Upload
others
View
8
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
MADISON SUPPORTIVE HOUSING PROJECTThe City’s Response to Homelessness
Dayna Sarver
Spring 2015
University of Wisconsin-Madison
1 Table of Contents2 List of Tables and Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3 Maps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-5
4 Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6 Causes of Homelessness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6.1 Homelessness Defined . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6.2 Homeless Minimum Wage Earners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6.3 Underemployment and Unemployment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6.4 Historical and Systemic Issues Leading to Homelessness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7 Homelessness in Madison and Dane County, WI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
8 Madison Supportive Housing Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11
8.1 Milestones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11
8.2 Public Engagement Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12
8.3 Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
8.4 Context: Neighborhood Demographics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Appendix A – Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Appendix B – Madison Supportive Housing Project Site Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
2
2 List of Tables and Figures
Figure 1. Census Tract 26.01 (CT 26.01) 4
Figure 2. Zip Codes 53704, 53714, 53703 with CT 26.01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Figure 3. Nested Geographies: Dane County, Madison, Zip Codes and Census Tract
26.01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Figure 4. Number of Single Men Seeking Shelter in Dane County 2000-2012 . . . . . . .10
Figure 5. Floor plan of studio apartment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14
Figure 6. Artist renderings of ariel view of MSHD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Figure 7. Artist renderings of view from Rethke Ave. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14
Figure 8. Artist renderings of view from northwest corner. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14
Chart 1: Annual Percentage Change in Population by Geographic Area . . . . . . . . . . . . .15
Chart 2: Proportion of Educational Achievement and Geographic Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Figure 9: Percentage Of Households Below Poverty Level In The Last 12 Months By Geographical Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Chart 3: Annual Percentage Change in Owner Occupied Housing by Geography . . . . . 17
Chart 4: Annual Percentage Change In Renter Occupied Housing By Geography . . . . . 17
Table 1. Area Median Income for Madison, WI by Household Size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Table 2. 2013 Poverty Threshold by Household Size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Table 3. Homeless Single Men Served in Dane County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Table 4. WHEDA Scoring Criteria and point valuation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Table 5: Wisconsin Federally Designated Qualified Census Tracts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Figure 10. Site Layout Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Figure 11. Floor Plans – First Floor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Figure 12. Floor Plans – Second, Third and Fourth Floor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Figure 13. Artist renderings of Elevations with Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
3
4
Left: Census Tract 26.01
(CT 26.01) in Carpenter-
Hawthorne-Ridgeway-
Sycamore-Truax
Neighborhood. Lower left
corner starts at the
intersection of East
Washington and
Marquette. The Gold Star
indicates location of
Madison Supportive
Housing Development.
3 MapsFigure 1. Census Tract 26.01 (CT 26.01)
Source: ESRI Business Analyst Online
Left: Zip Codes 53704,
53714 surround Census
Tract 26.01, and those
that live within those zip
codes may find
employment
opportunities in 53703.
Source: ESRI Business Analyst Online
Figure 2. Zip Codes 53704, 53714, 53703 with CT
26.01
Above: Outline of Dane county, city of Madison (shaded grey) and the three neighboring
zip codes nested within the city.
5
Source: ESRI Business Analyst Online
Figure 3. Nested Geographies: Dane County, Madison, Zip Codes and Census Tract 26.01
4 Executive Summary
Homelessness is an ancient issue
nested within poverty. Neither issue is
restricted by geography or density of
population, however, the need for
growing entry level work, access to
mass transportation and the need for
social services often concentrates
poverty and homelessness in urban
areas. The urban poor face many
obstacles in obtaining and maintaining
their housing status such as racial
employment and income disparities,
and for many, employment is not a way
out of homelessness.
The facts:
■ There are “over 1800 homeless
students in the county’s school
districts.” (Paulsen, 2014)
■ According to the report, Race to
Equity, in 2011 black children were
13.7 times more likely to be living in
poverty in Dane County than their
white counterparts. (WCCF, pg. 8)
■ In 2012, 79-percent (79%) of those
seeking shelter declared
themselves as non-white.
■ Mayor Soglin and the Common
Council have since approved the
budget for 250 units of supportive
housing throughout the city of
Madison in five phases.
MSHD is the result of the city
implementing planning
recommendations and responding to the
needs of our city’s most vulnerable
citizens. It began with listening to the
neighborhoods and thoughtfully
collaborating with service providers and
end users to develop an implementable
plan to remediate the problem. The
development appears to be mutually
beneficial to the end users as well as the
neighborhood. The plan for the site fits
within the context of the neighborhood
and the neighborhood is likely to benefit
from the community amenities available.
I believe the combination of mass
transportation, entry level jobs in the
area, social services provided on-site,
and the design of the development
within the context of the neighborhood
makes this project a recipe for success.
6
Above: I chose this photo, because I rarely
acknowledge the men I pass by on the street.
This sign made me think about how many
thousands of people walk by them without
acknowledgment. Retrieved from
http://www.chron.com/news/houston-
texas/article/Texas-man-travels-country-to-buy-
homeless-signs-5637910.php
5 Introduction
In February 2014, I started working at
the UW-Extension office on Langdon St.
As I walked from Old Music Hall down
State St., men would greet me at each
intersection asking me to buy the most
recent edition of “Street Pulse,”
Madison’s homeless cooperative
newspaper. During the milder months
they would frequently congregate
between The Towers and the Potbelly
Sandwich Shop. Why does
homelessness exist in a city like
Madison, which I perceived as wealthy,
productive, educated, and progressive?
In the following report, I briefly share
what I learned about twentieth and
twenty-first century urban poverty in the
United States and the obstacles those in
poverty have in obtaining and
maintaining their housing status. I then
focus on how the city of Madison (city)
has responded to the needs of our
homeless population within the larger
context of the neighborhood and the city
through a collaborative planning process
that involved private planning
consultants, Urban Assets and non-profit
developer, Heartland Housing. The city
has approved a supportive housing
complex with 60 studio apartments,
Madison Supportive Housing
Development (MSHD) to be built on
Madison’s near east side. I interviewed
Jimmy Camacho, planning intern, and
Emma Schumann, assistant planner,
from Urban Assets about how they
engaged the public during the planning
process, what was learned, and how the
neighborhood’s concerns were
mitigated. I also interviewed Heather
Stouder, City of Madison Planner, and
Matt Wachter, Housing Initiatives
Specialist for the City of Madison
Community Development Authority about
the site selection process, funding, and
plans for future developments on
Madison’s west side. Finally, I looked at
the zoning code for the site, the urban
design requirements and guidelines, as
well as the neighborhood context to
evaluate the relationship between the
end users and the neighborhood.
6 Causes of
Homelessness
At some point in human history, people
recognized that there are those that
have more than they need and those
that need more than they have.
Homelessness is nested within the
ancient issue of poverty and neither are
restricted by geography or density of
population. While there are rural,
suburban, and urban poor, I am
particularly interested in the obstacles
the urban poor face in obtaining and
maintaining their housing status. For
example, severely cost-burdened
households spend fifty percent or more
on housing costs. For these households,
a temporary set-back such as an
automobile repair or unexpected medical
bill may also cause a temporary period of
homelessness. Homelessness,
therefore, may be a temporary or chronic
issue for some people. (NCH, Fact
Sheets)
7
6.1 Homelessness Defined
Critical to the definition of homelessness
is the instability of an individual’s living
arrangements. Section 330 of the
Public Health Service Act defines a
homeless individual as “an individual
who lacks housing (without regard to
whether the individual is a member of a
family), including an individual whose
primary residence during the night is a
supervised public or private facility (e.g.,
shelters) that provides temporary living
accommodations, and an individual who
is a resident in transitional housing.”
Any individual without permanent
housing or someone who finds
temporary shelter in an abandoned
building, automobile, shelter or mission,
meets this definition. Those that have
been released from criminal or health
institutions and have not secured a
permanent, stable living situation may
also be considered homeless.
(HRSA/Bureau of Primary Health Care)
6.2 Homeless Minimum Wage Earners
For many, employment is not a way out of homelessness. “Housing is out of reach for many workers. In order to afford a one- to two-bedroom fair market rent apartment, more than the minimum wage is required in every state. In some cases, a minimum-wage worker would have to work 87 hours each week to afford a two-bedroom apartment at 30% of his or her income. Homeless shelters have a significant amount of full-time wage earners.” (NCH, Fact Sheet #4).
A study done in 2005 by the US Conference of Mayors found that 15-percent (15%) of the homeless in
the sampled cities were employed. The
US Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) has defined housing
as affordable if the rent is less than or
equal to 30-percent of the budget for a
household with greater than or equal to
60-percent an area median income. A
single-mom with two kids working full-
time at a minimum wage job can earn at
most $15,080 per year, or $1,160 a
month. For the city of Madison, the area
median income for a family of three is
$72,800 annually, therefore an
affordable rent payment would have to
be at or below $1092 per month. For
our single full-time minimum wage
provider, there would be only $68
remaining in the monthly budget for
food, clothing, and daycare. The result
may be period of temporary
8
Homeless man on the street with his best friend.
While this photo was not taken in Madison, this is
not an unfamiliar scene. Two of the men I walk
past have their own pets. Some people, including
myself, will give them scraps or donate dog food.
http://www.exposingtruth.com/criminalizing-
homelessness/
homelessness. (See Appendix A, Table 1)
6.3 Underemployment and
Unemployment
Underemployment measures
“individuals who are unemployed, but
also involuntary part-timers and those
who want to work but have been
discouraged by their lack of success.”
Involuntary job loss has also increased in
recent years. Workers find it difficult to
find new employment and the jobs they
do find pay on average about 13% less
than the jobs they lost. More than
twenty-five percent (25%) of those who
had employer provided benefits, such as
healthcare, do not receive these benefits
from their new employer (Mishel,
Bernstein, and Schmitt, 1999).
6.4 Historical and Systemic
Issues Leading to
Homelessness
The need for growing entry level work,
access to mass transportation and the
need for social services often
concentrates poverty in urban areas.
Racial employment and income
disparities, which have a lengthy history,
also play a significant part in the
problem of urban homelessness.
Federal Housing Authority loan policies
in the 1950s racially segregated many
metropolitan neighborhoods. (Fishman,
pg. 16) Particularly for blacks, this led to
poorly underwritten loans, increased
foreclosures, abandonment, and the
suburban flight of their wealthier white
neighbors.
Later, when the US economy transitioned
from manufacturing to service industries,
employment opportunities left downtown
areas of major metros and relocated in
suburban areas. Those left behind in the
urban core lacked the skills required by
the service industry and access to
transportation to the suburbs resulting in
increased underemployment and
unemployment. These legacies have
had a lasting impact on the development
and composition of cities today. The
following section looks at the current
housing need in the city of Madison, who
would be served by future developments
and where the first phase of
development will be located.
9
How fair is “fair housing?” It is difficult, but not
impossible to prove housing discrimination even
today, due to the length of time and expense it
takes to set up an experiment to test accused
landlords. Image provided by fsohc.org and
retrieved from Salem News, Jan. 16, 2008.
http://www.salem-
news.com/articles/january162008/housing_discr
imination_study_011608.php
7 Homelessness in
Madison and Dane
County, WI
In 2013, the City of Madison hired Matt
Wachter, Housing Initiatives Specialist
for the Community Development
Authority, to examine the housing trends
in Madison and Dane County, analyze
the gaps between supply and demand,
and identify the best practices used
across the country for addressing the
homeless housing need. Matt identified
three housing markets in Madison: low-
income, market-rate, and student
housing. The market-rate housing has
not been able to keep pace with the
overall growth of the city. Vacancy rates
have been historically low and demand
has increased keeping market rate rents
high.
The facts:
■ There are “over 1800 homeless
students in the county’s school
districts.” (Paulsen, 2014)
■ Since 2001, more than 1,800 single
men seek shelter on average per
year. Of those 1,800, more than
260 are turned away.
■ Of the 700 single women seeking
shelter per year on average since
2001, nearly one-third are turned
away.
The city decided that the greatest need
was for homeless individuals with
disabilities, mental illness, alcohol and
drug abuse (AODA), that consume a
disproportionate amount of social
services. A report done in 2008 by
United Way found that “for the most
frequent homeless users of services in
Madison (detox, police, emergency room,
etc.) it cost over $50,000 per person per
year.” (Wachter, 2014)
These services are expensive and taxing
on the system. By providing a hub of
services by a single service provider, the
theory is that the clients will be more
efficiently served and the system will be
relieved from the burden. Mayor Soglin
and the Common Council then approved
the budget for 100 units of supportive
housing.
10
Source: 2012 Annual Report on Homeless Served
in Dane County. Retrieved from:
http://www.cityofmadison.com/cdbg/documents/
2012AnnualReportFinalwebsite.pdf
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
Number of Single Men turned away
Number of Single Men sheltered
Figure 4. Number of Single Men
Seeking Shelter in Dane County
2000-2012
8 Madison Supportive Housing Development
8.1 Milestones
2001 - Neighborhood Goals
The Carpenter-Hawthorne-Ridgeway-
Sycamore-Truax neighborhood straddles
either side of East Washington. It is
bounded by Commercial Ave. (south),
Anderson St. (north), Mendota St. (east)
and Starkweather Creek (west). In
2001, members of neighborhood
identified the most challenging issues
facing their community. These included:
■ Increase access to Hawthorne
Elementary School for community
purposes and better utilize space for
neighborhood recreational activities.
■ Improve the appearance and
function of East Washington Avenue.
■ Identify potential future land uses
and development concepts for
underutilized redevelopment sites.
■ Develop pedestrian and bicycle
networks that improve safety and
connections to frequently traveled
locations.
2008 – East Washington Ave. Capital
Gateway Corridor Plan
■ The city of Madison hired Vandewalle
and Associates to develop the East
Washington Avenue Capitol Gateway
Corridor Plan. The Steering
Committee selected four core
principles:
■ Protect and enhance the iconic view
of the capital.
■ Respect and strengthen existing
neighborhoods.
■ Firmly establish the corridor as an
employment center supported by
transit.
■ Create an inviting, vibrant boulevard
along East Washington Avenue.
2009 – Zoning Code
The zoning code §28.067 was rewritten
and includes land use defined as
Commercial Corridor – Transitional
Districts (CC-T) that stretches down East
Washington on either side of the street.
The general purpose of mixed use and
commercial districts is “to provide a
range of district types, from the small
neighborhood center to regional-level
retail centers, while fostering high-
quality building and site design and
pedestrian, bicycle and transit as well as
automobile circulation.” (City of
Madison, 2009) The city has since
adopted and implemented elements of
the Capital Gateway plan including
renovations to major intersections,
11
Below: Carpenter-Ridgeway Neighborhood sign
off of East Washington. MSHD will be located
within the Carpenter-Ridgeway neighborhood
which is in the CT 26.01. This census tract has
been identified as an area that would benefit
from low-income housing tax credits.
additional street-scape, crosswalks and
bike lanes to enhance bicycle and
pedestrian safety. These action items
have helped meet the aesthetic and
safety goals of the neighborhood.
2013 – Request for Proposals
■ City hires Matt Wachter to research
national best practices for
remediating homelessness in urban
areas and requested proposals for
supportive housing development on
Rethke Ave. Heartland Housing won
the bid.
2014 - Funding
The “lynch pin” to developing supportive
housing units is how the project is
financed. This determines how the
property is managed and maintained. A
variety of housing models were
proposed, but the city settled on a new
construction, urban infill model that
uses a variety of government funding
including ownership, section 8 subsidy
and low income housing tax credits.
The city owned two parcels on Rethke
Ave., in the Carpenter-Hawthrone-
Ridgeway-Sycamore-Truax
neighborhood, which is also in CT
26.01. These parcels meet the
Wisconsin Housing and Economic
Development Authority (WHEDA) and
the city’s criteria of being within
targeted census tracts, high WalkScore,
and close to mass transit. It is also in
an area with entry level employment
growth. (See Table 4.) WHEDA
awarded $5.4 million dollars in low-
income housing tax credits to be sold by
May 1st, 2015 to corporate entities.
12
Left: Posted
Public Hearing
Sign on 707
Rethke Ave.
Photo provided by
author.
2015 - Construction
Construction of 60 studio unit complex
scheduled to begin.
2016 – Move-in
Madison Supportive Housing
Development scheduled to be
completed.
8.2 Public Engagement Process The city encouraged HH to conduct a
robust public engagement process due
the nature of the project. HH developed
a relationship with UA, a consultant
planning firm in Madison, because they
already knew the area, who the
stakeholders are, and have developed a
niche for public engagement. The public
involvement process UA has utilized has
been key to the plans adoption and
acceptance in the neighborhood. Post
card notices were sent through the
alderman’s mailing list and UA also sent
email blasts. Between January and
August 2014, there were four public
meetings with Alderman David Ahrens
and the community to address the
concerns that the neighborhood had
with who would be served by the
development. They were particularly
concerned about the proximity of
the development to the church,
childcare and preschool centers. Due to
the nature of the rental agreements,
potential residents will be screened
based on their criminal records. There
will also be quarterly meetings between
residents and staff with the
neighborhood residents and the
neighborhood association to address
any concerns or issues that arise with
the operation of the facility or conduct of
the residents.
UA also invited end users and service
providers to participate in a series of
focus groups and workshops which
included design charrettes to develop
programming and design. Neighbors
desired a facility that would become a
community asset and resolved to using
the housing hub for improved
neighborhood services. At the end user
workshop, 25 homeless or previously
homeless individuals were invited to
walk around a full sized floor plan UA
had taped to the floor and provide
feedback to specific questions such as
“what makes a home?” and “If you are
previously homeless, what fears or
challenges did you face when you moved
into permanent housing?” Heartland
learned the following key lessons:
Accommodate a variety of life stages
and abilities
Offer cooking classes, arts/crafts room,
urban agriculture, bike storage,
meditation/”quiet” room
Focus on safety and security
Develop strong noise, smoking, and
visitor policies
Have resident serve as a representative
in neighborhood association
13
Part of the process of developing supportive
housing is meeting with the people who will
eventually be using the facility to understand what
elements make a structure “home.” Design
charettes are one method of facilitating this
discussion. Photo provided by Heartland Housing.
8.3 DesignMSHD complies with the purpose of the
CC-T district, helps meet the goals for
the neighborhood and follows the urban
design requirements and guidelines set
by the city. (See appendix for detailed
design requirements.) It utilizes vacant
parcels in the neighborhood and will
relieve some of the pressure to utilize
Hawthorne Elementary School for
community purposes. It will also be an
aesthetic upgrade to the current site,
and the resources available to the
community will be an asset.
It will have a lobby with twenty-four hour
reception services, break room and
kitchenette, nine single occupancy
rooms, fitness room, bug room,
community kitchen, community meeting
room, office, library, business center,
and shared laundry facilities on the first
floor. Floors two through four will have
seventeen single occupancy rooms and
trash receptacles. A roof top garden
between the first and second floors,
14
landscaped exterior, a garden area,
eleven standard and two handicapped
parking stalls are also planned for the
site. The housing hub will also have on-
site social services provided by
Heartland. The office, library and
community meeting room on the first
floor will utilized as private counseling
rooms between residents and service
providers. These services may include
job training and placement services, as
well as other social services. Building
materials include three colors of 6”
cement board lap siding, fiber glass
windows, yellow cement board panels,
flat shingle style metal wall panels, and
stainless steel cable guardrail. (See
Appendix A: Site and Floor Plan for more
details.)
Left: Approximately 350 sq. ft. studio apartment
design with full-sized kitchen and private
bathroom.
Figure 6. Artist renderings of ariel view
of MSHD.
Figure 7. Artist renderings of view from
Rethke Ave.
Figure 8. Artist renderings of view from
northwest corner.
Figure 5. Floor plan of studio apartment.
Source: Heartland Housing Alliance
Source: Heartland Housing Alliance
Source: Heartland Housing Alliance
Source: Heartland Housing Alliance
8.4 Context: Neighborhood
Demographics
The site is in the Carpenter-Hawthorne-
Ridgeway-Sycamore-Truax neighborhood.
To the immediate north is LSM
Chiropractic clinic and an industrial
trucking repair company is to the
immediate south. A hotel is directly
across the street to the west and a
residential neighborhood sits to the
immediate east. There is a mixture of
multifamily and single-family detached
housing in the neighborhood. Three
blocks north of the site is a church, and
small business service providers.
Gardener’s Bakery is approximately a ten
to fifteen minute walk from the site and
the closest grocery store is an
approximate five minute bus ride.
Total Population. From 2000-2010,
Census Tract 26.01 (CT 26.01) and its
surrounding areas experienced
population growth, however, not at the
same rates. From 2010-2014, CT 26.01
was the only geographic area in the
nested region to experience population
decline.
Educational Attainment. Compared to
Dane County, the city of Madison, and
the three zip codes (53703, 53704,
53714), a higher proportion of the
population in CT 26.01 have not
received a high school diploma (or high
school equivalent). In fact, residents in
Dane county are nearly three times as
likely to have achieved a bachelor’s
degree or higher than residents in CT
26.01.
15
-0.40%
0.00%
0.40%
0.80%
1.20%
1.60%
2000-2010 2010-2014
CHART 1: ANNUAL PERCENTAGE
CHANGE IN POPULATION BY
GEOGRAPHIC AREA
Source: ESRI Business Analyst Online, Population
Summary
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
CT 26.01
Zip Codes
Dane Co.
Madison, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area (31540)
CHART 2: PROPORTION OF
EDUCATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT AND
GEOGRAPHIC AREA
Source: ESRI Business Analyst Online, Market Profile
Employment and Income. Within a half-
mile radius of the MSHD are a total of
296 military personnel. The Wisconsin
Department of Corrections and The
Division of Community Corrections
employ a combined total of 569
employees. There are at least two major
employers in the area. Gardner Bakery,
a division of Earthgrains, is one of the
largest employers and is on East
Washington Avenue. They have doubled
the number of full-time employees since
2001. The second largest employer,
CleanPower boasts 400 employees,
according to an ESRI report. The city
should continue to support the growth
of these businesses and advocate on
behalf of the residents in MSHD for job-
training experience at these locations.
Race and Ethnicity. According to the
report, Race to Equity, Black children
were 13.7 times more likely to be living
in poverty in Dane County than their
white counterparts in 2011. (WCCF, pg.
8) In 2012, 79-percent of those
seeking shelter declared themselves as
non-white. With the exception of the
population that identifies themselves as
Asian alone, CT 26.01 has a
disproportionate minority population
compared to the surrounding area.
Blacks comprised 10.1 percent and
Asians comprise 4.0 percent compared
to 7.2 percent and 8.1 percent city-
wide. Persons of Hispanic origin
comprise 16.5 percent compared to 7.7
percent of Madison on the whole. This
neighborhood is already more racially
diverse than the surrounding area. It
may be prove to be beneficial to the
individuals being sheltered to integrate
within the context of the diverse
neighborhood.
16
Poverty. Peer pressure to conform to
norms of the neighborhood also
increases in neighborhoods of isolated
poverty and may be counter to
mainstream culture. Between 2008 and
2012, the surrounding three zip codes
and the city of Madison had higher
proportions of households whose
income level was below the poverty level
in the last twelve months. The benefit of
having the MSHD in this census tract is
that it has relatively lower rates of
poverty. The individuals served by this
development will therefore have access
to social capital that they might
otherwise not have had in other parts of
the city.
FIGURE 9: PERCENTAGE OF
HOUSEHOLDS BELOW POVERTY
LEVEL IN THE LAST 12 MONTHS BY
GEOGRAPHICAL AREA
CT 26.01 13.50%
3 Zip Code 21.90%
Madison 17.30%
Dane County 11.80%
Source: ESRI Business Analyst Online
Housing Tenure. From 2000-2010, the
housing tenure in CT 26.01 declined in
ownership while renter occupancy
increased. Conversely, in the city of
Madison, Dane County and the Madison
Metropolitan Statistical Area increased
ownership and decreased rental
occupancy. In this context, the
development won’t stand out like the
Pruit-Igoe towers did in the single-family
detatched two-story neighborhood of St.
Louis and will hopefully be positively
integrated within the community.
10 Conclusion
The need for growing entry level work,
access to mass transportation and the need
for social services often concentrates
poverty in urban areas. The urban poor
17
-0.50% 0.00% 0.50%
Census Tract
Zip Codes
County
CBSA
2010-2014 2000-2010
CHART 4: ANNUAL PERCENTAGE
CHANGE IN RENTER OCCUPIED
HOUSING BY GEOGRAPHY
Source: ESRI Business Analyst Online
-0.80% -0.60% -0.40% -0.20% 0.00% 0.20%
Census Tract
Zip Codes
County
CBSA
2010-2014 2000-2010
CHART 3: ANNUAL PERCENTAGE
CHANGE IN OWNER OCCUPIED HOUSING
BY GEOGRAPHY
Source: ESRI Business Analyst Online
face many obstacles in obtaining and
maintaining their housing status and
for many, employment is not a way out
of poverty. For single individuals that
do secure employment, a minimum
wage job may not be enough to secure
housing.
In Dane County, there are “over 1800
homeless students in the county’s
school districts.” According to the
report, Race to Equity, black children
were 13.7 times more likely to be living
in poverty in Dane County than their
white counterparts in 2011. (WCCF,
pg. 8) In 2012, 79-percent (79%) of
those seeking shelter declared
themselves as non-white. Mayor
Soglin and the Common Council have
since approved the budget for a total
of 250 units of supportive housing
throughout the city of Madison in five
separate phases. The development on
Rethke Ave. is Phase I. There is also a
proposal for a development of a
second phase on Tree Lane.
MSHD is the result of the city
implementing planning
recommendations and responding to
the needs of our city’s most vulnerable
citizens. It began with listening to the
neighborhoods, thoughtfully
collaborating with service providers
and the end users to develop an
implementable plan to remediate the
problem. The development appears to
be mutually beneficial to the end users
as well as the neighborhood. The plan
for the site fits within the context of the
neighborhood and the neighborhood is
likely to benefit from the community
amenities available. It is, however, a
conditional use of the zoning code, so
if there are any issues with how the
building is used or maintained, the city
can take it back to the Common
Council. I believe that the odds of
success are favorable in light of the
combination of access to mass
transportation to entry level jobs in the
area, social services provided on-site,
and the design of the development
within the context of the neighborhood.
References
(1999). NIMBY: A Primer for Lawyers
and Advocates. Chicago, IL. American
Bar Association.
Been, Vicki. (1994). Locally Undesirable
Land Uses in Minority Neighborhoods:
Disproportionate Siting or Market
Dynamics? The Yale Law Journal. Vol.
103, No. (April, 1994) pp. 1383-1422
Corburn, J. (2009). Toward the Healthy
City: People, Places, and the Politics of
Urban Planning. Cambridge, Mass. MIT
Press. Pgs. 83-128
Crane, R., & Manville, M. (2008). People
or Place? Revisiting the Who Versus the
Where of Urban Development. Land
Lines, 20(3), 2-7.
City of Madison. (2009). ## Commercial
and Mixed Use Districts. Retrieved
from:
http://www.cityofmadison.com/neighbo
rhoods/zoningrewrite/documents/com
merciamuldistricts.pdf
Curly, Alexandra M. (2005). Theories of
Urban Poverty and Implications for
Public Housing Policy. Journal of
Sociology and Social Welfare. Vol. 32,
Number 2. Pg. 97
Erickson, David J. (2009). The Housing
Policy Revolution: Networks and
Neighborhoods. Washington, D.C. Urban
Institute Press. Pg. 35-102
Freudenburg, William R. (1986). Social
Impact Assessment. Annual Review of
Sociology. Vol. 12. Pg. 451-478
Galster, G. C. (2004). The effects of
affordable and multifamily housing on
market values of nearby homes. Growth
management and affordable housing:
Do they conflict, 176-201.
Gleeson, B.J. and P.A. Memon. (1994).
The NIMBY Syndrome and Community
Care Facilities: A Research Agenda for
Planning. Planning Practice and
Research. Vol. 9, Issue 2, pp. 105-119.
Julian the Apostate. (361-363) Letter to
Arsacius.
LaGro, James A. Jr. (2013) Site Analysis:
Informing Context-Sensitive and
Sustainable Site Planning and Design.
3rd Ed. Hoboken, N.J. John Wiley &
Sons. Pg. 31-60
Lee, Chang-Moo, Dennis P. Culhane and
Susan M. Wachter. (1999). The
Differential Impacts of Federally
Assisted Housing Programs on Nearby
Property Values: A Philadelphia Case
Study. Housing Policy Debate, Volume
10, Issue 2, 1999, pages 75-93.
Massey, D.S. and N.R. Denton. (1993).
American Apartheid: Segregation and
the Making of the Underclass.
Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
18
Morales, Alfonso. (2014) Interaction
and Values Lecture. Working Draft.
National Coalition for the Homeless
(NCH). (2007). Employment and
Homelessness. Fact Sheet #4.
National Coalition for the Homeless
(NCH). (2007). Who is Homeless? Fact
Sheet #4.
National Health Care for the Homeless
Council.
https://www.nhchc.org/faq/official-
definition-homelessness/
Olinger, Mark A. et al. (2001).
Carpenter-Hawthorne-Ridgeway-
Sycamore-Truax Neighborhood Plan.
Retrieved from:
http://www.cityofmadison.com/planning
/ndp/carpenter.pdf
Paulsen, Kurt. (2014). Dane County
Housing Needs Assessment.
Department of Urban and Regional
Planning. University of Wisconsin-
Madison.
Schneider, Pat. (2014, January 12).
Homeless Housing Needs to Benefit, Not
Burden Neighborhood, Says Madison
Alder. The Cap Times. Retrieved from:
http://tinyurl.com/aldermandaveahrens
interview
Schneider, Pat. (2014, May 5).
Permanent Housing for Homeless wins
$5.4 million in Low-income Tax Credits.
The Cap Times. Retrieved from:
http://tinyurl.com/LIHTCaward
Siemens, Jeremy James. (2008). The
Head, the Heart, the Hands: Gregory of
Nazianzus and Emperor Julian on the
Importance of Piety, Purity and
Philanthropy in Shaping the Empire.
University of St. Michaels College.
Canada.
Soglin, Paul. (2012). 2012 Annual
Report on Homeless Served in Dane
County: An Analysis of the Population
Served by Dane County Shelter,
Transitional and Supportive Permanent
Housing and Service Agencies. City of
Madison. Retrieved from:
http://www.cityofmadison.com/cdbg/do
cuments/2012AnnualReportFinalwebsit
e.pdf
Stouder, Heather et al. (2014).
Planning Division Staff Report. (Legistar
File ID number: 35639). Retrieved
from:
http://www.cityofmadison.com/planning
/projects/conditional/documents/3563
9StaffComments.pdf
The United States Conference of
Mayors. (2005). A Status Report on
Hunger and Homelessness in American
Cities: A 24-City Survey.
Vandewalle & Associates. (2008). East
Washington Gateway Corridor Plan.
Retrieved from:
http://www.cityofmadison.com/planning
/pdf/capitol_gateway_corridor_plan.pdf
Wilson, W.J. (1987). The Truly
Disadvantaged. Chicago: The University
of Chicago Press.
19
Appendix A - Tables
Household
Size
2014 Area
Median
Income
(100%
Median)
90%
Median
"Low and Moderate Income" (or "LMI")
Individuals or households whose income does not exceed 80% of
area median income.
80%
Median*
70%
Median
60%
Median
50%
Median*
40%
Median
30%
Median*
1 person $56,600 $50,940 $44,750 $39,620 $33,960 $28,300 $22,640 $17,000
2 persons $64,700 $58,230 $51,150 $45,290 $38,820 $32,350 $25,880 $19,400
3 persons $72,800 $65,520 $57,550 $50,960 $43,680 $36,400 $29,120 $21,850
4 persons $80,800 $72,720 $63,900 $56,560 $48,480 $40,400 $32,320 $24,250
5 persons $87,300 $78,570 $69,050 $61,110 $52,380 $43,650 $34,920 $26,200
6 persons $93,800 $84,420 $74,150 $65,660 $56,280 $46,900 $37,520 $28,150
7 persons $100,200 $90,180 $79,250 $70,140 $60,120 $50,100 $40,080 $30,100
8 persons $106,700 $96,030 $84,350 $74,690 $64,020 $53,350 $42,680 $32,050
* The 30%, 50%, and 80% figures are taken from HUD tables. The do not necessarily represent the precise mathematical
percentage of the median income base of 100%. The additional percentage figures are provided for your convenience and are
locally derived by the formula from the 50% figure.
Above income limits are effective for CBDG as of 12/18/13, and for HOME as of 5/1/14.
20
Retrieved from http://www.cityofmadison.com/cdbg/docs/income_limits.htm
Table 1. Area Median Income for Madison, WI by Household Size
21
Poverty Thresholds for 2013 by Size of Family and Number of Related Children Under 18 Years
Size of family unitWeighted
average
thresholds
Related children under 18 years
None One Two Three Four Five Six SevenEight or
more
One person (unrelated
individual).................... 11,888
Under 65 years......... 12,119 12,119
65 years and over..... 11,173 11,173
Two people ................. 15,142
Householder under
65 years ...................... 15,679 15,600 16,057
Householder 65
years and over ............ 14,095 14,081 15,996
Three people ............. 18,552 18,222 18,751 18,769
Four people ............... 23,834 24,028 24,421 23,624 23,707
Five people ................ 28,265 28,977 29,398 28,498 27,801 27,376
Six people .................. 31,925 33,329 33,461 32,771 32,110 31,128 30,545
Seven people ….......... 36,384 38,349 38,588 37,763 37,187 36,115 34,865 33,493
Eight people ............... 40,484 42,890 43,269 42,490 41,807 40,839 39,610 38,331 38,006
Nine people or more 48,065 51,594 51,844 51,154 50,575 49,625 48,317 47,134 46,842 45,037
Source: U.S. Census Bureau.
Table 2. 2013 Poverty Threshold by Household Size
Table 3. Homeless Single Men Served in Dane County
22
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Sheltered 1,087 1,016 939 1,520 1,343 1,129 1,481 1,558 1,300 1,310 1,235 1,257 1,362
Turned away 281 265 408 406 332 375 280 194 0 128 195 135 428
Total 1,368 1,281 1,347 1,926 1,675 1,504 1,761 1,752 1,300 1,438 1,430 1,392 1,790
Percent Sheltered 79% 79% 70% 79% 80% 75% 84% 89% 100% 91% 86% 90% 76%
Percent Turned
Away21% 21% 30% 21% 20% 25% 16% 11% 0% 9% 14% 10% 24%
Number that slept
in uninhabitable
place prior to
shelter
65 266 200 191 79 97 256 230 148 186 350 397 476
Homeless episode
< 1 month37% 49% 51% 59% 50% 18% 45% 78% 86% 86% 76% 5% 27%
Homeless episode
1-6 months13% 23% 29% 25% 29% 17% 19% 11% 7% 10% 18% 24% 37%
Homeless episode
> 6 months49% 15% 12% 12% 14% 8% 22% 10% 7% 3% 2% 68% 30%
Homeless episode
unknown1% 13% 8% 4% 7% 57% 15% 2% 0% 0% 3% 3% 6%
These measures were collected by volunteers, staff, and individuals willing to self-report their status within
our area shelter, transitional and permanent housing system. These figures do not reflect the number of
individuals that have not sought shelter, living in hotels, or doubling up with others. (Soglin, 2012)
Table 4. WHEDA Scoring Criteria and point valuation
23
Unless otherwise noted, for scattered site developments, two-thirds of the sites must meet
the scoring category criteria to receive points.
Scoring Categories 2014 Points
1. Lower-Income Areas 5
2. Energy Efficiency and Sustainability 48
3. Community Notification and Support 8
4. Mixed-Income Incentive 15
5. Serves Large Families 18
6. Serves Lowest-Income Residents 80
7. Supportive Housing 35
8. Elderly Assisted Living- RCACs 18
9. Rehab/Neighborhood Stabilization 40
10. Universal Design 23
11. Financial Participation 25
12. Ownership Characteristics 6
13. Eventual Resident Ownership 3
14. Development Team 50
Source: WHEDA sample application retrieved from:
http://www.wheda.com/uploadedFiles/Website/LIHTC/Allocating/14SampleAp.pdf
24
Table 5: Wisconsin Federally Designated Qualified Census Tracts
25
Appendix B – Madison Supportive Housing Project Site Plan
Figure 10. Site Layout Plan
Source: City of Madison, Planning Department
26
Figure 11. Floor Plans – First Floor
27
Figure 12. Floor Plans – Second, Third and Fourth Floor
28
Figure 13. Artist renderings of Elevations with Materials