Full Text
FINAL REPORT Executive Summary of the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice City of Arvada, Colorado ---PAGE BREAK--- FINAL REPORT September 30, 2013 Executive Summary of the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice Prepared for Arvada Housing Authority 8001 Ralston Road Arvada, Colorado 80001 Prepared by BBC Research & Consulting 1999 Broadway, Suite 2200 Denver, Colorado 80202‐9750 [PHONE REDACTED] fax [PHONE REDACTED] www.bbcresearch.com [EMAIL REDACTED] ---PAGE BREAK--- BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING ARVADA AI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, PAGE 1 ANALYSIS OF IMPEDIMENTS TO FAIR HOUSING CHOICE—CITY OF ARVADA, COLORADO Executive Summary In 2012, the City of Arvada, in conjunction with Jefferson County and the City of Lakewood, contracted with the Denver consulting firm BBC Research & Consulting (BBC) to complete an Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (AI) for each jurisdiction. The AI is a review of fair housing barriers in a city or county and is required by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) as a condition for receiving federal housing and community development block grant funding. The joint AI consists of: • An examination of demographic trends that influence housing choice; • Identification of areas of racial and/or ethnic concentrations and analysis of the reasons for any concentrations; • Analysis of affordable housing opportunities and how well subsidized housing programs serve protected classes; • Consideration of mortgage lending disparities between borrowers of different races and ethnicities; • A review of public policies—primarily land use and zoning regulations—that affect the provision of housing; • Input from residents and stakeholders about their experiences finding housing and encountering housing barriers; and • Identification of impediments to fair housing choice and development of a Fair Housing Action Plan (FHAP) to address the impediments. This AI contains findings in the joint AI specific to the City of Arvada. The AI incorporates the most recent data available at the time the section was prepared. Primary data sources include: • 2010 Census; • Colorado State Demographer; • 2011‐American Community Survey; and the • 2006‐2010 American Community Survey. ---PAGE BREAK--- PAGE 2, ARVADA AI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING The State of Fair Housing in Arvada The AI found few impediments to fair housing choice in Arvada. The city has been very progressive in adopting regulations to incentivize developers to create a diversity of housing types, especially those that are accessible and allow residents to age in place. For example, the city recently adopted a visitability regulation with the specific purpose of providing for enhanced access for the disabled and elderly. In addition, the city has adopted substantial planning goals to make affordable housing available throughout the city and encourage the development of special needs housing. The city also has an “inclusion team” with the purpose of “developing recommendations for the city’s executive management of actions, changes, additions and/or trainings that should be undertaken to move the city toward a more inclusive environment. “ Finally, in addition to the visitability regulation above, the city accommodates persons with disabilities, racial and ethnic minorities, and non‐English speakers in many ways, including: • Accessibility accommodations sign language interpretation, audio storytelling) at the Arvada Center for the Arts and Humanities. • Having an accessible playground for children. • Maintaining resource folders at city reception and housing authority areas that can assist residents who need translations or accommodations for a disability. • Affirmative marketing efforts to inform all residents about city housing programs and services. • Placement of TDD contact numbers on all city web pages, including those for the CDBG program, Essential Home Repairs Program, etc. • Maintaining and continuing a substantial program to add new and replace older sidewalk ramps at city intersections in all areas of the city including any areas of higher ethnic, disabled, or elderly populations. • The City of Arvada collects information related to special assistance requirements for Arvada citizens, and updates this information annually. Information is sent to dispatchers for emergency response agencies and entered into the computer dispatch system; it is made available to response teams in case of an emergency. The City of Arvada is committed to supporting accessibility in the community and has a designated contact person in the City Manager’s Office to address concerns or requests for information related to accessibility. • Since 1975 the City of Arvada has contracted with the Jefferson County Seniors' Resource Center, Inc. (SRC) to provide transportation services for low income, frail elderly, and handicapped Arvada citizens. The program has two full‐time buses providing services in the Arvada area. • Return of funds from a loan repayment made to Developmental Disabilities Resource Center (DDRC) to allow funds to be made available for use by DDRC in 2013. • The city, as detailed in its Citizen Participation Plan for CDBG funding, encourages and provides for affirmative efforts for citizen participation, including involvement of low income residents, where housing and community development funds may be spent. The City ---PAGE BREAK--- BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING ARVADA AI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, PAGE 3 Plan states that the city will take actions that are appropriate and reasonable for the participation of all its residents, including minorities and non‐English speaking persons as well as persons with mobility, visual, or hearing impairments, to participate in the development process of the Consolidated Strategy and Plan submission for Housing and Community Development Programs. Some specific examples include: • The city will provide notification to citizens of local public hearings on the Consolidated Plan through: − Maintenance of a mailing list of persons, agencies, or groups that have requested they be notified when proposals for funding or review of the Consolidated Plan including the Action Plan: One Year Use of Funds will occur. That list will be updated and utilized to mail notices prior to hearing dates as they occur. − Prior to the process of preparing its Consolidated Plan, the city will mail a notification letter to appropriate social service agencies requesting their participation in the Plan process, so that the city can consult with those agencies about the housing needs of children, minorities, elderly, disabled, homeless, and other special populations within the community. • The city will hold two public hearings during the program year cycle of preparing its Consolidated Strategy and Plan Submission for Housing and Community Development Programs, with one hearing held before the proposed Consolidated Plan or Action Plan: One Year Use of Funds is published for comment. The public hearings will normally be held in Council Chambers at the City Municipal Building at 8101 Ralston Road in Arvada, which is accessible to and designed to accommodate persons with disabilities. The Municipal Building is also located in the approximate center of Southeast Arvada which contains a higher proportion of low income and minority residents in the city, and thus will provide more centralized access to those individuals or households. Affordable housing activities. The city also has undertaken a wide variety of affordable housing and related activities to promote housing choice within Arvada. Although these activities are not always specific to a protected class, they demonstrate the city’s commitment to creating a variety of housing types for all types of residents regardless of race, ethnicity, color, national origin, religion, disability, familial status, and/or gender/identification. These activities include the following: • Essential Home Repairs Single Family Rehabilitation Program and Rental Improvement Loan Program. The Division has operated the Essential Home Repairs Program since 1981. This program is intended to relieve hazardous, unhealthy, defective, and unsanitary conditions and to provide a readily maintainable, energy efficient, single family structure through the provision of affordable financial assistance and related services to eligible low and moderate income Arvada homeowners. The program’s evaluation process is ongoing and responses received in 2012 indicated very good program ratings from participants. The program includes specific outreach efforts such as yard signs at job sites that prominently display the Equal Housing Opportunity logo, and annual postcards to several minority organizations (Asian, Indian, Hispanic) that the city is aware of. The city ---PAGE BREAK--- PAGE 4, ARVADA AI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING also has some regular nonprofits that include handicapped residents that receive CDBG assistance. Flyers are sent to all Arvada residents and the city has a web page notice and description about their programs. • Applecreek Apartment HODAG loan repayment. The Community Development Department engaged a private consulting firm, Community Strategies Institute (CSI), to prepare a study and report intended to identify and help meet the housing needs of city households and neighborhoods primarily through use of the Apple Creek HODAG loan repayment and other loan repayments that are available for use. The Report, Findings and Recommendations for a Housing Investment Fund Using Recycled City of Arvada Housing and Community Development Loan Payments, has been completed. In that report, CSI developed a set of recommended priority uses for the available funds. CSI and Community Development staff also developed financial projections and a funding model based on use of the funds for the major focus areas within a 10‐year financial term. Based on that financial model, city staff have included budget recommendations for 2013. The study and report, as adopted by the city, provides for: • Accessibility. The Housing Investment Fund would encourage a goal of greater accessibility for affordable housing units. Applicants seeking financial assistance from the fund would be encouraged to at least meet Section 504 Accessibility Requirements for any project assisted with federal funds. • Section 8 Participants. No recipient of housing investment fund assistance may refuse to lease or make unavailable assisted units solely because an applicant for housing is a recipient of Section 8 Rental Assistance. • Prepare and implement Annual Action Plans for the Consolidated Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy and Community Development. The 2012 CDBG Annual Action Plan allocated CDBG funding to a variety of projects or activities including the Memorial Park Neighborhood revitalization project to be built in 2013, the Essential Home Repairs Program, and a variety of private nonprofit public service entities which provided assistance for a variety of disadvantaged Arvada persons and households in 2012. The following subrecipient services were funded with 2012 CDBG allocations and are typical of the diverse array of services the city aids with funding for disadvantaged low and moderate income households: • $2,000 for the VOA Nutrition Lunch Program—VOA reported 20 Arvada seniors benefited from this Program in Arvada in 2012, (first three quarters only). • $10,000 for the VOA Meals On Wheels Program—VOA reported 51 Arvada seniors benefited from this Program in Arvada in 2012, (first three quarters only). • $12,000 for the Carin Clinic—Carin Clinic reported that 387 unduplicated Arvada clients benefited from this program in Arvada in 2012, (first three quarters only). ---PAGE BREAK--- BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING ARVADA AI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, PAGE 5 • $15,000 for the Arvada Community Food Bank—The Arvada Food Bank reported 4,271 Arvada residents benefited from this program in Arvada in 2012 (first three quarters only). • $16,000 for the Jefferson Center for Mental Health—Jeffco Mental Health reported 3,757 Arvada residents benefited from this program in 2012, (first three quarters only). • $10,000 for Ralston House—Ralston House reported 94 Arvada residents benefited from this program in 2012, (first three quarters only). • $5,000 for the Senior Resource Center—Senior Resource Center reported 57 Arvada residents benefited from this program in 2012 (first three quarters only). • $5,000 for STRIDE Self Sufficiency Program—STRIDE reported that 92 Arvada residents benefited from this program in 2012 (first three quarters only). • TOTAL: $75,000 for 2012 CDBG Human Services. More than 8,729 Arvada persons or households assisted or benefited through services assisted with funding support through the first three quarters of 2012. • Arvada Housing Authority—508 unit Section 8 Housing Assistance Payments Program. The Authority also a participant in the License to Dream Thanksgiving Dinner effort resulting in provision of Thanksgiving dinners to program clients. The Authority achieved a SEMAP score of 100 percent (135 points out of 135 possible) for its 2011 fiscal year which is the highest possible score a housing authority can achieve and was once again rated as a “High Performer.” • Provision of Community Wheels Program in Arvada in concert with the Seniors Resource Center. Since 1975, the City of Arvada has contracted with the Jefferson County Seniors' Resource Center, Inc. (SRC) to provide transportation services for low income, frail elderly and handicapped Arvada citizens. The program has two full‐time buses providing services in the Arvada area. • Utilize appropriate to encourage additional affordable housing development in the city and the continuation, improvement, maintenance, and proper management of assisted rental housing developments in the city. • City loan for the Jefferson Green Affordable housing LIHTC development at West 69th and Sheridan Boulevard and participation of the Arvada Housing Authority as a limited partner in project. • HOME loans made by city for the Sheridan Ridge affordable housing LIHTC development at W. 66th and Sheridan. • City loan for the Parkview Village Apartments at 5383 Carr Street and Parkview Village West Apartments at 5350 Everett Street. • City participation in the Castlegate Apartments and participation of the Arvada Housing Authority as a limited partner in project which provides 504 units of affordable housing at dispersed site in north Arvada. ---PAGE BREAK--- PAGE 6, ARVADA AI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING • Collaborative project for Viking Square Apartments at 12205 W. 58th Avenue under which the Authority approved the Jefferson County Housing Authority to purchase the 55 unit project for use as affordable housing. • Cooperation with both profit and nonprofit entities like Family Tree, Inc., Habitat for Humanity, or others to provide additional housing opportunities to targeted populations in the city and Jefferson County as opportunities may arise. Examples include: • Repayment of three loans made to Family Tree regarding the Brookview Apartments transitional housing facility that was sold by Family Tree. Repaid funds were made available for reuse by Family Tree in 2013 for service provision for disadvantaged households. • Repayment of loan made to Developmental Disabilities Resource Center (DDRC) to allow funds to be made available for use by DDRC in 2013. • Housing Division, the R‐1 School District, and Habitat for Humanity cooperated to acquire the Secrest Cottage Schools at 7120 W. 68th Avenue for construction of three houses. $30,000 provided by city for acquisition costs. • Worked with the Colorado Foreclosure Hotline, FHA and HUD to publicize and provide public information on foreclosure resources including a “foreclosure fair.” • Continue to implement an EOC assistance program for Arvada. An application prepared and submitted to EOC for the 2011‐2012 year and successful in obtaining a new grant. • Residential foreclosure prevention and mitigation services or programs including: • Implementation of the NSP I Program with Arvada as a primary member of Jefferson County Collaboration to use $6,000,000 of Federal Neighborhood Stabilization Plan funding under the Housing and Economic Recovery Act for targeted properties and areas to pursue abandoned/foreclosed property acquisitions, renovations, and resale or demolition and clearance. A private contractor operating program in Arvada and staff provided continuing support. Eleven properties were purchased, rehabilitated, and sold. • Implementation of the NSP II Program in cooperation with the city by the Community Resources & Housing Development Corporation, which has purchased nine properties in Arvada, completed rehabilitation of those properties, and have sold or are offering them for sale to eligible program clients. • Creekside Pedestrian Crossing and Drainage Project. The Division obtained and utilized $771,200 in regular HUD CDBG and additional CDBG stimulus funding for this major project which removed three deficient, deteriorated, and hazardous pedestrian river crossings and replaced them with a new span crossing with related grading, berms, walkway improvements and replacement, replacement landscaping, neighborhood park and playground improvements, and restoration of the Ralston Creek waterway. The project was ---PAGE BREAK--- BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING ARVADA AI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, PAGE 7 located between two multifamily residential areas with a substantial number of low and moderate income households. • Mile High Community Loan Fund. Members of the Metro Mayors Caucus cooperated to expand an existing revolving loan fund, the Denver Neighborhood Housing Fund, into the broader Mile High Community Loan Fund to address regional needs regarding affordable housing in 2001. Denver metropolitan cities such as Arvada contributed or loaned their individual Coors Field tax rebates or other funds to the Fund to be used to assist in the provision or preservation of affordable housing in the Denver metropolitan area at that time. The city agreed to “loan” its $75,000 rebate to the Fund. ---PAGE BREAK--- PAGE 8, ARVADA AI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING Primary Findings from the AI This section highlights the primary findings from the joint AI and includes the following topics: • Racial and ethnic diversity and concentrations; • Distribution of and access to affordable housing; • Land use and zoning regulations and their effect on housing choice; • Policies and procedures of the Arvada Housing Authority; • Identification of potential fair housing barriers by stakeholders and residents; • Private sector lending practices and disparities in mortgage loan denials; and • Fair housing impediments in Arvada and a recommended Fair Housing Action Plan (FHAP). Demographic and housing profile. The 2011 Census’ American Community Survey (ACS) reported Jefferson County’s population at 539,884. Currently, nearly half of the county population lives in Arvada (107,326 people) and Lakewood. Over the decade, the county population overall grew by 2.4 percent. Arvada saw the largest population increase in numbers (4,821) while Golden saw the largest percent increase Racial and ethnic diversity and concentrations. Jefferson County and Arvada residents report their race as predominately white (91.5% for the county; 92.3% for the city). The largest racial minority groups are Asians (2.7% in the city) and African Americans Over half of the county’s Hispanic population lives in Arvada and Lakewood which is moderately higher than the overall population share of these cities Figure ES‐1 shows ethnic concentration data by Census block group in Arvada and Jefferson County. According to HUD, concentrated block groups are of those where the block group exceeds the county proportion by more than 20 percentage points As shown by the map, the areas of concentration are located near the eastern border of the county, mostly in Lakewood. In fact, of the 26 concentrated block groups: • 21 are in Lakewood, • Two are in Arvada, • Two are in Edgewater, and • One is in Wheat Ridge. Figure ES‐2 shows the proportion of African American residents in Arvada and Jefferson County. Because there are no concentrations of African Americans in the county, the map instead shows block groups in which African Americans represent a higher percentage than the county proportion of residents. Figure ES‐3 shows the proportion of Asian residents in Arvada and Jefferson County. There are no concentrations of Asians; as such, the map shows block groups in which Asians represent a higher percentage than the county proportion of residents. ---PAGE BREAK--- BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING ARVADA AI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, PAGE 9 Figure ES‐1. Percent Hispanic Population and Concentrated Areas, Arvada and Jefferson County, 2010 Source: 2010 Census. ---PAGE BREAK--- PAGE 10, ARVADA AI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING Figure ES‐2. Percent African American Population, Arvada and Jefferson County, 2010 Source: 2010 Census. Note: There are no block groups with a concentration (greater than 21%) of the population identifying as African American. ---PAGE BREAK--- BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING ARVADA AI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, PAGE 11 Figure ES‐3. Percent Asian Population, Arvada and Jefferson County, 2010 Source: 2010 Census. Note: There are no block groups with a concentration (greater than 22.4%) of the population identifying as Asian. ---PAGE BREAK--- PAGE 12, ARVADA AI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING Disability. About 9 percent of Jefferson County citizens have a disability.1 The largest age groups with a disability are the 75 years old and over group (46%) and 65 to 74 years old group Poverty and concentrations. In 2006‐2010, the proportion of Jefferson County residents living below poverty level was 8 percent. This is an increase of 2.8 percent in the past decade. Arvada’s poverty rate was 7 percent, up from 5.2 percent in 1999 and one percentage point lower than the county’s overall. Arvada has second lowest proportion of residents living below the poverty rate of all cities in the county. No Census tracts in the county have a poverty concentration (greater than 28% of families living below the poverty level). About half of the Census tracts with the highest poverty rates are also areas of Hispanic concentration. Poverty—and the lack of housing to serve persons living in poverty—disproportionately affects persons of Hispanic descent in the county. Figure ES‐4 shows a proportion of families living below the poverty level by Census tract. 1 At the time this report was prepared, updated disability data were only available at the county level. ---PAGE BREAK--- BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING ARVADA AI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, PAGE 13 Figure ES‐4. Percent of Families Living Below the Poverty Level, Arvada and Jefferson County, 2010 Source: 2010 Census. Note: No Census tracts had a concentration (greater than 28%) of families living below the poverty level. ---PAGE BREAK--- PAGE 14, ARVADA AI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING Housing affordability and distribution. There is a wide array of housing types and affordability levels in Jefferson County overall; however, affordability varies substantially across communities. Arvada has the highest homeownership rate in the county (69%) and, as shown below, offers many options for homes to buy for less than $200,000 and $300,000, as shown in the following maps. ---PAGE BREAK--- BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING ARVADA AI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, PAGE 15 Figure ES‐5. Location of Homes Priced Less Than $200,000, Arvada and Jefferson County, 2011 Source: BBC Research & Consulting and regional MLS data. ---PAGE BREAK--- PAGE 16, ARVADA AI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING Figure ES‐6. Location of Homes Priced Less Than $300,000, Arvada and Jefferson County, 2011 Source: BBC Research & Consulting and regional MLS data. ---PAGE BREAK--- BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING ARVADA AI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, PAGE 17 The rental market is a different story, however. During the past decade, rent costs have increased 22 percent in Arvada, higher than the increase in the county overall The Metro Denver Vacancy Survey from second quarter 2012 shows rental vacancies at a very low 1.9 percent in Arvada. The average rent in the city as of second quarter 2012 was $862. During the past decade, rental costs have shifted in the city as well as the county toward higher cost units. In 2000, 26 percent of rentals were affordable to households earning $25,000 and less (these units rent for less than $600 per month). By 2011, the proportion of affordable units had dropped to 19 percent. Despite these increases, Arvada continues to provide a large share of the county’s affordable rentals, as shown in the table below. Arvada supplies 29 percent of the county’s affordable rentals compared to just 20 percent of the county population. Figure ES‐7. Number and Proportion of Affordable Units Source: BBC Research & Consulting. Land use and zoning regulations review. The review of land use and zoning regulations was completed using a checklist developed by HUD. Special attention was paid to regulations governing group homes for persons with disabilities, an area where the potential to create barriers is usually the greatest. The review found that, overall, Arvada’s zoning and land use regulations do not appear to create barriers to housing choice. The city’s codes are standard and mostly straightforward, although the definition of group homes is confusing. The city’s code would be improved if the definitions of group homes, group living facilities, and/or disability are clarified. Similar to Jefferson County’s regulations, in Arvada, group homes are allowed by right in residential districts if housing fewer than seven individuals and for certain protected classes, including persons who are developmentally disabled or mentally ill. Although the code implies that a reasonable accommodation could be made if another type of “handicapped” facility is proposed, this language is presented in the context of sex offenders occupying the home. The city’s regulations suggest that facilities housing persons with other types of disabilities— physical disabilities, recovering substance abusers, persons with HIV/AIDS—would be classified as living in other types of group homes, which are not allowed by right in residential districts; instead, a conditional permit is required. This could have the effect of limiting housing opportunities for people with certain types of disabilities. Less than $200 377 177 129 12 19 — — 101 $200 to $400 2,404 994 909 88 35 1 4 146 $400 to $600 3,846 755 1,345 60 438 — 8 774 Total Affordable Rentals 6,627 1,926 2,383 160 492 1 12 1,021 Percent of County: Affordable Rentals 29% 36% 2% 7% 0% 0% 15% Population 20% 27% 1% 3% 0% 0% 6% Mountain View Wheat Ridge Jefferson County Arvada Lakewood Edgewater Golden Lakeside ---PAGE BREAK--- PAGE 18, ARVADA AI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING The city should consider adding a definition of disability to add clarity to its zoning regulations and generalize the definition of group home to include persons with all types of disabilities or to eliminate the requirement for conditional use permits for homes that house persons with disabilities other than developmental and mental illness. The term “disability” under the FHA includes federal laws that define a person with a disability as “Any person who has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities; has a record of such impairment; or is regarded as having such an impairment.” This includes people with HIV/AIDS and recovering addicts. Other areas examined in the review, using HUD’s checklist, follow. 1. Does the code definition of “family” have the effect of discriminating against unrelated individuals with disabilities who reside together in a congregate or group living arrangement? No. Arvada’s definition of family is: “One or more persons related by blood, marriage, or adoption, living together as a single household unit or a group of not more than five persons not related by blood, marriage, or adoption, living together as a single household unit. A family foster home, licensed by the State of Colorado, or certified by the Jefferson County Department of Human Services or Adams County Department of Social Services, or a state‐licensed child placement agency, and having no more than four foster children, shall also be considered a family. A family shall not include more than one person required to register as a sex offender.” 2. Does the Code definition of “family” have the effect of discriminating against unrelated individuals with disabilities who reside together in a congregate or group living arrangement? No, see above. 3. Is the Code definition of “disability” the same as the Fair Housing Act? Arvada’s code does not define “disability.” 4. Does the zoning ordinance restrict housing opportunities for individuals with disabilities and mischaracterize such housing as a “boarding or rooming house” or “hotel”? No. 5. Does the zoning ordinance deny housing opportunities for disability individuals with on‐site housing supporting services? No. 6. Does the jurisdiction policy allow any number of unrelated persons to reside together, but restrict such occupancy, if the residents are disabled? No. 7. Does the jurisdiction policy not allow disabled persons to make reasonable modifications or provide reasonable accommodation for disabled people who live in municipal‐supplied or managed residential housing? No. 8. Does the jurisdiction require a public hearing to obtain public input for specific exceptions to zoning and land‐use rules for disabled applicants and is the hearing only for disabled applicants rather than for all applicants? No. 9. Does the zoning ordinance address mixed uses? Yes, the code includes guidelines for all mixed‐use sub districts. ---PAGE BREAK--- BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING ARVADA AI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, PAGE 19 10. How are the residential land uses discussed? Arvada has eight residential zoning districts including: R‐CE Residential Estate District, R‐E Residential Estate District, R‐L Residential Low Density District, R‐SL Residential Small Lot, Low Density District, R‐NT Residential Neo‐Traditional District, R‐I, One and Two‐Family Residence District, R‐MD, Residential Medium Density District and R‐M, Residential Multi‐Family District. The zones differ in their permitted uses and development standards. What standards apply? The district regulations include guidelines for permitted uses, development standards, lot size standards, setbacks and performance standards. 11. Does the zoning ordinance describe any areas in this jurisdiction as exclusive? No. 12. Are there any restrictions for Senior Housing in the zoning ordinance? If yes, do the restrictions comply with Federal law on housing for older persons solely occupied by persons 62 years of age or older or at least one person 55 years of age and has significant facilities or services to meet the physical or social needs of older people)? No. 13. Does the zoning ordinance contain any special provisions for making housing accessible to persons with disabilities? Arvada has adopted the 2009 International Building Code which includes provision for persons with disabilities and access to housing. In addition, the city has adopted a very progressive visitability ordinance, which requires that 15 percent of all new housing developments meet universal design standards or payment of a fee‐in‐lieu. In addition, at least one model home within each qualifying residential development shall be built with a step‐free building entrance and all interior visitability features. 14. Does the zoning ordinance establish occupancy standards or maximum occupancy limits? No. 15. Does the zoning ordinance include a discussion of fair housing? Yes, the FHA is discussed in the definition of “group home” and the permitting of city code modifications (reasonable accommodations) in order to comply with the FHA. 16. Describe the minimum standards and amenities required by the ordinance for a multiple family project with respect to handicap parking. Handicapped parking is discussed in section 6.16.1.C.1 of the Land Development Code. The code requires a certain number of accessible parking spaces per a range of housing units one space for developments with 1‐25 units, etc). 17. Does the Zoning Code distinguish senior citizen housing from other single family residential and multifamily residential uses by the application of a conditional use permit? No. 18. Does the Zoning Code distinguish handicapped housing from other single family residential and multifamily residential uses by the application of a conditional use permit? The city’s Allowed and Principal Uses regulation allows group homes for developmentally disabled, elderly, and mentally ill by right in single family residential districts and other group homes with fewer than eight occupants by right. 19. How is “special group residential housing” defined in the jurisdiction Zoning Code? Arvada’s code contains several definitions of group housing: Several sub‐definitions are included under the broad “Group Home” definition: 1) “Group Living Facility in which six or more individuals can live together and receive supportive services and are supervised by persons who live in the residence.” ---PAGE BREAK--- PAGE 20, ARVADA AI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING 2) “A Group Home shall not have more than 12 residents, including supervisory personnel, plus any children of a resident…” This definition includes a reasonable accommodation provision, but in the context of housing sex offenders: “In the event a group living facility for handicapped persons does not meet the definition of “Group Home” as contained herein, but requires reasonable accommodation pursuant to the Fair Housing Amendments Act…such group living facility shall not include more than one person required to register as a sex offender…” Additional definitions are included for Group Homes for Developmentally Disabled Persons; Group Homes for Elderly Persons; Group Homes for Juvenile Offenders; and Group Homes for Mentally Ill Persons; as well as Group Living Facilities. 20. Does the jurisdiction’s planning and building codes presently make specific reference to the accessibility requirements contained in the 1988 amendment to the Fair Housing Act? Not specifically, although the code does make reference to coordinating with accessibility requirements of HUD and the ADA. Arvada Housing Authority policies and procedures. This section discusses the policies and procedures of the Arvada Housing Authority (AHA), one of the primary providers of housing assistance in the city. AHA was created in 1975 by City Council to assist low income renters with their rent payments. The Housing Authority is governed by the seven members of City Council, who serve as Commissioners of the Authority. The Manager for the Housing and Neighborhood Revitalization Division serves as executive director. AHA has five employees in addition to the executive director. The primary purpose of the Housing Authority is to administer the federal Section 8 rental assistance program. As of January 2013, the Housing Authority administered 496 vouchers. Ninety‐two percent of voucher holders were white, the same as the overall proportion of city residents who report their race as white. Twenty‐five percent were Hispanic, which is higher than the overall proportion of residents who report their ethnicity as Hispanic A little more than half of voucher holders were families (57%) and 23 percent are disabled, which is much higher than the countywide portion of persons with disabilities The voucher wait list is more diverse racially and ethnically than the composition of current voucher holders: 21 percent are racial minorities (14% are African Americans, which is much higher than the proportion of African Americans in the city overall). Thirty‐eight percent are of Hispanic descent. Yet just 4 percent are disabled, lower than the rate of disability for current voucher holders and for the county overall. Eighty‐five percent have extremely low incomes and the vast majority—85 percent—are females. AHA’s Administrative Plan—specifically Chapters 2 Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity and Chapter 4 Applications, Waiting List and Tenant Selection—was reviewed as part of the AI. Both chapters were very comprehensive, contained easy‐to‐follow instructions and contained updated information on fair housing regulations. ---PAGE BREAK--- BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING ARVADA AI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, PAGE 21 The briefing packet that new voucher holders receive at their orientation meeting was also reviewed. The packet was easy to understand, contained information on fair housing rights and how to request a reasonable accommodation, described portability options, and listed accessible apartment complexes. Public and stakeholder input. The public input effort for the joint AI included the following elements: • A paper and online resident survey offered in Spanish and English—207 residents responded to the survey. The online survey was hosted by SurveyMonkey.com, a certified Section 508 compliant website. • One community meeting to discuss fair housing issues held October 30, 2012—five residents attended the meeting. The meeting was held at an accessible venue near public transit. • An online survey of stakeholders about potential barriers to fair housing choice—57 stakeholders completed surveys. • Interviews with subject matter experts, including housing developers, housing authorities, planners, and social service providers. Reasonable accommodations. The meeting notices included language offering to make reasonable accommodations for residents as requested. Many of the meeting attendees were persons with disabilities. One attendee brought a service animal, which was accommodated during the meeting. To encourage participation by low income, minority, special needs, and non‐English speaking residents, packets of surveys in both English and Spanish were hand delivered to 11 nonprofit social service organizations in July. In addition, information about the surveys and the community meeting was sent by email and in hard copy to 11 nonprofit social service and housing organizations in the county. Figure ES‐8 lists the survey distribution sites. The Denver Post ran an article about the availability of the survey and the AI study in its community insert for Jefferson County (YourHub.com). Because the survey was voluntary and distribution of paper surveys was targeted to lower income and special needs residents, the results are not necessarily representative of Jefferson County residents overall. Yet the residents surveyed live in a broad spectrum of cities within Jefferson County, including Arvada, as the map in Figure ES‐9 shows. Figure ES‐8. Resident Survey Distribution Sites Source: BBC Research & Consulting. Organization Arvada Community Food Bank Brothers Redevelopment Developmental Disabilities Resource Center Family Tree, Inc Jefferson Center for Mental Health Jefferson County Housing Authority Jefferson County Human Services Metro West Housing Solutions Seniors' Resource Center The Action Center The ARC in Jefferson County ---PAGE BREAK--- PAGE 22, ARVADA AI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING It is also important to note that the race and ethnicity of survey respondents matched the race and ethnicity of Jefferson County residents overall (92% white and 14% Hispanic). Figure ES‐9. Where Survey Respondents Live Note: n=183. Source: BBC Research & Consulting 2012 Jefferson County Resident Survey. ---PAGE BREAK--- BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING ARVADA AI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, PAGE 23 The primary findings from the stakeholder and public input include: • Jefferson County residents are generally happy with their current housing situation. Residents view the greatest issues, or needs, in their communities as addressing crime, school quality, and neighborhood deterioration; all of which are factors in declining property values. • The majority of residents did not consider many housing barriers to be very serious problems. On average, residents consider the most serious barriers to be finding affordable housing that has low crime, good quality schools, and neighborhood pride. Residents that are unsatisfied with their housing situation frequently cite declines in property values that prevent moving to another location. • Residents report a moderate incidence of discrimination in Jefferson County overall but rates are much higher for minorities and persons with disabilities In addition, about one‐quarter of residents believe that not all members of the community are treated equally. A strong theme emerged from the survey results as to why: class (poor versus affluent) and a person’s race or ethnicity. • Stakeholders consider a lack of affordable housing to be a serious barrier to fair housing choice in Jefferson County. • One open‐ended comment pertaining to Arvada only expressed concern about the city’s community facilities planning: “Arvada builds all the new recreation facilities on the western side of Arvada and promotes its food bank on the east side. This reinforces the idea the east is for poor people and ups the perception that the east side is full of crime and bad kids.” Perspectives from community meetings. Participants in the community meetings, many of whom have physical disabilities, emphasized the need for sidewalk improvements. In an exercise to identify the most serious barriers to fair housing choice, participants selected the issues they considered to be most serious. Two of the top three most serious barriers focused on accessibility issues: • Housing for persons with disabilities is lacking; and • Public and private areas are not accessible (lack sidewalks). Much of the community meeting discussion focused on the need for sidewalks and sidewalk improvements, particularly along major thoroughfares such as Colfax, Wadsworth, and Kipling. Other issues include: • Difficulty navigating sidewalks in a wheelchair after snow because the curb gets iced over by snow plows, and bus stops become inaccessible because snow is piled on the curb; • Sidewalks in older suburbs are very narrow and are too narrow for wheelchairs; • The current dog park is not accessible to people with physical disabilities; and • A lack of affordable and accessible rental units is a barrier. ---PAGE BREAK--- PAGE 24, ARVADA AI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING Private sector lending practices. During 2010, there were 6,081 mortgage loan applications completed by residents of the City of Arvada, representing 18 percent of all Jefferson County loan applications. Seventy‐two percent of all loans originated were conventional loans; 25 percent were FHA‐insured; and the balance were VA or other guaranteed loans, as shown in Figure ES‐ 10. Figure ES‐10. Mortgage Loan Applications, City of Arvada, 2010 Note: VA‐guaranteed loans are available to veterans through the Veterans Administration. FSA/RHS loans are available to residents in rural areas through USDA programs. Source: Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA), 2010. Figure ES‐11 shows the purpose of the loan applications. The majority (74%) were refinances; 24 percent were for home purchases; and just 3 percent were for home improvements. Loan purpose is very similar to that of Jefferson County as a whole. Figure ES‐11. Purpose of Loan Applications, City of Arvada, 2010 Source: Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA), 2010. Of all of the loan applications, 68 percent were approved and 16 percent were denied. Nine percent of the applications were withdrawn by the applicants and in another 4 percent of cases, the applicants did not accept the loans. The loan file was closed as incomplete in about 3 percent of the cases. Denials were 1 percent higher than Jefferson County as a whole (not a significant difference). Conventional loans were approved 68 percent of the time, compared with 69 percent for FHA loans. Applications for home purchases were approved most often (75% of the time), compared to 59 percent for home improvements and 66 percent for refinances. Figure ES‐12. Action Taken on Mortgage Loan Applications, City of Arvada, 2010 Source: Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA), 2010. Conventional 72% FHA‐insured 25% VA‐guaranteed 3% FSA/RHS 0% Number of applications 6,081 Type City of Arvada ---PAGE BREAK--- BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING ARVADA AI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, PAGE 25 Figure ES‐13 examines the disposition of loan applications by race and ethnicity in the City of Arvada. Hispanic denial rates are 9 percentage points higher than those of non‐Hispanic borrowers. Loans to Hispanic borrowers were originated 54 percent of the time, compared to 71 percent of the time for non‐Hispanic borrowers (a difference of 17 percentage points). Figure ES‐13. Result of Mortgage Loan Applications by Race/Ethnicity, Arvada, 2010 Source: Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA), 2010. City of Arvada Race American Indian or Alaska Native 0% 68% 0% 11% 0% 4% Asian 1% 64% 4% 16% 4% 4% Black or African American 0% 50% 0% 8% 0% 17% Pacific Islander 0% 67% 0% 33% 0% 0% White 84% 70% 4% 15% 4% 2% Info not provided by applicant 14% 56% 5% 21% 5% 5% Not Applicable 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% Ethnicity Hispanic or Latino 6% 54% 7% 23% 7% 4% Not Hispanic or Latino 81% 71% 4% 14% 4% 2% Info not provided by applicant 14% 56% 5% 21% 5% 4% Not Applicable 0% 75% 0% 25% 0% 0% Racial/Ethnic Comparison Action Taken Percent of Total Loan Applications Loan Originated Hispanic/Latino or Not Hispanic/Not Latino ‐75% ‐17% 3% 9% Application Approved, but Not Accepted Denied Application Withdrawn by Applicant Closed for Incompleteness 3% 2% ---PAGE BREAK--- PAGE 26, ARVADA AI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING Figure ES‐14 shows loan denials and Hispanic concentration. The crosshatch designates Census tracts with higher than average denial rates. As the figure demonstrates, while areas of Hispanic concentration are also areas of higher than average denial rates, there are higher than average denials in many non‐concentrated areas. Figure ES‐14. Loan Denials and Hispanic Concentration, City of Arvada, 2010 Source: Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA), 2010, and BBC Research & Consulting. As demonstrated in Figure ES‐15, high debt‐to‐income ratios and inadequate collateral are the major reasons for application denials across race and loan type in Arvada. For Hispanic or Latino and African American applicants, credit history was also a common reason for application denials. Unverifiable information and other reasons were material for Asian borrower denials. African American applicants in the City of Arvada were denied at a rate 19 percentage points higher than Jefferson County residents as a whole for credit history and insufficient cash reasons, but were denied 19 percentage points and 13 percentage points less frequently, respectively, for debt‐to‐ income ratios and unverifiable information. ---PAGE BREAK--- BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING ARVADA AI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, PAGE 27 Figure ES‐15. Reasons for Denial by Loan Type and Race/Ethnicity, City of Arvada, 2010 Source: Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA), 2010. City of Arvada Debt‐to‐income ratio 30% 0% 23% 31% Employment history 0% 0% 2% 2% Credit history 10% 25% 11% 21% Collateral 10% 25% 20% 17% Insufficient cash 0% 25% 3% 4% Unverifiable information 20% 0% 12% 11% Credit application incomplete 10% 0% 14% 6% Mortgage insurance denied 0% 0% 0% 0% Other 20% 25% 15% 8% Total 100% 100% 100% 100% Asian Black or African American White Hispanic or Latino ---PAGE BREAK--- PAGE 28, ARVADA AI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING 2013 Impediments to Fair Housing Choice and Fair Housing Action Plan This section identifies the impediments to fair housing choice for the 2013 City of Arvada AI. Some of the impediments listed below also apply to the county overall or for other cities within the county. Impediments for the county and other cities are detailed in the full AI for Jefferson County, Arvada, and Lakewood. IMPEDIMENT NO. 1—Lack of accessible housing limits the housing choices of persons with physical disabilities and mobility limitations. Evidence of this barrier was found in both qualitative and quantitative data obtained for the AI. Lack of accessible housing for persons with disabilities was raised frequently by residents and stakeholders participating in the AI:2 • There were 27 percent of survey respondents who are disabled that said their current home or apartment does not meet their accessibility needs. • Along with 69 percent of stakeholders responding to the survey who said that the availability of accessible housing units for persons with disabilities was “insufficient.” • The majority of attendees attending the AI community meeting needed wheelchair accessible housing and each mentioned the challenges they had finding accessible, affordable housing—often apartments that accept Section 8 vouchers. Open ended survey comments concerning the lack of accessible housing included the following: • “As someone who works in the field of disability and is a parent of an adult with a disability, I have found housing barriers to be one of the biggest challenges to the potential for individuals to become a contributory member of their chosen communities.” • “We have extremely limited options for affordable housing and for housing for persons with disabilities.” • “[The county needs] more accessible (wheelchair), more affordable, better locations, closer to bus lines.” • “[The county needs] homes for older adults with intellectual/development disabilities who also have medical needs.” Quantitative data from the Metro Denver Apartment Association quarterly survey and area housing authorities provide further evidence of the lack of and demand for accessible housing: • The Apartment Association survey reports that accessible 1 bedroom units rent for about $145 more on average than non‐accessible units. Larger accessible units, however, are less expensive than non‐accessible units; this is mostly true for those with 4 to 5 bedrooms. These data suggest that demand for 1 bedroom accessible units is higher than for 1 bedroom 2 These statistics represent all residents responding to the AI survey, not exclusively residents of Arvada. There were too few surveys received back from residents in the individual jurisdictions within the county to analyze the results at the jurisdiction level. ---PAGE BREAK--- BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING ARVADA AI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, PAGE 29 non‐accessible units because these units are difficult to find in the currently very tight rental market. • Metro West Housing Solutions reports more than 500 persons with disabilities on their wait list for Section 8 vouchers, about 20 percent of households on the wait list. Twenty‐three percent of households (116) on the Arvada Housing Authority’s wait list are disabled. These households in need of affordable housing make up more than the county’s overall proportion of persons with disabilities Why is this an impediment? Lack of accessible housing impedes housing choice for people with disabilities. IMPEDIMENT NO. 2—Fair housing information is difficult to find and is not in a language other than English. Fair housing awareness is low. A review of the City of Arvada’s website (as well as the websites of Jefferson County and Lakewood) found that fair housing information can be difficult to find. Searches on the website found some documents pertaining to fair housing, but few provided information about who to contact about housing discrimination. None of the information was available in Spanish, although the city’s website contains a “translation feature” where users can request translation of content into a language other than English. In addition, the stakeholder survey conducted for the AI found that knowledge and awareness of protected classes by stakeholders is low and residents are mostly likely to “do nothing” when faced with discrimination. These responses indicate a need for more visible availability of information and contact sources for stakeholders and residents about fair housing laws and rights. Why is this an impediment? Inadequate information on fair housing can create barriers to fair housing choice if the lack of the information denies residents the opportunity to report housing violations. In addition, lack of fair housing information in accessible formats can disproportionately impact non‐English speakers and persons with disabilities. OBSERVATION NO. 3—NIMBYism may create impediments to fair housing choice. Not‐in‐My‐Backyard or NIMBYism, can create significant barriers for affordable housing development and may be directed towards or disparately impact protected classes. The survey conducted for this AI detected a fair amount of NIMBYism among Jefferson County residents.3 Specifically: • Twenty percent said they would prefer “fewer rental units/rentals” in their neighborhoods; • Twelve percent said they would prefer “fewer low income/poor people;” and • Thirty percent of stakeholders attributed concentrations of low income housing to NIMBYism. 3 Too few responses were received at the jurisdictional level to analyze by city. ---PAGE BREAK--- PAGE 30, ARVADA AI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING Affordable housing developers interviewed for this study described several cases of NIMBYism associated with proposed affordable housing developments which resulted in the projects not moving forward or significant development delays. Why is this an observation rather than an impediment? It is unclear if NIMBYism has a disparate impact on the housing opportunities of protected classes or how widespread NIMBYism is in Arvada. IMPEDIMENT NO. 4—Services for persons who are homeless—as well as federal resources to fund needed services—are limited. The lack of emergency shelters and transitional housing for the homeless was raised often by attendees at the community meeting conducted for the AI. Overall, Jefferson County and its cities offer very limited resources for persons who are homeless; motels and shelters in Denver serve most of the demand for housing for the homeless. The county and its cities find it difficult to expand shelters and housing services for persons who are homeless due to federal fiscal restraints. Serving persons who are homeless requires deep subsidies and many levels (federal, state, local) of public resources. It should be noted that public resources are currently very limited, especially at the federal level. Why is this an impediment? Persons who are homeless in Jefferson County are disproportionately likely to be racial and ethnic minorities and persons with disabilities. IMPEDIMENT NO. 5—Hispanic applicants have 65 percent higher loan application denial rates than non‐Hispanic applicants. An analysis of Home Mortgage Lending Data (HMDA) from 2010 found that Hispanic applicants for mortgage loans on properties in Arvada had 30 percent lower origination rates (17 percentage points) and higher denial rates (9 percentage points, 65% higher) than non‐Hispanic applicants (see Figure II‐17a). These differences were higher than those in the county and Lakewood. Disparities also existed for other minority applicants, but the number of minority applications was small, making the data less significant. Why is this an impediment? There are many reasons why minorities may have higher mortgage loan denial rates than non‐minorities. The most common reasons are differences in credit scores, higher debt to income ratios, and lack of credit history. Yet patterns of differences in high denials can signal disinvestment in minority‐concentrated areas and/or deny minorities housing opportunities. ---PAGE BREAK--- BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING ARVADA AI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, PAGE 31 Recommended Fair Housing Action Plan To address the fair housing impediments described above, it is recommended that Arvada consider the following Fair Housing Action Plan (FHAP). Action items for the county and other cities are included for context. ACTION ITEM NO. 1—Improve the housing environment for people with disabilities. Lack of accessible, affordable housing was identified as an impediment to housing choice for persons with disabilities in Jefferson County, including Arvada. To increase housing opportunities for persons with disabilities, the county and its partner cities, including Arvada, should consider the following: • To the degree resources are available, continue to support nonprofit organizations that assist persons with disabilities find accessible housing, make accessibility improvements/reasonable accommodations, and develop accessible, affordable housing. • Encourage the production of “visitable,” accessible, and affordable housing by private sector developers. Possible examples include: visitability ordinances (already adopted by Arvada), offering accessibility modifications as part of home repair programs (currently in place), exploring fee waivers and/or expedited review for affordable, accessible housing developments and/or donating land for such developments. • Maintain a list of resources on city websites (or link to state websites maintained by CHFA and the Division of Housing and/or similar organizations) for people with disabilities—for example, information about rights concerning service animals, reasonable accommodations procedures, list accessible housing. This might be accomplished as part of the efforts of the Metro Denver Fair Housing Center. • As part of preparation of HUD Consolidated Plans, Comprehensive Plans, and similar documents, evaluate the needs of persons with disabilities accessible housing group homes, transit). ACTION ITEM NO. 2—Continue efforts to increase the supply of affordable housing and homeless resources in all areas of Jefferson County. It is recommended that the county and cities continue or establish reasonable goals to support a balance of housing opportunities in all areas of the county, particularly affordable rental housing in high opportunity areas. This could include the following tasks: • Continue the city’s goal of not adding to a concentration of affordable, assisted housing in the southeast part of Arvada. • Explore standard incentives for affordable housing development. The city currently has a provision whereby the payment of certain city fees can be delayed from being due at the time of a building permit issuance to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy). Incentives like this should continue. • Encourage developments that incorporate a range of housing choices, particularly affordable rentals. ---PAGE BREAK--- PAGE 32, ARVADA AI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING • Continue efforts to support mixed income housing developments along transit corridors and in high opportunity areas. • Continue efforts to support nonprofit service and housing providers and expand support if federal dollars for housing and community development increase. • To the extent that these activities can be directed to benefit protected classes this should be a priority.4 ACTION ITEM NO. 3—Strengthen fair housing information, educational and training opportunities. Jefferson County and its jurisdictions, including Arvada, should increase the availability, access, and volume of fair housing information and educational opportunities in the county through exploring activities such as those listed below. • If the Metro Denver Fair Housing Center offers education and outreach activities to residents and landlords, support through suggesting venues, publicizing events, and providing other types of non‐financial assistance. • Keep new staff abreast of fair housing resources and information. Arvada’s provision of training to staff on accommodating non‐English speakers, persons who are hearing impaired, and people with other types of disabilities is a good model for disseminating such information and should be continued. • Add visible, easy to understand fair housing information on city websites or links to websites. The information should be prominent and contain links to CCRD and HUD at: • http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite?c=Page&childpagename=DORA‐DCR%2FDORA Layout&cid=1251614735957&pagename=CBONWrapper • http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/fair_housing_equal_opp Examples of local government websites with good fair housing information include: • Douglas County: http://www.douglas.co.us/cdbg/fair‐housing/ • City of Las Cruces: http://www.las‐ cruces.org/Departments/Community%20Development/ Sections/Planning%20and%20Neighborhoods/Housing%20and%20Family%20Service s/Fair%20Housing.aspx ACTION ITEM NO. 4—Encourage efforts to improve residents’ creditworthiness. Arvada should share information about disparities in loan approval rates among borrowers with different races and ethnicities with local offices of financial mortgage lending institutions serving the city. Where possible, the city should encourage Arvada financial institutions to provide educational and counseling classes to desired homebuyers. 4 Protected classes in Colorado include: race, ethnicity, color, national origin, ancestry, disability, marriage status, sex, familial status, sexual orientation, creed, and religion. ---PAGE BREAK--- BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING ARVADA AI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, PAGE 33 The city is currently commencing an effort with local lenders and CHAC to introduce a program to assist income qualified borrowers to purchase a home in the city. Areas with older homes and where there have been a high number of foreclosures would be a focus for these homebuyers, to add local investment and stability to these neighborhoods. If efforts like these are successful, they should continue as part of this action item. FHAP Matrix The following FHAP matrix summarizes Arvada’s action plan to address fair housing impediments, including the program years during which activities will be conducted. ---PAGE BREAK--- PAGE 34, ARVADA AI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BBC RESEARCH & CONSULTING Figure ES‐16. Fair Housing Action Plan Matrix, Goals and Accomplishments, City of Arvada Action Item Lead Agency Activities Goals Accomplishments 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 1. Improve the housing environment for persons with disabilities. City of Arvada As resources are available, support nonprofit organizations that assist persons with disabilities find accessible housing, make accessibility improvements, develop accessible, affordable housing. X X X X Encourage the production of “visitable,” accessible, and affordable housing by private sector developers. X X X X X Maintain a list of resources or links on city websites for people with disabilities. X X X X Through Consolidated Plans, Comprehensive Plans and similar studies, evaluate the needs for persons with disabilities. X X 2. Increase the supply of affordable housing and homeless resources. City of Arvada Continue city’s goal of not concentrating assisted housing. X X X X X Explore standard incentives for affordable housing development. X Encourage developments that incorporate a wide range of housing choices. X X X X X Continue to support mixed income housing developments along transit corridors and in high opportunity areas. X X X X X Continue efforts to support nonprofit service and housing providers. X X X X X 3. Strengthen fair housing information, educational and training opportunities. City of Arvada Participate in regional fair housing training for residents and staff. X X Add visible, easy to understand fair housing information and/or links on city website. X Include fair housing information on city utility bills. X X X 4. Encourage efforts to improve residents’ creditworthiness. City of Arvada Share information about disparities in loan approval rates among borrowers with different races and ethnicity with local offices of financial mortgage lending institutions serving the city. Where possible, encourage Arvada financial institutions to provide educational and counseling classes to desired homebuyers. X Source: BBC Research & Consulting and City of Arvada.