|
|
Community Scale Document
Page 13: Current Examples
The Community Scaling
Tool allows the effects of an agency's various activities related to a
single project to be shown. It provides a framework within which to illustrate
the multiple outcomes which can arise from the strategies used to achieve
a single goal.
For example, as a result of its ongoing
community needs and assets analyses related to social and economic self-sufficiency,
a community action agency concluded that there was a need for additional
affordable housing for families in transition between public assistance
and self-sufficiency. The agency decided to attempt to expand the affordable
housing stock by constructing 52 townhouses for participants in its self-sufficiency
programs. Within the Service and Support Systems category of the Community
Scaling Tool, the agency defined the current systems as "Responsive but
not Comprehensive" ("Vulnerable" on the Community Scale.) (See Table and
the accompanying notes.)
The agency identified a site in close proximity
to major employment and post secondary education opportunities. The agency
reviewed the community's comprehensive plan, which guides the zoning process,
and found that the site was designated for multi-family housing. The current
zoning was, however, for commercial use. The agency conferred with the
local government's planning staff and confirmed that the site was designated
to be rezoned for multi-family housing.
The agency obtained site control through
an option with the owner, secured commitments for the financing to develop
the project and applied for the needed zoning change. The agency's request
for a zoning change received the unanimous approval of the community's
planning commission, but the planning commission's rezoning decision was
appealed to the local government's legislative body by the residents of
an affluent, predominantly white, historic neighborhood adjacent to the
proposed site. The legislative body reversed the rezoning by an 8 to 2
vote.
The agency appealed the zoning reversal
in the courts. The legal premise of the appeal is that the local government's
decision to reverse the rezoning was in violation of its own comprehensive
plan that, under State law, should guide the zoning process. The case
is still pending in the courts and because of the appeals process, may
not be resolved for several more years.
Now in the third year of the project, the
agency still has not built any units. It still has a goal of increasing
the supply of affordable housing for families in transition between public
assistance and self-sufficiency, moving the housing dimension from "Vulnerable"
to "Stable."
The agency also has new goals for moving
public policy related to affordable housing from "Vulnerable" to "Stable."
(See Table 11.) It would also be possible for the agency to establish
additional goals related to the Equity category. Goals and strategies
could be established to move the equity and diversity of the neighborhood
where the site is located from "In Crisis" to "Stable."
Table 10: Services and Support Systems
Scale with Housing Subscale
|
|
| Community Scale Thresholds
|
Services and Support Systems
Scale Descriptors |
Services and Support Systems
Scale |
Housing Subscale |
| Thriving 5 |
Comprehensive and Interrelated
|
Community services of all
kinds are both comprehensive and integrated into a virtually
seamless system. Collaboration and synergy are the norms.
Social services are based on a "wellness" model and are participant
driven. A strong community-wide set of strategic planning
processes assures that public and community services are responsive
and will grow and develop in accord with community needs.
Community is committed to providing resources sufficient to
assure quality and comprehensiveness of, and full access to,
community, public and educational services. |
Affordable housing
development is integrated with other systems including education,
social services and transportation. Most housing initiatives
involve multiple players. Development of affordable housing
is targeted to clearly identified community needs. It is needs
driven, not driven by available categorical public funding
opportunities. Housing planning process is comprehensive and
reflects both vertical and horizontal integration. |
| Safe 4 |
Preventive |
Service and support programs
have a strong preventive orientation. Most essential community
and social services are available to those who need them.
Service providers are committed to collaboration and are in
the process of developing an integrated approach to provision
of community services. Planning involves all segments of the
community. Commitment of resources is adequate to assure continued
availability of services that meet needs for both basic and
early intervention services, as well as for strong public
and education services. |
The community
has a long range plan for affordable housing and strategies
to meet its goals and objectives. Most low-income households
needing housing have multiple choices in terms of price, size
and location. Housing developers are pursuing collaborative
projects, such as mixed income developments. Planning for
affordable housing includes intended beneficiaries throughout
the process. There is a wide range of financing available
for affordable housing development, including private and
local, state and federal funding. |
| Stable 3 |
Comprehensive but Reactive
|
Public and social services
available in the community are generally comprehensive, but
are primarily reactive in their responses to community needs.
Planning tends to be very limited in strategic outlook and
occurs principally within programmatic boundaries. Focus is
on evident current needs. Clients (customers) are seldom brought
into the planning process. Providers of public and social
services are communicating and considering the value of collaboration.
Resources are adequate for the most immediate basic needs.
|
While there is significant
growth in the development of affordable housing in the community,
it is not proactive in nature but generally in response to
existing problems. Low and moderate income households are
rarely consulted in the development of housing plans. Developers
of affordable housing meet regularly to share information
and are discussing processes to collaborate on development
activities. While often not well matched to household needs,
most low-income families are able to locate housing. |
| Vulnerable 2 |
Responsive but not Comprehensive
|
Some key public and social
services exist and are responsive to needs to which they are
focused but the range of community services and resources
is limited but not comprehensive. There is no effort to plan
collaboratively and comprehensively for a broad range of community
needs. Fragmentation of services and community resources is
common. Resources are strained and directed principally to
maintenance of effort. Competition is the most common characteristic
of relationship between service providers. |
The community
continues to experience growth in the development of affordable
housing but local data indicate that the lowest vacancy rate
is in housing for low to moderate income households. Participants
in agency's self-sufficiency programs experience considerable
difficulty in obtaining adequate housing. Housing related
problems are the second most frequent barrier to participant
success. While the local government has a housing development
plan, it is primarily used to satisfy federal requirements
and does not guide most housing development activity or policies
and initiatives by local organizations or local government.
There is little coordination between local housing developers
or between housing development and other human services activities.
|
| In Crisis 1 |
Non-Responsive |
Public and social services
are non-responsive to community needs. "Turf" boundaries are
very strong and planning is minimal or non-existent. Even
emergency services are inadequate in comparison with the intensity
of need. Resources are barely adequate to maintain even the
most minimal configuration of community services. Most public
and social services are ineffective. |
Available affordable
housing stock is significantly below identified needs. Homelessness
and overcrowding are common. There is significant competition
between for- profit, non-profit and governmental housing developers. |
|
Table 11: Public Policy Scale with
Housing Policy Subscale
|
|
| Community Scale Thresholds
|
Pubic Policy Scale Descriptor
|
Pubic Policy Scale |
Housing Policy Subscale
|
| Thriving 5 |
Innovative |
Public policy affecting
the community is innovative in its values, premises and strategies
regarding the condition and needs of low income persons. Affirmatively
seeks new ways to promote the economic development and well-being
of low income residents and their full inclusion in the life
of the community. |
Low-income needs are
fully integrated into community housing planning and development
systems. Land use planning and zoning policies require that
developers provide set asides for affordable housing and/or
employment generating activities as a condition for the approval
of new development. |
| Safe 4 |
Supportive |
Public policy is supportive
with respect to the needs and aspirations of low income residents.
Generally is proactive and systematic in identifying and eliminating
barriers to improvement in economic and social status. |
There is a comprehensive
plan to develop affordable housing consistent with identified
needs. The local government actively seeks private, federal
and state resources for housing development. The land use
planning and zoning process is proactive in ensuring that
sufficient sites are designated for future development. |
| Stable 3 |
Reactive or Selective |
Public policy is reactive
in its approaches to responding to the needs of low income
persons. When issues are forcefully brought to the attention
of policy makers, it is usually possible to achieve a case-by-case
policy outcome that is favorable with respect to issues and
problems of low income residents. |
While the local government
has a plan to develop low-income housing, its goals are not
pursued proactively. When low-income advocates and supportive
groups press for housing initiatives, however, the local government
tends to respond positively. The land use planning and zoning
process is even-handed and treats all petitioners consistently
without respect to socio-economic status. |
| Vulnerable 2 |
None of Unenforced |
There is no public policy
intended to support the needs and aspirations of low income
persons, or any such policy that does exist is unenforced.
There is little or no awareness or concern or acceptance of
public responsibility for supporting improvement of the economic
and social conditions of the poor. |
There is no comprehensive
community policy to develop affordable housing. The only planning
that occurs is to satisfy federal requirements to obtain grant
funds. Land use planning and zoning decisions are generally
based on the relative power and influence of the petitioners. |
| In Crisis 1 |
Hostile |
Public policy is hostile
with respect to conditions and needs of low income persons.
Policies are intended to make it difficult for low income
persons to live in the community or to play a meaningful and
contributing role in the life of the community. |
Public policy actively
discourages the development of affordable housing through
lot size and other restrictions that put most housing beyond
the reach of low income families. The community has no plan
for the development of affordable housing and does not seek
or accept federal or state funds for housing initiatives. |
|
|
