Burde
ded
ard
ned
Total
20
50
25
25
1,995
3,255
Very Low Income 30.150% AMI
Substand
ard
Sever
ely
Overcrowd
ed
Severe
ly Cost
Burden
ed
0
15
50
50
290
1,320
Low Income 50.1%80% AMI
Substan
dard
Sever
ely
Overcrowd
ed
Sever
ely
Cost
Burde
ned
0
140
0
45
85
865
Total
All
<=80%
AMI
Total <=80% AMI
Substan
dard
Sever
ely
Overcrowd
ed
Severe
ly Cost
Burden
ed
20
205
75
120
2,370
5,440
2,465
5,765
Table E10: Housing Problem Severity104
Severe
Housing
Problems
Owner
Renter
Total
Moderate Income (80.1%-95%
AMI)
Severely Severely
OverCost
Substandard crowded Burdened
0
0
135
0
0
90
0
0
225
Mid-Level Income (>95.1%
AMI)
Severely Severely
OverCost
Substandard crowded Burdened
300
0
210
0
0
0
300
0
210
Total
All
>80.1%
AMI
Total All
HHs with
Severe
Housing
Problems
<=80%
AMI
345
90
435
3,300
2,465
5,765
Table E11: Cost-Burden by Household Type105
Small Family,
elderly
Cost
Burden
Severe
Cost
Burden
Moderate
Cost
Burden
No Cost
Burden
Total
Own
Rent
Small Family,
Non-Elderly
Own
Large Family
Rent
Own
All Other HHs
Rent
Total
Own
Rent
Own
Rent
55
1,430
715
425
90
1,415
1,665
3,580
2,525
6,105
720
135
2,170
1,490
440
205
1,325
1,365
4,655
3,195
7,850
2,005
3,035
295
575
6,265
9,865
1,835
4,210
1,180
2,045
225
535
3,130
5,935
2,415
5,640
12,580
20,880
4,770
10,960
17,350
31,840
Own
20,875
All HH
105
106
%
Rent
10,965
%
All
31,840
%
Ibid Table 3
Norwalk
All
310
Table E12: Moderate Cost Burden by Tenure106
104
Total
Page 136
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
All Moderate Cost Burden (3050% of HH Income)
ELI (<=30% AMI)
VLI (30.1-50% AMI)
HVLI (50.1-60% AMI)
LI (60.1-80% AMI)
Mod (80.1-95% AMI)
Mid (95.1+%)
Own
%
Rent
%
All
%
4,500
365
710
430
1,245
450
1,305
21.56%
8.11%
15.78%
9.56%
27.67%
10.00%
29.00%
3,050
755
1,355
360
410
55
110
27.82%
24.75%
44.43%
11.80%
13.44%
1.80%
3.61%
7,550
1,120
2,065
790
1,655
505
1,415
23.71%
3.52%
6.49%
2.48%
5.20%
1.59%
4.44%
Table E13: Severe Cost Burden by Tenure107
All HH
All Severe Cost Burden (>50%
of HH Income)
ELI (<=30% AMI)
VLI (30.1-50% AMI)
HVLI (50.1-60% AMI)
LI (60.1-80% AMI)
Mod (80.1-95% AMI)
Mid (95.1+% AMI) as a % of all
Moderate Cost HHs
Own
20,875
%
Rent
10,965
%
All
31,840
%
3,410
1,260
1,030
495
285
135
16.34%
36.95%
30.21%
14.52%
8.36%
3.96%
2,460
1,995
290
85
0
90
22.44%
81.10%
11.79%
3.46%
0.00%
3.66%
5,870
3,255
1,320
580
285
225
18.44%
10.22%
4.15%
1.82%
0.90%
0.71%
210
6.16%
0
0.00%
210
0.66%
Table E14: Cost Burden by Income and Physical Condition of Unit108
<=30% AMI
Substandard
Severe
Cost
Burden
Moderate
Cost
Burden
No Cost
Burden
Total
Standard
Severe
Cost
Burden
Moderate
Cost
Burden
107
108
Own
30.1-50% AMI
Rent
Own
Rent
50.1%-80%
AMI
Own
Total <=80%
AMI
Rent
Own
Total
Rent
<=80%
AMI
80.1%+ AMI
Own
Rent
All
0
20
0
0
0
0
0
20
20
0
0
20
30
0
0
0
0
0
30
0
30
50
0
80
0
30
Ow
n
0
15
15
0
0
0
155
185
0
0
140
140
20
255
305
0
0
410
510
Rent
Own
Rent
Own
Rent
Own
Rent
155
205
<=80%
AMI
Own
Rent
1,2
60
2,050
1,145
290
780
85
3,185
2,425
5,610
400
90
6,100
365
780
725
1,475
1,740
775
2,830
3,030
5,860
1,755
165
7,780
20
Ibid Table 3
Norwalk
Total
Page 137
Version 2.0
All
City of Norwalk
<=30% AMI
No Cost
Burden
Total
155
1,8
45
50.1%-80%
AMI
30.1-50% AMI
Total <=80%
AMI
Total
495
650
560
2,185
1,460
2,990
2,515
3,570
2,520
2,325
4,705
2,320
9,070
8,215
80.1%+ AMI
5,505
17,285
9,180
11,33
5
Total
2,480
17,165
2,735
31,355
Table E15: Overcrowding109
<=30% AMI
Family
Structure
1 Family HH
No
Overcrowding
Moderate
Overcrowding
Severe
Overcrowding
Own
30.1-50% AMI
Rent
Own
Rent
Own
Rent
All
Own
Rent
All
Own
Rent
1,335
3,315
1,105
5,400
3,745
9,145
8,695
1,000
18,840
125
135
40
155
165
360
525
70
0
595
0
45
50
45
75
120
0
0
120
1,470
3,400
1,310
5,610
4,180
8,765
1,000
19,555
Rent
Own
Rent
Own
Rent
9,790
<=80
%
AMI
Own
Rent
All
620
1,305
0
70
0
25
2+ Family
HH
No
Overcrowding
Moderate
Overcrowding
Severe
Overcrowding
Ow
n
Rent
Ow
n
15
45
75
75
185
25
275
145
420
295
0
715
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
15
0
50
125
0
185
0
25
0
275
50
195
0
295
0
50
765
Rent
Ow
n
Rent
Own
Rent
Own
Rent
50
470
<=80
%
AMI
0
45
0
75
Own
Rent
All
2,145
860
735
1,260
1,010
3,360
3,890
7,250
2,570
1,730
11,550
0
0
0
0
0
25
0
25
25
0
0
25
0
1,24
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,260
1,035
3,360
3,915
7,275
2,570
1,730
11,575
Ow
n
1,24
0
2,145
860
735
Norwalk
Total
Rent
1,400
109
Own
80.1%+ AMI
Own
620
Total
Rent
Total
<=80
%
AMI
Rent
Rent
Ow
n
1,46
5
Total
Non-Family
HH
No
Overcrowding
Moderate
Overcrowding
Severe
Overcrowding
Own
Total <=80%
AMI
<=80
%
AMI
Ow
n
0
1,59
0
Total
Rent
50.1%-80%
AMI
Page 138
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Table E16: Race and Ethnicity in Norwalk 2000, 2009, 2014110
2000
73.9%
15.3%
0.2%
3.3%
0.0%
4.3%
2.9%
15.6%
White Alone
Black Alone
American Indian Alone
Asian Alone
Pacific Islander Alone
Some Other Race Alone
Two or More Races
Hispanic Origin (Any Race)
2009
68.9%
16.8%
0.3%
4.9%
0.1%
5.6%
3.5%
20.1%
2014
66.1%
17.5%
0.3%
6.0%
0.1%
6.3%
3.7%
22.7%
Change
2000-2014
-8.78%
17.19%
37.93%
86.66%
37.50%
49.60%
29.20%
48.45%
Table E17: Housing Needs by Race111
<=30% AMI
30.1-50% AMI
50.1%-80% AMI
Total <=80% AMI
Total
Race with Housing Problems
White
Black
Asian
American
Indian
Pacific
Islander
Hispanic
Other
Total
Own
1,375
120
0
Rent
910
935
145
Own
1,005
165
115
Rent
530
370
85
Own
1,610
440
85
Rent
480
50
0
Own
3,990
725
200
Rent
1,920
1,355
230
<=80%
AMI
5,910
2,080
430
0
0
0
0
0
55
0
55
55
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
95
60
1,650
840
30
2,860
600
0
1,885
845
0
1,830
530
15
2,680
460
0
1,045
1,225
75
6,215
2,145
30
5,735
3,370
105
11,950
Race with No Housing Problems
White
Black
Asian
American
Indian
Pacific
Islander
Hispanic
Other
Total
110
111
115
45
0
0
105
220
0
0
575
0
0
0
200
90
0
0
1,680
240
45
0
460
185
120
0
2,370
285
45
0
765
495
120
0
3,135
780
165
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
155
75
175
185
390
260
720
980
0
160
1,375
0
480
910
0
650
1,005
0
465
530
10
2,160
1,610
25
1,180
480
10
2,970
3,990
25
2,125
1,920
35
5,095
5,910
ESRI Ibid
Norwalk
Page 139
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
<=30% AMI
Total All
1,875
30.1-50% AMI
3,585
2,535
50.1%-80% AMI
2,330
4,840
Total <=80% AMI
2,325
Total
9,250
8,240
17,490
% of Owner or Renter Population
CHAS/ACS
2009
Race with
Housing
Problems
White
Black
Asian
American
Indian
Pacific
Islander
Hispanic
Other
Total
Race with
No
Housing
Problems
White
Black
Asian
American
Indian
Pacific
Islander
Hispanic
Other
Total
Total All
% of
Owner or
Renter
Population
Norwalk
Own
Rent
Own
Rent
Own
Rent
Own
Rent
<=80%
AMI
8.98%
32.69%
12.14%
21.25%
23.19%
21.20%
44.31%
75.15%
54.92%
80.1%-95%AMI
Owner
450
55
0
95.1%+ AMI
35
0
105
Owner
1,545
130
50
0
0
0
130
0
0
0
0
635
Renter
140
Total
Renter
55
0
55
All HHs
7,995
2,265
640
0
0
55
0
105
0
1,830
0
0
0
0
3,605
105
14,665
110
960
150
15
490
215
0
7,065
320
325
955
215
190
12,605
1,680
695
0
0
25
0
25
0
60
0
0
260
0
0
45
15
15
1,575
50
16,645
31,850
1,185
1,820
965
1,105
15
230
0
7,980
9,810
8.72%
10.08%
46.99%
1,420
1,625
14.82%
100.02%
Page 140
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
Table E18: Percentage of HHs with Housing Problems by Race112
Race
with
Housing
Problems
<=30% AMI
White
Owner
73.33%
Renter
25.38%
Owner
39.64%
Renter
22.75%
Owner
33.26%
Renter
20.65%
Owner
43.14%
Renter
23.30%
Total
<=80%
AMI
33.79%
Black
6.40%
26.08%
6.51%
15.88%
9.09%
2.15%
7.84%
16.44%
11.89%
Asian
American
Indian
Pacific
Islander
0.00%
4.04%
4.54%
3.65%
1.76%
0.00%
2.16%
2.79%
2.46%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
2.37%
0.00%
0.67%
0.31%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
Hispanic
Other
5.07%
3.20%
23.43%
0.84%
23.67%
0.00%
36.27%
0.00%
10.95%
0.31%
19.78%
0.00%
13.24%
0.81%
26.03%
0.36%
19.27%
0.60%
Race with
Housing
Problems
30.1-50% AMI
80.1%- 95% AMI
White
Black
Asian
American
Indian
Pacific
Islander
50.1%-80% AMI
Total <=80% AMI
95.1%+ AMI
Owner
24.73%
3.02%
0.00%
Renter
3.17%
0.00%
9.50%
Owner
15.75%
1.33%
0.51%
Renter
3.38%
0.00%
3.38%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
7.14%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
1.07%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
Hispanic
Other
Table E19: Severe Housing Needs by Race113
<=30% AMI
Race with
Housing
Problems
30.1-50% AMI
Own
Rent
Own
White
58.93%
19.67%
19.01%
5.15%
12.50%
Black
Asian
4.53%
0.00%
17.99%
4.04%
5.35%
0.79%
1.72%
0.00%
3.10%
0.00%
112
113
Rent
50.1%-80% AMI
Own
Rent
Total <=80% AMI
Total
<=80%
AMI
Own
Rent
3.66%
23.70%
11.04%
17.73%
0.00%
0.00%
4.00%
0.22%
8.31%
1.76%
6.04%
0.94%
HUD CHAS/ACS Table 1
CHAS/ACS Table 2
Norwalk
Page 141
Version 2.0
City of Norwalk
<=30% AMI
Race with
Housing
Problems
American
Indian
Pacific
Islander
30.1-50% AMI
50.1%-80% AMI
Total <=80% AMI
Total
<=80%
AMI
Own
Rent
Own
Rent
Own
Rent
Own
Rent
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
Hispanic
2.13%
15.48%
20.79%
7.73%
4.34%
0.00%
8.39%
8.92%
8.64%
Other
3.20%
0.42%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.65%
0.18%
0.43%
80.1%- 95% AMI
Race with
Housing
Problems
White
Black
Asian
American
Indian
Pacific
Islander
95.1%+ AMI
Owner
3.29%
3.01%
0.00%
Renter
0.00%
0.00%
8.11%
Owner
5.20%
0.00%
0.00%
Renter
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
4.11%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
Hispanic
Other
Table E20: Cost Burden by Race (Numbers)114
Race
White
Black
Asian
American
Indian
Pacific
Islander
Hispanic
Other
Severe Cost
Burden
Owner
Renter
2,315
905
335
685
20
235
Moderate Cost
Burden
Owner
Renter
3,290
1,100
530
670
205
135
No Cost Burden
Owner
Renter
10,770
2,210
800
925
410
335
Total
Moderate and
Severe
Owner Renter
5,605
2,005
865
1,355
225
370
Total
21,000
3,985
1,355
0
0
0
55
25
0
0
55
80
0
850
60
0
690
15
0
615
15
0
1,230
0
15
550
10
0
1,250
55
0
1,465
75
0
1,920
15
15
5,260
155
Table E21: Cost Burden by Race (Percentages)115
Race
with
Housing
Problems
White
114
115
Severe Cost
Burden
Owner
Renter
Moderate Cost
Burden
Owner
Renter
No Cost Burden
Owner
Renter
Total Moderate
and Severe
Owner
Renter
64.66%
70.68%
85.61%
68.06%
35.77%
34.48%
46.28%
35.05%
CHAS/ACS Table 9
CHAS/ACS Table 9
Norwalk
Page 142
Version 2.0
Total
All HHs
65.93%
City of Norwalk
Race
with
Housing
Problems
Black
Asian
American
Indian
Pacific
Islander
Hispanic
Other
Norwalk
Severe Cost
Burden
Owner
Renter
Moderate Cost
Burden
Owner
Renter
No Cost Burden
Owner
Renter
Total Moderate
and Severe
Owner
Renter
Total
All HHs
9.36%
0.56%
27.08%
9.29%
11.39%
4.40%
21.00%
4.23%
6.36%
3.26%
19.37%
7.02%
10.50%
2.73%
23.69%
6.47%
12.51%
4.25%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
1.72%
0.20%
0.00%
0.00%
0.96%
0.25%
0.00%
23.74%
0.00%
27.27%
0.00%
13.21%
0.00%
38.56%
0.12%
4.37%
0.00%
26.18%
0.00%
17.79%
0.00%
33.57%
0.05%
16.51%
1.68%
0.59%
0.32%
0.00%
0.08%
1.15%
0.91%
0.26%
0.49%
Page 143
Version 2.0

Strategic Plan Final m

Transcription

Similar documents

Affordable Housing Video Report

clark county, nevada - Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco

ADD BELT - Corporate

Contact: [email protected] www

partner guide - North Avenue Presbyterian Church

lowe`s triple-net corporate guaranty

04 Japan - Alliance for Healthy Cities

Your helpful life insurance guide

Annual Report - People Serving People

Homelessness and De-Institutionalization