HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT AND HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS FOR

THE CITY OF ELMIRA, NEW YORK

A Professional Report

Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School

of Cornell University

in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of

Master's of Regional Planning

by

Karimeh S. Shamieh

August 2010

© 2010 Karimeh S. Shamieh

ABSTRACT

This professional report consists of a Housing Needs Assessment and Housing

Market Analysis for Elmira, New York's 2010 Consolidated Plan (CP). The federal

Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requires all municipalities

that receive Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment

Fund monies to submit a CP every three to five years. A CP addresses housing and

homelessness needs, housing market trends, community and economic development

initiatives, and other information that explains how a municipality intends to spend its

HUD funds.

Specific guidelines for the information in the housing needs assessment and

housing market analysis were provided by HUD. Quantitative data were obtained

through the US Census, the American Community Survey, the US Postal Service, and

local municipal databases. Qualitative data were collected on housing trends and

needs through thirteen interviews with Elmira locals who do housing-related work.

Particular attention was paid to special needs populations including elderly and

disabled households, people with mental illnesses, and people with HIV/AIDS.

Results indicate that while a great deal of housing is available within the city

for very low cost, there is a shortage of affordable housing that can pass inspection.

This has strained subsidized housing programs for people with mental illnesses and

people with HIV/AIDS, and in the Section 8 tenant-based voucher program. Housing

values in the city are low and property taxes are high compared to Elmira’s suburbs.

The city’s old housing stock and relatively poor real estate market discourage capital

improvements in residential real estate and suppress new building within the city. For

the most part, middle- and upper-income homeowners choose to buy homes in the

suburbs where there are newer houses and lower property taxes. Those who work for

housing programs that assist elderly and disabled households have seen a decline in

household upkeep practices. Tenant upkeep practices continue to be a concern in the

city and may dissuade landlords from maintaining and investing in their properties.

The city suffers from a high residential vacancy rate, with nearly 600 dwelling units

vacant for over one year and 300 dwelling units vacant for over three years as of

September 2009.

Recommendations and a rough implementation proposal address:

• Stabilizing neighborhoods.

• Increasing property values and property tax revenues.

• Improving the overall housing stock through demolition, redevelopment, and

rehabilitation.

• Diversifying the city's housing stock.

• Fostering partnerships with private institutions and other municipalities

• Collecting and maintaining data to help determine areas to target for

rehabilitation, demolition, and redevelopment.

iii

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Rima Shamieh received a Bachelor's of Science degree in Molecular

Environmental Biology with an emphasis in Ecology from the University of

California, Berkeley in 2004. After working as a lab technician for two years in a

fungal genetics lab at Cornell University, she decided to leave science in favor of a

career in city planning. Before attending graduate school she worked for a year in the

Free Community Tax Program at the Alternatives Federal Credit Union in Ithaca, NY

as a full-time AmeriCorps*VISTA volunteer.

iv

I dedicate this work to all the people in upstate New York who could have left but did

not.

v

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

There are many people who have contributed to this project both directly and

indirectly. First, I would like to thank all of my classmates, especially Callie Watkins,

Nurit Shir and Yelena Zeltser, for an amazing two years of learning and exploration. A

big “thank you” goes to my chair, Ann Forsyth, for being a fantastic advisor with a

great sense of humor, a wealth of information, and just the right amount of pushiness.

I also want to thank my committee member, Katia Balassiano, for sharing her hands-

on knowledge of how to navigate the planning world, and also for her thorough edits.

These acknowledgements could not be complete without a “thank you” to George

Frantz, for sharing his amazing upstate planning expertise; Rolf Pendall for working

with me on affordable housing; Dick Booth for his invaluable land use law class and

guidance with property taxes; and Thys Van Court for taking the time to teach me a

thing or two about residential property taxes.

Without my husband, Ari Epstein, I would not be here today. Thank you so

much for all your support.

While there were well over a dozen people in Elmira who contributed to this

report, I particularly want to thank the City of Elmira’s Assessor, Bruce Stanko, for his

patience and great data sets; Art Ambrose, for his valuable insights and hours of labor

spent generating data for me; and Fire Marshal Bill Wheeler, for spending two and a

half hours one Friday afternoon explaining codes enforcement. I would also like to

acknowledge the following individuals who graciously took time out of their busy

schedules to speak with me: James Mirando, Beth Farr, Scott Shaw, Steve Kettelle, Art

Ambrose, Judy Celelli, Kathy Ridosh, Jane Sokolowski, Amy Bell, Gary Sokolowski,

vi

Zsuzsi Kadar, Becky Wheeler, Bill Wheeler, and Gayle Pado. Last but not least, I

could not have completed this project without the extensive support and enthusiasm of

the City of Elmira’s Office of Community Development’s Deputy Director, Jennifer

Miller, and Executive Director, Kelli Ramsdell. It was such a pleasure working with

you both.

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ......................................................................................... iii DEDICATION ............................................................................................................... iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................... v TABLE OF CONTENTS .............................................................................................. vii LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................... ix LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................... x LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................................ xi CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ............................................ 1 

1.1. A Short History of Elmira, New York .................................................................. 3 1.2. The Consolidated Plan ......................................................................................... 4 1.3. Housing Needs Assessment ................................................................................. 5 1.4. Housing Market Analysis .................................................................................... 6 1.5. Methods ............................................................................................................... 7 

CHAPTER 2: PROFESSIONAL REPORT.................................................................. 10 2.1. Housing Market Analysis .................................................................................. 10 

2.1.1. Population Projection ................................................................................. 10 2.1.2. Homeownership Rates ................................................................................. 11 2.1.3. Quality of the Housing Stock ..................................................................... 12 2.1.4. Vacancy Rates ............................................................................................. 29 

2.2 Housing Needs Assessment ................................................................................ 41 2.2.1. Needs of Extra-Low Income Households ................................................... 41 2.2.2. Needs of Low-Income Households ............................................................ 43 2.2.3. Needs of Moderate-Income Households .................................................... 44 2.2.4. Needs of Middle-Income Households ........................................................ 45 2.2.5. Needs of Elderly People ............................................................................. 45 2.2.6. Needs of People with HIV/AIDS and Their Families ................................ 47 2.2.7. Needs of People with Mental Illnesses ....................................................... 49 2.2.8. Needs of People with Disabilities ............................................................... 51 2.2.9. Needs of Single People ............................................................................... 52 2.2.10. Needs of Large Households ...................................................................... 53 2.2.11. Needs of Section 8 Voucher Recipients and Households on the Section

viii

8 Wait List......................................................................................................... 53 2.2.12. Needs of Public Housing Residents ......................................................... 56 2.2.13. Lead Hazards ............................................................................................ 57 

2.3 How the Housing Market and Residents’ Needs May Influence the Use of Funds Made Available for Rental Assistance, Production of New Units, Rehabilitation of Old Units, or Acquisition of Existing Units ............................ 58 2.3.1. Rental Assistance ........................................................................................ 58 2.3.2. Rehabilitation of Old Units ........................................................................ 59 

2.4. Implementation of Policy Recommendations ................................................... 60 CHAPTER 3: CONCLUSIONS AND REFLECTIONS .............................................. 64 

3.1. Conclusions ....................................................................................................... 64 3.2. Reflections ......................................................................................................... 65 

APPENDIX .................................................................................................................. 70 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................. 73 

ix

LIST OF FIGURES  

Figure 1: Historic Populations of Chemung County and Elmira, and a Population Projection of Chemung County ............................................................................... 11 

Figure 2: Elmira Census Tracts .................................................................................... 14 Figure 3: Low, Median, and High Selling Prices for Single-Family Dwellings in

Elmira by Zip Codes, 2005-2009 ............................................................................. 16 Figure 4: Extent of 14901 and 14904 Zip Codes ......................................................... 16 Figure 5: Low, Median, and High Selling Prices for Multi-Family Dwelling Units in

Elmira, 2005-2009 ................................................................................................... 17 Figure 6: Number of Multi-Family Dwellings Sold in Elmira, 2005-2009 ................. 22 Figure 7: Percent Vacant Dwellings in Elmira and Surrounding County ..................... 31 Figure 8: Number of Vacant Dwellings in Elmira Over Time ...................................... 32 Figure 9: Percent Vacant Dwellings per Elmira Census Tract ...................................... 33 Figure 10: Survey of Apartments for Rent in Elmira, March 2 to March 16, 2010 ..... 36 

x

LIST OF TABLES  

Table 1: Time period that housing units were built in the city, per Census Tract. See Figure 2 for map of Census Tracts ........................................................................... 13 

Table 2: Percent Residential Parcels Owned by Absentee Landlords by Parcel Class, as of January, 2010 ....................................................................................................... 20 

Table 3: Residential Vacancies in Each Elmira Census Tract and Time Vacant for September, 2009 Quarter ......................................................................................... 34 

Table 4: Fair Market Rent (FMR) for Chemung County, FY 2010, and the Results of a Survey of Rent in Elmira, March 2010 .................................................................... 36 

Table 5: Elmira Census Tracts That Qualify for an Income Area Benefit and has a Foreclosure and Abandonment Score Above 5 ........................................................ 38 

Table 6: Public and Subsidized Housing Projects in Elmira ........................................ 40 Table 7: Demographic Summary of Households on the Wait List for a Section 8

Voucher .................................................................................................................... 54 Table 8: Number of Dwellings per Housing Type in Elmira ........................................ 54 Table 9: Implementation of Recommendations ............................................................ 61 

xi

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ACS: American Community Survey

AMI: Area median income, as determined by HUD

CAPER: Consolidated Annual Performance Report

CDBG: Community Development Block Grant

CHAS: Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy

CP: Consolidated Plan

CPD: Community Planning and Development

EHA: Elmira Housing Authority

ESG: Emergency Shelter Grant

FMR: Fair Median Rent, as determined by HUD

HOME: HOME Investment Fund

HOPWA: Housing Opportunities for People with AIDS

HUD: Department of Housing and Urban Development

MFD: Multi-Family Dwelling

NWNA: Near Westside Neighborhood Association

PAD: Program on Applied Demographics

SFD: Single-Family Dwelling

STAP: Southern Tier AIDS Program

USPS: US Postal Service

1

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

The City of Elmira's Office of Community Development required a well-

researched housing market analysis and housing needs assessment to incorporate into

its 2010 Consolidated Plan (CP), which is a single grant application for the federal

Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnerships

(HOME) grant. This professional report provides such an analysis.

The components that were required for both the housing market analysis and

the housing needs assessment are outlined by the federal Department of Housing and

Urban Development (HUD). Both required a combination of qualitative and

quantitative data. The housing market analysis primarily consists of:

• A population projection

• A comparison of home ownership rates between the city, the surrounding

county, New York State, and the nation

• An evaluation of vacancy and foreclosure rates

• A summary of the state of the city's public and subsidized housing

• An evaluation of the quality of the city's housing stock

Five factors were identified as affecting the city's housing quality: 1) the age of

the housing stock, 2) high property taxes coupled with low property values, 3) the

ability or willingness of landlords and homeowners to make capital improvements, 4)

homeowner and tenant household upkeep practices, and 5) lack of city funds for

demolition and redevelopment. The housing needs assessment addressed the needs of

residents of different income groups and of residents with special needs such as those

with a mental illness or the elderly.

Thirteen interviews of local housing professionals were conducted and

multiple data sets were analyzed, including data obtained from the City Assessor, US

2

Postal Service, US Census and American Community Survey, and others. In addition,

a small website survey was conducted to determine the range of rents for Elmira rental

units.

Twenty-five policy recommendations and a proposal for their implementation

are included in this report. The recommendations focused on:

• Stabilizing neighborhoods

• Increasing property values and property tax revenues

• Improving the overall housing stock through demolition, redevelopment, and

rehabilitation

• Diversifying the city's housing stock

• Fostering partnerships with private institutions and other municipalities

• Collecting and maintaining data to help determine areas to target for

rehabilitation, demolition, and redevelopment

This report consists of three chapters. Chapter 1 summarizes Elmira’s history,

provides an overview of the components of the Consolidated Plan, and briefly reviews

the nature of a typical housing needs assessment and housing market analysis. It also

details the methods used to complete this project. Chapter 2 contains the professional

report that was submitted to the city and consists of four sections. The first two

sections present the housing market analysis and the housing needs assessment. The

third section discusses how the housing market and residents’ housing needs may

affect the use of Elmira’s HUD funds, as required by the Consolidated Plan

Management Process Tool (CPMP). The fourth section summarizes all the

recommendations provided earlier in the chapter and proposes a rough implementation

strategy. The third chapter concludes the report and includes a few reflections on the

project from an academic point of view.

3

1.1. A Short History of Elmira, New York

Elmira’s history has been chronicled in a publication of the Chemung County

Historical Society entitled Chemung County, 1890-1975 (Byrne 1976). This section

summarizes the city’s history based on this work.

Elmira once held an illustrious position as a major manufacturing center of

cigars, textiles, automobiles, glassware, and many other goods; as a contributor to the

WWII war effort; as the “typewriter capitol of the world (Byrne 1976, 133);” and as a

center of technological innovation. However, like other Rust Belt cities, Elmira's

industry began a steady decline in the 1950’s that has resulted in a faltering job

market, an eroding tax base, and population loss to developing job centers in other

parts of the country.

As the population of Chemung County grew from 73,718 in 1940 to 101,537 in

1970, the population of Elmira declined. In 1940, Elmira's population was 45,106.

The city's population peaked in the US Census of 1950 with a population of 49,715,

but then began to decline, with the 1970 census recording 39,945 residents (Byrne

1976, 140). As of the 2000 US Census there were 30,940 residents, while the 2008

American Community Survey estimates the population to be 29,494 residents, more

than 20,000 people short of its peak population.

Elmira's flood of 1972 was declared by President Nixon to be the worst natural

disaster in America's history (Byrne 1976, 140) and had a devastating effect on the

city. Long-time residents describe a history similar to other cities in the 1960's and

1970's; before the flood, Elmira's downtown shopping district was ailing and the retail

industry in Chemung County was shifting from its main city to the stripmalls and

larger facilities in the suburbs. Because of this broader trend many businesses that

were damaged in the flood chose not to reopen or instead relocated their businesses to

4

the suburbs. In total, the city suffered almost $300 million in damage, including

damage done to five bridges and thousands of buildings (Byrne 1976, 135-137).

Information prepared by the Chemung County Planning Board listed 8,687 housing

units in the county damaged, affecting 23,091 people (approximately 25% of

population). Based on the local history account, 7,193 of the houses damaged by the

flood were located in Elmira, which amounted to 52% of the total city housing stock

and 82% of the housing in the county damaged by the flood (Byrne 1976, 138).

Elmira's urban renewal, the devastating flood of 1972, and changing retail

practices meant that the traditional city form was no longer a viable way to compete

with surrounding suburbs for jobs, housing, and population growth. Like their

counterparts in other ailing center cities of the 1950's, 1960's, and 1970's, Elmira's

policymakers eagerly courted federal urban renewal money from the Department of

Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to replace blighted neighborhoods (Byrne

1976, 125).

1.2. The Consolidated Plan

The purpose of the Consolidated Plan, created in 1990 by an act of Congress, is

to encourage each municipality to develop a unified vision for community

development actions (HUD, no date, 1). Before the Consolidated Plan was created,

separate grant applications were required for each HUD funding source, such as the

Community Development Block Grant. Developing a Consolidated Plan is intended

to be a collaborative process between a lead agency and a consortium of members,

typically for-profit and non-profit entities within the community that are involved in

affordable housing, homelessness, economic development, and community

development activities (HUD, no date, 1). It also meets the submission requirements

5

for the CDBG, the HOME grant, Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS

(HOPWA), and Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG).

The Strategic Plan portion of the CP sets forth program goals, specific

objectives, annual goals, and benchmarks for measuring progress (HUD, no date, 1).

All four formula grant programs set forth three basic goals from which the

Consolidated Plan and the local jurisdictions are judged. Those three goals are: 1)

decent housing, 2) a suitable living environment, and 3) expanded economic

opportunities (HUD, no date, 1-2).

A Consolidated Plan consists of (HUD, no date, 5-12):

• A citizen participation plan

• A housing and homelessness needs assessment

• A housing market analysis

• A strategic plan that brings needs, priorities, objectives, and strategies

together into a coherent plan.

Local jurisdictions submit a Consolidated Plan every three to five years, and

must submit an annual Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report

(CAPER). The CAPER describes the jurisdiction's annual efforts towards

implementing the goals and objectives of the Consolidated Plan. Elmira is an

entitlement community, which means that it does not compete with other

municipalities for HUD funds but is instead guaranteed a share of funding every year.

However, Elmira is still accountable to HUD for how its funding is spent.

1.3. Housing Needs Assessment

The term housing needs assessment sometimes includes a housing market

analysis, but at other times it is defined more narrowly. Housing needs are

6

characterized by the number and type of housing units that are required to

accommodate a population, at a given quality standard (Myers et al., 2002, 567-596).

Due to population and lifestyle changes, housing needs in a given location change

over time. Municipal, county, and state governments carry out both housing needs

assessments and housing market analyses in an attempt to anticipate future housing

trends. While an analysis of housing needs could include sophisticated modeling of

population trends and changes in household formation over time (Myers et al., 2002,

567-596; Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing 2006), the assessment for the

purposes of a Consolidated Plan submission is much simpler, and explicitly delineated

by HUD (see section 1.5).

1.4. Housing Market Analysis

A housing market can be defined as the dynamic between the supply and

demand of residential real estate within a given geographic area. The geographic area

that a housing market encompasses may be difficult to define because supply and

demand can change from neighborhood to neighborhood as well as from municipality

to municipality. These variations complicate housing market analyses. However a

housing market’s geography is delineated, most housing market analyses aim to

understand consumer demand and market supply for that specific market. These

analyses are further complicated by imperfect access to data such as income and

qualitative factors such as a beautiful view or a house’s proximity to a good school.

Sophisticated statistical models have been developed to evaluate housing

markets. For example, the hedonic model is used to study the demand of housing

attributes and environmental amenities by considering the heterogeneity of housing

quality and characteristics (Sheppard 1999, 1596-1598). While statistical models may

7

be useful in evaluating markets, such an analysis is beyond the scope of this report.

Instead, HUD requires a simpler analysis that is outlined in detail in the CPMP (see

section 1.5).

1.5. Methods

This project’s specific research questions – a housing market analysis and a

housing needs assessment for the city— are broken down into their specific

components in the CPMP’s 3-5 Year Strategic Plan document. This tool is a set of

modifiable .doc and .xls computer files developed by HUD to streamline the

consolidated planning process for municipalities and increase the accessibility and

legibility of the information for the general public. Essentially, HUD designed the

CPMP tool as a series of questions that the municipalities must answer. In this way,

the CPMP ensures that all pertinent information is provided. The CPMP breaks down

the housing market analysis and housing needs assessment portions as follows (HUD

no date, 26-28):

Housing Market Analysis 1. Based on information available to the jurisdiction, describe the

significant characteristics of the housing market in terms of supply, demand, condition, and the cost of housing; the housing stock available to serve persons with disabilities; and to serve persons with HIV/AIDS and their families.

2. Describe the number and targeting (income level and type of household served) of units currently assisted by local, state, or federally funded programs, and an assessment of whether any such units are expected to be lost from the assisted housing inventory for any reason, (i.e. expiration of Section 8 contracts).

3. Indicate how the characteristics of the housing market will influence the use of funds made available for rental assistance, production of new units, rehabilitation of old units, or acquisition of existing units. Please note, the goal of affordable housing is not met by beds in nursing homes.

8

Housing Needs 1. Describe the estimated housing needs projected for the next five

year period for the following categories of persons: extremely low-income, low-income, moderate-income, and middle-income families, renters and owners, elderly persons, persons with disabilities, including persons with HIV/AIDS and their families, single persons, large families, public housing residents, families on the public housing and section 8 tenant- based waiting list, and discuss specific housing problems, including: cost-burden, severe cost- burden, substandard housing, and overcrowding (especially large families).

2. To the extent that any racial or ethnic group has a disproportionately greater need for any income category in comparison to the needs of that category as a whole, the jurisdiction must complete an assessment of that specific need. For this purpose, disproportionately greater need exists when the percentage of persons in a category of need who are members of a particular racial or ethnic group is at least ten percentage points higher than the percentage of persons in the category as a whole.

The data required for the analysis above were organized into the following

categories:

1. Data that could be obtained easily from HUD’s Comprehensive Housing

Affordability Strategy (CHAS) 2009 report, the US Census, the American

Community Survey (ACS), the US Postal Service (USPS), or by contacting

local professionals with access to local data, such as the City Assessor and the

City Codes Office.

2. Qualitative data that could only be obtained by communicating directly with

people that work in housing-related fields within the city, whom will be

referred to throughout this report as “housing professionals.”

Future housing trends and insight about those trends in the quantitative data were

determined by interviewing local housing professionals from a variety of

organizations, including the Elmira Housing Authority (EHA), the Near Westside

Neighborhood Association (NWNA), the Chemung County Planning Department, the

9

Tri-County Housing Council, Catholic Charities, the city’s Home Repair Program, the

City Codes Office, and the Southern Tier AIDS Program (STAP). I also interviewed

two realtors who work in the city, one of which is also a real estate investor with

residential properties in Elmira.

As a comparison to HUD’s Fair Market Rent calculation, a small survey was

conducted of two websites that provide apartment listings in Elmira:

www.craigslist.org and www.apartments.com. These two sites were chosen after

consulting with people who work with housing in the city on which sites are most

commonly used for searching for apartments. The survey was conducted over a two

week period in March, 2010. The number of bedrooms and bathrooms, the monthly

rent posted, and whether utilities were included in the rent price were recorded and

basic descriptive statistics were carried out to determine trends.

10

CHAPTER 2

PROFESSIONAL REPORT

Chapter 2 presents the professional report that was produced for Elmira’s

Office of Community Development and it contains four sections. The first two

sections present the Housing Market Analysis and the Housing Needs Assessment.

The third section discusses how the housing market and residents’ housing needs may

affect the use of Elmira’s HUD funds, as required by the Consolidated Plan

Management Process Tool (CPMP). The fourth section summarizes all the

recommendations provided earlier in the chapter and proposes a rough implementation

strategy.

2.1. Housing Market Analysis

2.1.1. Population Projection

Figure 1 indicates the population changes over time in Elmira and Chemung

County, and also includes a population projection for the county between the last

census in 2000 and the year 2035. Elmira’s population decline began around 1950 and

continues to this day. By around 1970, Chemung County’s population also began to

decrease. Cornell University’s Program in Applied Demographics (PAD) models

population projections for each county in New York State. PAD predicts that

Chemung County’s population will continue to decline until at least 2035, when PAD

predicts it will have a population of 71,237 (Cornell University College of Human

Ecology, Program on Applied Demographics) While there are no population

projections available to predict Elmira’s future population changes, trends in the

national and regional economies suggest that Elmira will also continue to see a

11

decrease in population. It is important to keep this trend in mind when considering

how to address Elmira’s housing problems, as it may affect future policies to enhance

quality of life in the city.

Figure 1: Historic Populations of Chemung County and Elmira, and a Population Projection of Chemung County Source: Historical data from the Chemung County Data Book. Chemung County population projection from the Program in Applied Demographics (PAD) at Cornell University.

2.1.2. Homeownership Rates

The national homeownership rate is approximately 68% (US Census, 2000).

Elmira's homeownership rate is much lower than the national rate: 48% (US Census,

2000). In contrast, at 79% the surrounding county's ownership rate is much higher

than the national rate and 30 percentage points higher than homeownership in Elmira

(US Census, 2000).

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

Popu

lation

 Cou

nt

Chemung Projection

Chemung

Elmira

12

2.1.3. Quality of the Housing Stock

The quality of Elmira’s housing stock is affected by complex and

interconnected factors. Through interviews and data analysis, five main factors were

identified that affect housing quality in Elmira. These factors are listed below,

followed by more thorough explanations for each factor.

1. The age of the housing stock

• Most housing was built before 1940.

2. High property taxes coupled with low property values

• Elmira’s population decline means that an increasingly smaller number

of property owners must support the city infrastructure.

• Newer suburban housing and the perception that the suburbs provide

better public services exacerbates the city’s low property values.

3. The ability or willingness of landlords and homeowners to make

capital improvements

• Elmira has suffered from real estate speculation by some landlords.

• Many homeowners live on a fixed income, preventing them from

making capital improvements on their homes.

• Homeowner and tenant household upkeep practicesSome

homeowners are unable to adequately care for their homes because of

age, illness, or disability.

• Landlords do not want to invest in properties when they know they are

going to be faced with thousands of dollars of damages when the tenant

moves out.

• The city does not prosecute tenants who violate codes.

13

4. Lack of city funds for demolition and redevelopment

• Chronically vacant or dilapidated residential parcels create an

environment that depresses property values and ties up land that may be

put to productive use.

1. The age of the housing stock

Most housing was built before 1940

Elmira’s housing is old, with 62% of it built before 1940. As Table 1 and

Figure 2 indicate, the vast majority of the housing in all Census Tracts except for Tract

3 and Tract 8 was built prior to 1960, and relatively few housing units were developed

after 1980 (US Census, 2000).

Simply by virtue of its age, Elmira's housing stock requires more maintenance,

repairs, and improvements than new housing. Because of the decline in the city's

population and industry, the funds available to homeowners and landlords has

diminished, resulting in delayed maintenance and repairs that over many decades has

contributed to the decline in the quality of the housing stock.

Table 1: Time period that housing units were built in the city, per Census Tract. See Figure 2 for map of Census Tracts.

Total units

% Built between 1980 and March 2000

% Built 1959 or earlier

% Built 1939 or earlier

Tract 1 1,266 2% 86% 63% Tract 2 1,342 3% 89% 53% Tract 3 3 100% 0% 0% Tract 4 1,035 2% 90% 54% Tract 5 1,538 3% 89% 71% Tract 6 1,712 1% 90% 71% Tract 7 370 0% 99% 82% Tract 8 1,023 13% 41% 30% Tract 9 1,561 2% 90% 63% Tract 10 1,516 3% 73% 56% Tract 11 1,529 2% 95% 73%

Source: 2000 Census

14

Figure 2: Elmira Census Tracts Source: CUGIR, March 3, 2010

2. High property taxes coupled with low property values

Elmira’s population decline means that an increasingly smaller number of property

owners must support the city infrastructure.

Municipal property taxes in Elmira are much higher than in its suburbs. For

example, Elmira’s 2009 base tax rate was $18.02 per $1,000 assessed value (City

of Elmira Department of Finance) while the Village of Horseheads, a suburb of

Elmira, had a base tax rate of $4.75 per $1,000 assessed value for the 2008-2009

fiscal year (Village Clerk- Treasurer). A comparison of two single family homes

with similar market values, one in Elmira and one in Horseheads, indicated that a

total of county, school and municipal taxes in Elmira is approximately 150% of

Horsehead’s total tax rate (Chemung County Tax Search Program). Multiple

housing professionals that were interviewed, including a realtor and two housing

program managers, cited this as one reason why the housing market in Elmira is

not as robust as it is in the surrounding suburbs. Unfortunately, the low property

15

values, which is another reason that Elmira’s real estate market struggles relative to

its suburbs, has a positive feedback effect on high property taxes.

Newer suburban housing and the perception that the suburbs provide better public

services exacerbates the city’s low property values.

Elmira’s housing prices have sunk very low. Figure 3 shows the low, median,

and high selling prices for single family dwellings (SFD) in Elmira, by zip code.

The figure indicates that the mean selling price from 2005 to 2009 for SFD is very

low, between $47,500 and $56,160. Figure 4 indicates the extent of the 14901 and

14904 zip codes. Figure 5 shows the low, median, and high selling prices for

Multiple Family Dwellings (MFD). The mean selling price from 2005-2009 for

MFD is also very low, between $35,900 and $43,000. It is common for both SFD

and MFD properties to sell for under $10,000.

A realtor that I spoke with perceived that the city’s high property taxes and the

older housing that lacks modern amenities and modern energy efficiency deter

middle- and upper-income homebuyers from purchasing their homes in Elmira.

This decrease in demand for Elmira housing leads to lower property values and

also decreases the city’s population, as buyers who can afford a house in the

suburbs move out of the city. A decreasing population forces the city to increase

property taxes on the property owners who remain, creating a positive feedback.

16

Figure 3: Low, Median, and High Selling Prices for Single-Family Dwellings in Elmira by Zip Codes, 2005-2009 Source: Navica MLS, www.navicamls.net, March 2, 2010

Figure 4: Extent of 14901 and 14904 Zip Codes Source: Census 2000 and TIGER

$0

$50,000

$100,000

$150,000

$200,000

$250,000

$300,000

$350,000

$400,000

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Price ($)

high selling price 14901

high selling price 14904

median selling price 14901

median selling price 14904

low selling price 14901

low selling price 14904

17

Figure 5: Low, Median, and High Selling Prices for Multi-Family Dwelling Units in Elmira, 2005-2009 Source: Navica MLS, www.navicamls.net, March 2, 2010

There are other factors drawing people out of Elmira besides lower taxes.

Realtors also perceive that the relatively new housing in the suburbs attracts more

buyers with modern amenities and better energy efficiency. According to the City

Assessor’s records, there were 1,178 building starts in the county from 1998 to

2008, but only 22 building starts in the city in the same period. Also, a Chemung

County planner pointed out that as of December 2009 another development of single

family homes had been approved in an Elmira suburb. Housing prices in most Elmira

neighborhoods do not encourage new building because developers would have to sell

the houses at a loss. However, there are some neighborhoods in the city with robust

housing markets.

Housing professionals have expressed concern regarding the lack of available

space for building new housing. Because there is no land available to build a new

neighborhood, it would be most practical to carry out in-fill development in targeted

neighborhoods by selectively demolishing dilapidated housing and rebuilding new

$0

$50,000

$100,000

$150,000

$200,000

$250,000

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Price ($)

high selling price

median selling price

Low selling price

18

housing. While there are vacant residential lots dispersed throughout Elmira, previous

city efforts to bundle parcels for redevelopment was complicated by title issues.

However, there are neighborhoods with low property values and high vacancy rates

that may be strategically rebuilt to put the land to more productive use. In fact, with

the low property values and high vacancies in some Census Tracts, it may be possible

to survey the housing stock and target specific streets, blocks, and parcels for

redevelopment. While these new houses would be too expensive for low- or

moderate-income residents to purchase, new in-fill housing development may

indirectly help affordable housing by boosting neighborhood property values, thus

providing an incentive for landlords to invest in their properties. It would also provide

incentives for homeowners to invest in their properties because of appreciation and

higher demand for Elmira housing, thereby indirectly benefiting low- and moderate-

income residents.

Besides the less desirable housing stock and higher taxes found in Elmira,

another reason cited by a realtor, an agency director, and a program manager that

middle- and upper-income households often chose to settle outside of Elmira is the

perception of inadequate services within the city. Although the people that I

interviewed were reluctant to reveal the details of the problems, both crime in the city

and problems with the city’s schools were cited as possible deterrents to attracting

homeowners.

19

Recommendations: B2: Create developer incentives to build new middle- and upper-income

housing in the city, strategically targeting stable areas near neighborhoods with the highest real estate prices.

C7: Foster the development of neighborhood groups and block associations that are interested in neighborhood issues such as neighborhood safety, vacant buildings, empty lots, street upkeep, and sense of community.

D1: Consult with neighborhood groups, block associations, etc. to determine the best use of vacant lots throughout the city, and particularly in the less stable neighborhoods such as those in census tracts 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10. Just a few possible uses are: community gardens, pocket parks, side yards to adjacent homes, new housing, and corner stores.

E1: Intensify funding for energy efficiency upgrades for all housing types.

3. The ability or willingness of landlords and homeowners to make capital

improvements

Elmira has suffered from real estate speculation by some landlords.

The hesitation on the part of some landlords to invest in their properties

appears to have two origins. First, some landlords have a “grab and run” mentality

with their investments. Second, landlords may not have the capital to invest in

their buildings, or may be unable to make reasonable returns on their investment

if they do.

Some Elmira landlords have a “grab and run” mentality, where the owner

collects as much rent as possible while investing minimally in the property, and then

simply walks away when the property can no longer turn a profit. Several people

interviewed described this behavior including a realtor, a fire marshal, and program

managers. This behavior is most often attributed to Elmira’s absentee landlords and is

often connected to the county real estate auction and websites such as

www.craigslist.org.

20

According to the City Assessor’s data, there are nearly 8,000 residential parcels

in Elmira, containing approximately 12,300 dwelling units. The large majority of

these parcels, 94%, belong to owners who live within Chemung County or an adjacent

county. The remaining parcels are owned by absentee landlords (defined as owners

that live beyond Chemung County's immediate neighboring counties, Table 2), but

these landlords do not own equal percentages of each housing type. Although

absentee landlords own only 6% of the total residential parcels in the city, they

own a disproportionately large percentage (29%) of the parcels with four or more

dwelling units. Also, absentee landlords own 21% of the parcels with three-

family dwelling structures in the city and 17% of the converted houses in the city

(a converted house is defined as a single-family dwelling that has been converted into

a combination of residential and commercial use or into a multi-family dwelling). In

contrast, according to the City Assessor’s records, only 3% of the single-family

residential parcels are owned by people living outside the region.

Table 2: Percent Residential Parcels Owned by Absentee Landlords by Parcel Class, as of January, 2010

Parcel Class

Number Parcels Owned by Absentee Landlords

% Parcels Owned by Absentee Landlords

Total # Parcels

Single Family Dwelling 202 3% 5,885 Two Family Dwelling 159 11% 1,447 Three Family Dwelling 33 21% 158 Multi Residential, two or more buildings 6* 15% 39 Four or More Units 83 29% 286 Converted Residence; commercial and residential or just residential 15 17% 89 Total 505 6% 7,911

Source: City of Elmira Assessor’s Office *This number may be attributed to the fact that the larger apartment complexes, which fall within this parcel class, are usually run by corporations based outside the region.

21

According to a local real estate professional, there was an increase in buyers

from outside the region purchasing income properties in the past five years, especially

in 2006 and 2007 (Figure 6). This real estate professional and also a program manager

went on to elaborate that at the time, real estate was seen as a safe investment and that

it was very easy to purchase a mortgage. Many speculators bought multiple properties

in Elmira expecting the property values to appreciate over time. Several housing

professionals, including a realtor, the fire marshal, and program managers who have

dealt with absentee landlords, recounted anecdotes of how absentee landlords

purchased properties without seeing them, either through the county auction or

through websites such as www.craigslist.org or www.eBay.com. It is the general view

of housing professionals that some of these investors failed to consider the quality of

the housing or the soundness of their investments before purchasing. According to a

realtor, this assertion is backed up by the current market trends, which indicate that

many of these landlords are facing foreclosure or putting their properties back on the

market, hoping to sell quickly, because the properties do not generate enough rental

income to meet their operating expenses. In fact, the same realtor, who has worked in

the city for decades, remarked that there were more multi-family buildings on the

market as of December 2009 than he had ever seen before. As of February 27, 2010,

there were 53 MFD properties on the market, more than half of the total number

sold in 2007 (Navica Multiple Listing Service).

22

Figure 6: Number of Multi-Family Dwellings Sold in Elmira, 2005-2009 Source: Navica MLS, www.navicamls.net, March 2, 2010

Many multi-family dwellings are in poor condition and require significant

investments such as energy efficiency improvements. In fact, high energy costs have

led some landlords to lapse on bill payments, which often results in the electric

company shutting off the electricity and prompts the Codes Office to post these

dwellings “Unfit for Human Habitation.” This process is very disruptive for tenants

because once the dwelling is posted, residents are required to evacuate immediately.

According to the fire marshal interviewed, it is not uncommon for landlords to

collect rent from their occupied units without paying property taxes. The county waits

three years once an owner has stopped paying property taxes before it forecloses on

the property. During this time, owners typically make minimal investments in the

property and sometimes cease paying utility bills. Once a property is foreclosed on, it

becomes the property of the county and the residents must vacant immediately due to

liability concerns. The county then pays the city the back taxes owed on the property

and eventually sells it at the county auction. Unfortunately, the county auction is only

held once every two years, and a dwelling is not always sold when it comes up for

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Total N

umbe

r of P

rope

rties Sold

Number of MFD Sold

23

auction, meaning that it may be held vacant for several years. Meanwhile, the

property is not maintained and remains vacant, and any outstanding code violations

are the responsibility of the city. As of March 2010, there were 56 properties in

Elmira held for sale at county auction (www.nysauctionsbids.com, accessed March 15,

2010). Prior to this system, the city demolished dilapidated residential housing that

was foreclosed on because of back taxes. Now, houses that might have been

demolished are instead being sold for very low prices to absentee landlords and other

investors who do not invest in them, and many are held vacant for several years.

Although it is impossible at this time to say definitively whether the multi-

family dwellings owned by absentee landlords are in worse physical condition than

those owned by locals, this is the widely held belief within the city. Most

professionals who work with housing in Elmira cite absentee landlords as a major

problem and attribute the poor condition of rental housing in part to absentee landlords

who speculate on Elmira real estate and who do not invest in their properties.

However, without a windshield survey and additional analyses these trends are

impossible to quantify. Regardless of who owns the rental housing in the city, it is

clear that some landlords must do more to maintain their properties.

Another possible reason for limited landlord capital investments may be

that landlords simply lack the capital to invest in their buildings, or may be

unable to make reasonable returns on their investment if they do. While property

values can be very low, the work that Elmira’s dilapidated MFD housing requires in

order to bring it up to code can be very high, often several times the value of the

property. This is especially an issue in Elmira because there is very little, if any,

appreciation of MFD property values.

24

Many homeowners live on a fixed income, preventing them from making capital

improvements to their homes.

Homeowners also face the challenge of maintaining their homes. Capital

improvements can be especially challenging for homeowners who are elderly or

disabled because they often live on fixed incomes. According to the 2000 Census,

33% of all homeowners in the city are 65 years old or older. While there is no data

indicating the number of disabled non-elderly homeowners, it is possible that this

population is significant, considering that according to the 2000 Census, 26% of all

city residents over five years of age has a disability, compared to 19% of the

surrounding Chemung County population and 21% of the total New York State

population. The city’s Home Repair Program works closely with elderly and disabled

homeowners to help with home repairs and expressed that there is a great need in

these populations for financial assistance with home repairs.

25

Recommendations: A3: Conduct an assessment of the physical condition of the city’s housing

using a windshield survey or other methods. A5: Evaluate the city’s relationship with the county real estate auction. Is

this system contributing to slum housing, vacancies, and depressed real estate values in the city?

A6: Consider re-establishing the city’s rental rehabilitation assistance program for owners of low- and moderate-income rental properties.

B1: Create incentives for developers to rehabilitate housing for middle- and upper-income renters in the city, in the most stable neighborhoods throughout the city as well as loft apartments downtown.

B2: Create developer incentives to build new middle- and upper-income housing in the city, strategically targeting stable areas near neighborhoods with the highest real estate prices.

C8: Create public/private partnerships with major employers within the city to incentivize middle- and upper-income employees to purchase homes within the city. Possible incentives are: a grant for a down payment, a grant for home improvements, or tax incentives. Possible partners include: Elmira College, hospitals located within the city, and manufacturers in the area.

E2: Increase funds for rental rehabilitation through the existing program (NWNA).

E6: Continue funding owner-occupied housing rehabilitation through NWNA and city programs.

4. Homeowner and tenant household upkeep practices

Some homeowners are unable to adequately care for their homes because of age,

illness, or disability

Elderly, ill, or disabled homeowners may find home maintenance and upkeep

to be particularly challenging due to fixed incomes. Over the past 5 to 7 years, the

city's Home Repair Program, which works closely with extra-low to moderate- income

homeowners who need home repairs, has seen an increase in hoarding behavior by

elderly homeowners. These homeowners typically live alone and tend to accumulate

large quantities of objects, debris, food, or pets. Often this behavior creates fire

26

hazards or endangers the health and well-being of the residents. The consequences of

these behaviors also compromise the value and quality of the owner's housing,

and jeopardize the investment that the city and homeowner may put into the

structure.

Besides home upkeep, elderly, ill, or disabled landlords also face the challenge

of carrying out necessary repairs and maintenance on their properties due to limited

fixed incomes.

Landlords do not want to invest in properties when they know they are going to be

faced with thousands of dollars of damages when the tenant moves out.

The problem of poor rental housing stock in the city is caused partially by both

landlord and tenant behaviors. During interviews, at least three housing professionals

have said something similar to, “You’d be surprised what a tenant can do to an

apartment in just a few months.” Landlords face the challenge of finding responsible

tenants who will respect their property. It can also be difficult and expensive to evict

tenants who are not maintaining their housing or paying their rent.

Some tenants create disincentives for landlords, whether local or absentee,

to invest in their properties through the excessive wear and tear those tenants exert on

their rental units. The City Codes Office, which addresses tenant complaints regarding

codes violations, sees poor tenant household upkeep as a widespread and chronic

problem in the city that significantly impacts landlord investment in residential

dwellings. Landlords perceive no benefit from investing money in a unit if the

tenant is expected to cause so much damage that the initial investment is lost.

27

The city does not prosecute tenants that violate codes

From 1995 to 1997 the City’s Codes Office operated the Appearance Ticket

Program, which issued appearance tickets to tenants who violated code ordinances by

damaging their housing units or failing to adequately maintain their housing. For this

program, the Codes Office worked with the District Attorney’s office to enforce codes.

Tenants were sometimes fined or ordered by the court to attend the Home Upkeep

Program through the Cornell Cooperative Extension. The Home Upkeep Program

taught basic home upkeep and maintenance skills, awarding those who finished with a

certificate of completion required by the court. Tenants were also threatened with jail

time if they did not comply with codes. During the brief time the Appearance Ticket

Program was in place, the Codes Office saw improvements in the condition of rental

housing and in tenant home upkeep practices. Unfortunately, the Appearance Ticket

Program operated for only two years before political conflicts interfered, leading to its

cancelation. Also, the Home Upkeep Program lost its funding and was canceled.

While the Codes Office saw an improvement in tenant home upkeep while the

Appearance Ticket Program was in effect, those improvements were not sustained

once the program was canceled.

Recommendations: C4: Prosecute tenants that violate codes. C5: Re-establish the Home Upkeep Program for homeowners and

tenants. C6: Create a city/non-profit or city/county partnership to address the

home upkeep needs of elderly and disabled residents. Possible partners are the county’s Office for the Aging or a non-profit that works with people with disabilities.

28

5. Lack of city funds for demolition and redevelopment

Chronically vacant or dilapidated residential parcels create blight that depresses

property values and ties up land that may be put to productive use

Because of limited funds, the city has not been able to systematically assess the

quality of its housing stock, or demolish dilapidated or vacant housing. For example,

while in the past the Codes Office posted “Raze or Repair” properties to either push

owners to make structural repairs on their properties or have the building demolished,

the city has not demolished a house in several years, and the demolition process is at a

stand-still because there is no funding available. Also due to limited funds, the city is

unable to maintain a database that indicates the general physical condition of each

residential property. These missing data encumber a systematic and strategic city-

wide approach to addressing housing quality.

In 1995 the Codes Office had an annual demolition budget of $250,000. Since

then, the Codes Office demolished 130 residential buildings. Unfortunately, in the

past few years there has been no money allocated for demolitions and the Codes

Office has stopped doing any paperwork for “Raze and Repair” properties. As of

March 2010, the Codes Office had four residential buildings waiting to be demolished

and three other buildings that needed their paperwork processed. While there are

other houses in the city that should be demolished, the exact number is not known.

Because of the high cost of codes enforcement and property assessment, the

quality of the housing stock has not been quantified. However, from talking with

several city officials, real estate brokers, and housing non-profits, it is clear that there

are significant numbers of residential dwellings in the city that are in various stages of

disrepair. The city’s Home Repair Program and the NWNA have successful

rehabilitation programs, but more can be done.

29

While the city and non-profits have been actively assisting in housing

rehabilitation, there has been very little redevelopment in the city in the past twenty

years. As mentioned previously in this report, there is a demand for new housing

within the county but very little of this demand is being met in Elmira.

Recommendations: A2: Conduct a spatial analysis of the city to determine areas to target

for rental rehabilitation, homeowner rehabilitation, demolitions, and redevelopment of new housing.

A3: Collect data on the physical quality of the city’s housing for use in developing a city-wide systematic and strategic housing plan.

A4: Improve accuracy of total assessed value database to help with determining where to concentrate rehabilitation, demolition, and redevelopment efforts.

B2: Create developer incentives to build new middle- and upper-income housing in the city, strategically targeting stable areas near neighborhoods with the highest real estate prices.

D1: Consult with neighborhood groups, block associations, etc. to determine the best use of vacant lots throughout the city, and particularly in the less stable neighborhoods such as those in census tracts 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10. Just a few possible uses are: community gardens, pocket parks, side yards to adjacent homes, new housing, and corner stores.

E3: Resume demolition of houses that are unsafe, causing blight and/or financially infeasible to rehabilitate. Target buildings in areas that can be used to redevelop middle- and upper- income housing.

2.1.4. Vacancy Rates

HUD has entered into an agreement with the US Postal Service to receive

aggregated quarterly data at the Census Tract level on addresses with a “vacant” status

in the previous quarter. Beginning in November of 2005, USPS also tracks how long

addresses have been vacant, aggregating the data into 6 time categories, specifying

vacancies for: 3 months or less, 3 to 6 months, 6 to 12 months, 12 to 24 months, 24 to

30

36 months, or more than 36 months. Because USPS did not begin collecting these

time category data until November, 2005, the data were not complete until the

December, 2008 quarter. Before this time, the data in the time cohorts were

misleading because they indicated many more houses in some categories while leaving

other categories empty. For this reason, this report only provides residential data from

the December, 2008 quarter to the most recent quarter, September 2009.

Compared to the areas in Chemung County outside the city, Elmira has a much

higher vacancy rate for residential addresses (Fig 7); between 7% and 9% for the

city compared to between 1% and 2% for the surrounding county. Some city

neighborhoods suffer from residential vacancy rates at nearly 20%, while in the

September, 2009 quarter 300 residential units in the city were vacant for over three

years and nearly 600 housing units were vacant for more than one year. Figure 7

does show that Elmira’s vacancy rate has experienced a small net decline from 7.91%

in the last quarter of 2007 (this quarter was closed late, in February, 2008 rather than

December, 2007) to 7.52% in the September, 2009 quarter.

31

Figure 7: Percent Vacant Dwellings in Elmira and Surrounding County Source: HUD, http://www.huduser.org/portal/datasets/usps.html, February 23, 2010.

Figure 8 shows the total number of vacant residential addresses by time category for

the city for the quarters December, 2008 to September, 2009. It shows a surge of new

vacancies occurring in the last quarter of 2008 and the first half of 2009, with a

notable drop in new vacancies in the third quarter of 2009 (less than 3 mo., bottom

category). Also, when comparing the first quarter, December, 2008, with the last

quarter, September, 2009, the 6 to 12 mo. and 12 to 24 mo. categories gain vacancies

while the less than 3 mo. and 3 to 6 mo. categories shrink, suggesting that the decline

in the vacancy rate may be attributed to a drop in the rate of new vacancies rather than

to the occupation of longer-term vacant housing. Over the same time period the

number of vacant units in the two oldest categories, 24 to 36 mo. and more than 36

mo. experience slight changes but it is too early to determine whether the surge of

vacancies created in the December, 2008 quarter will become part of the long-term

vacant housing stock.

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

8%

9%

Percen

t Vacant D

wellings (vacant/total hou

sing)

total Elmira

total surrounding county

32

Figure 8: Number of Vacant Dwellings in Elmira Over Time Source: HUD, http://www.huduser.org/portal/datasets/usps.html, February 23, 2010.

Figure 9 indicates the percentage of the total residential dwellings that were

recorded vacant for each census tract over time (see Figure 2 for map of Elmira census

tracts). These data indicate consistently high vacancy rates in Census Tracts 6 and 7

with the remaining tracts exhibiting vacancy rates ranging from a little over 10% to

about 2%. Census Tract 6 includes most of the historic Near West Side neighborhood,

while Census Tract 7 encompasses a large part of Elmira’s downtown commercial

area. Census Tract 4 has the lowest vacancy rate, followed by Census Tracts 2 and 11.

This indicates that some Elmira Census Tracts have persistently high vacancies while

others have persistently low vacancies (Census Tract 3 was omitted from this analysis

because of its small number of residences; it contains only three dwellings).

153 178123

32

112 108127

92

164 145144

178

145 159164

206

98 9195

90

290 300298

300

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

Dec 2008 Mar 2009 Jun 2009 Sep 2009

vacant 36 or more mos.

vacant 24 to 36 mos.

vacant 12 to 24 mos.

vacant 6 to 12 mos.

vacant 3 to 6 mos.

vacant 3 mos. or less

33

Figure 9: Percent Vacant Dwellings per Elmira Census Tract Source: HUD, http://www.huduser.org/portal/datasets/usps.html, February 23, 2010.

In addition to the variation between census tracts in the percentage of housing

that is vacant, there is also variation between census tracts in how long vacant housing

has been unoccupied. Table 3 shows the variation in vacancies among census tracts

within the city, and also indicates the number of dwellings in each time category for

the September, 2009 quarter (see Figure 2 for map of Elmira census tracts). Census

Tract 6 has the most vacant housing (199 units) as well as the largest number of

housing units that were vacant for over 36 months (77 units, or 39% of its vacant

housing). Census Tract 3, with only three dwelling units, held the least housing as

well as the smallest number of vacant dwellings. Census Tract 10 also has a high

proportion of its vacant housing that has been vacant for over three years (62 units, or

48% of its vacant housing). Census Tract 7, which has the highest percentage of

vacant housing in the city (nearly 20% in September, 2009, Figure 9), has a relatively

low absolute number of vacant dwellings (56 vacancies, out of 288 dwellings),

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Percen

t Vacant D

wellings (vacant/total hou

sing)

Census Tract 1

Census Tract 2

Census Tract 4

Census Tract 5

Census Tract 6

Census Tract 7

Census Tract 8

Census Tract 9

Census Tract 10

Census Tract 11

total Elmira

total surrounding county

34

implying that although it has less housing than other Census Tracts, its housing stock

is less desirable or in worse condition than the housing in other tracts.

Table 3: Residential Vacancies in Each Elmira Census Tract and Time Vacant for September 2009 Quarter

< 3 mos

3 to 6 mos.

6 to 12 mos.

12 to 24 mos.

24 to 36 mos.

> 36 mos.

Total Vacant

Total Dwellings

Census Tract 1 0 10 32 35 6 38 121 1,211

Census Tract 2 4 7 12 9 6 12 50 1,284

Census Tract 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 3

Census Tract 4 2 3 9 3 1 10 28 1,068

Census Tract 5 2 3 22 23 13 17 80 1,364

Census Tract 6 6 14 20 50 32 77 199 1,420

Census Tract 7 4 16 1 12 4 19 56 288

Census Tract 8 0 1 4 24 1 16 46 864

Census Tract 9 6 18 43 16 11 29 123 1,554

Census Tract 10 4 15 18 22 9 62 130 1,389

Census Tract 11 4 5 17 11 7 20 64 1,464

Total 32 92 178 206 90 300 898 11,939 Source: HUD, http://www.huduser.org/portal/datasets/usps.html, February 23, 2010.

Recommendations: A3: Collect data on the physical quality of the city’s housing

for use in developing a city-wide systematic and strategic housing plan.

E4: Target demolition, rehabilitation, and redevelopment in tracts with highest vacancy rates, concentrating activity near most stable areas.

2.1.5. Fair Market Rent

The fair market rent (FMR) for Chemung County for fiscal year (FY) 2010, as

determined by HUD, is provided in Table 4 (the FMR is set by HUD and serves as the

rent ceiling in the HOME rental assistance program). While the county’s FMR is

lower than for other parts of the state, the paucity of jobs that pay well in and around

35

Elmira and the number of elderly and disabled Elmira residents living on fixed

incomes mean that many residents cannot afford to pay fair market rent. Instead,

households must look for more affordable accommodations that often means living in

run-down or poorly-maintained housing. The lower quality housing stock in Elmira

has led to market rents within the city that are lower than the county's FMR. To get an

idea of Elmira’s true market rent, a survey was conducted in the first two weeks of

March 2010 (Table 4 and Figure 10). Two websites, www.craigslist.org and

www.apartments.com were surveyed for apartments available within the City of

Elmira. Every dwelling within the city that advertized on these two sites between

March 2, 2010 and March 16, 2010 was recorded, for a total of 40 dwellings. The

most common type of dwelling available was the two-bedroom apartment (15

dwellings), followed by the one-bedroom apartment (11 dwellings). The least

common dwelling advertised was the efficiency apartment (two dwellings). Most of

the dwellings available through these websites were apartments; approximately 23%

were houses. The greatest variation of price was found in four-bedroom dwellings;

their rents ranged from $1,500, which is 1.5 standard deviations above the FMR, to

$550, which is two standard deviations below the FMR. The mean rental rate

advertized for each housing type was lower than that rental type’s FMR. For example,

the FMR for a one-bedroom dwelling was two standard deviations above the mean

observed rent for a one-bedroom, while the FMR for a two-bedroom dwelling was just

over one standard deviation above the observed mean.

36

Table 4: Fair Market Rent (FMR) for Chemung County, FY 2010, and the Results of a Survey of Rent in Elmira, March 2010

Rental Type FMR Mean Rent Surveyed

Median Rent Surveyed

Standard Deviation

Sample Size

Efficiency Unit $659 $420 $420 $30 2 1 Bedroom $661 $517 $500 $72 11 2 Bedroom $793 $605 $575 $181 15 3 Bedroom $1,019 $580 $550 $87 5 4 Bedroom $1,062 $889 $850 $280 7

Source: www.apartments.com, www.craigslist.org, accessed March 2010

Figure 10: Survey of Apartments for Rent in Elmira, March 2 to March 16, 2010 Source: www.apartments.com, www.craigslist.org, accessed March 2010

It is important to note that while the city has more than half of its housing stock

in rental units, there are relatively few rental units available for households earning

over 80% Area Median Income (AMI); the Comprehensive Housing Affordability

Strategy (CHAS) 2009 report estimates that only 170 units fit this description.

$‐

$200 

$400 

$600 

$800 

$1,000 

$1,200 

$1,400 

$1,600 

0 1 2 3 4 5

Rent

Number of Bedrooms

Efficiency

1 Bedroom

2 Bedroom

3 Bedroom

4 or more Bedrooms

37

According to a residential real estate investor who was interviewed, a downtown

property that was recently rehabilitated and that is suitable for this income group

was rented quickly, indicating a demand for this type of housing. While the

households with 80% and over the AMI are not targeted by HUD funds, the shortage

of this rental housing is important to keep in mind when considering ways to improve

housing and general economic conditions in the city.

Recommendations: B1: Create incentives for developers to rehabilitate housing for

middle- and upper-income renters in the city, in the most stable neighborhoods throughout the city as well as loft apartments downtown.

B2: Create developer incentives to build new middle- and upper-income housing in the city, strategically targeting stable areas near neighborhoods with the highest real estate prices.

2.1.6. Foreclosures

Catholic Charities’ Mortgage Foreclosure Prevention Services serves the City

of Elmira as well as six counties in the region. In the past year, this program has

seen a significant increase in the need for foreclosure prevention services. Of the

51 clients they worked with between July and December 2009, 17 (33%) were Elmira

residents. Their clients are primarily homeowners who have lost their jobs in the

recent economic downturn, but they also see clients with subprime mortgages.

There are two reasons why residential buildings in Elmira are foreclosed upon.

First, as discussed in section 2.1.3., for various reasons owners sometimes stop paying

the property taxes they owe. After three years of failing to pay taxes, Chemung

County seizes the property, pays the city the back taxes owed, and sells the property at

38

a county auction. The second reason residential buildings are foreclosed on is if the

owner fails to pay the property’s mortgage. In this case, it is up to the financial

institution that owns the mortgage to foreclose on the property. HUD has responded to

the national mortgage crisis in part by creating the National Stabilization Program.

This Program provides funds to qualifying municipalities to help stabilize

neighborhoods with high rates of foreclosure and abandonment. Table 5 provides

information on Elmira Census Tracts that qualify for an Income Area Benefit and also

has a high Foreclosure and Abandonment Score (5 or greater). All Census Tracts meet

these criteria except for Tract 3 (which contains only three residential units).

Table 5: Elmira Census Tracts That Qualify for an Income Area Benefit and has a Foreclosure and Abandonment Score Above 5

Census Tract

Foreclosure and Abandonment Score

% Population below 120% AMI

Vacancy Rate

Estimated Foreclosure Rate

Estimated High Cost Loan Rate

1 10 82.30% 8.90% 8.00% 44.30% 2 9 72.90% 4.00% 6.40% 34.40% 4 7 61.00% 2.40% 4.80% 22.80% 5 8 64.90% 6.80% 5.80% 29.20% 6 10 61.40% 17.40% 8.10% 43.50% 7 8 93.50% 18.00% 0.00% 25.00% 8 8 79.10% 10.30% 4.30% 30.00% 9 10 76.00% 7.00% 7.50% 40.80% 10 9 87.80% 10.00% 7.20% 37.20% 11 10 72.20% 5.30% 7.50% 41.30%

Source: HUD Neighborhood Stabilization Program, http://hud.gov/offices/cpd/communitydevelopment/programs/neighborhoodspg, June 9, 2010

2.1.7. Public and Subsidized Housing

The city has 479 units of federal public housing (Table 6). Three hundred

thirty-five of those units are designated for elderly or disabled households, while the

remaining 144 units are for families or disabled households. In addition to public

housing, there are 765 units of subsidized housing in the city. The funding sources

39

and target households for all public or subsidized housing are summarized in Table 6.

In addition to these units, the Tri-County Housing Council administers 750 Section 8

tenant-based and project-based vouchers for Chemung County. Most of these

vouchers are used within Elmira, rather than the suburbs. These Section 8 vouchers

primarily target households with an income below 30% AMI (see the Needs of Section

8 Voucher Recipients and Households on the Section 8 Waitlist (section 2.2.11.).

Included in this number are 125 project-based vouchers at Hathorn Court. This

number of project-based vouchers was recently reduced from 135 vouchers because,

despite the fact that there are over 1,200 households on the Section 8 waitlist, there

was difficulty leasing all of these units. As of March 2010, there continues to be

management issues at Hathorn Court that threaten to force the city to evacuate the

residents. One issue that Hathorn Court continues to face is its unpaid electricity bills.

Sheldrake Organization, which owns Hathorn Court as of March 2010, is currently

trying to sell the project to another property manager. This may jeopardize the Section

8 project-based vouchers at this project, but the outcome is uncertain.

While federal public housing is secured as affordable housing indefinitely, this

is not the case for privately held subsidized housing. Developers of this housing

typically agree to provide subsidized housing to low- income households for a

specified number of years in exchange for tax breaks, development grants, or other

financial incentives. It is unclear when these arrangements will expire for Elmira’s

privately held affordable housing developments. It is important to determine when the

contracts will expire, which may result in the loss of affordable housing within the city

unless the contracts are renegotiated.

40

Table 6: Public and Subsidized Housing Projects in Elmira

Project Name

Census Tract

Private Entity

Federal Program

State Program

Other Funds

Year Built/ Rehab.

# Units

Unit Type (family, elderly, disabled, mentally ill)

Hathorn Court 2

Sheldrake Org. LIHTC

construction loan, operating subsidy, NYS Housing Trust Fund

Chemung County IDA tax-exempt bonds

built 1941, privatized 2001 274 family

McNiff Commons 10

Providence Housing Dev. Corp. LIHTC

NYS HOME Investment Partnership (through federal gov. program) n/a 2005 11 disabled

Clemens Manor 7

Providence Housing Dev. Corp.

LIHTC, CDBG

NYS Housing Trust Fund n/a 1999 30 elderly

Eastgate Homes 8

Streeter Assoc.

Urban Renewal, Section 236

Limited Profit Housing Subsidy (Mitchell-Lama) n/a 1973 102 low-income

Hoffman Plaza 4

(none) EHA

operating and capital subsidies n/a n/a 1941 144 family

Bragg Towers 8

(none) EHA

operating and capital subsidies n/a n/a 1969 124

elderly or disabled

Flannery Apts. 10

(none) EHA

operating and capital subsidies n/a n/a 1977 209

elderly or disabled

Carpenter Apts. 8

Christopher Community

Section 202 n/a n/a 1998 40 elderly

St Patrick's Apts. 6

Conifer Dev. Assoc. Section 8 n/a n/a 1990 39

elderly or disabled

Heritage Park 8

Heritage Park Limited

Urban Renewal, Section 8 Capital funds

City capital funds circa 1970 212 family

St. Joseph's Apts. 8

Conifer Dev. Assoc. unknown unknown n/a

remodeled 1994 66

elderly or disabled

Miller Manor 10

Gateways, a Division of Catholic Charities unknown unknown n/a 1999 12 mentally ill

Jones Court 8 unknown n/a

operating and capital subsidies n/a

built 1952, closed 1998, sold 2005 84 vacant

Source: City Office of Community Development, Elmira Housing Authority

41

Recommendations: A8: Determine when the affordable housing contracts for

privately subsidized developments will expire.

2.2 Housing Needs Assessment

The Housing Market Analysis in section 2.1 addressed economic and

behavioral trends within Elmira and Chemung County that influence the state of the

city’s housing market, as required by HUD for Elmira’s Consolidated Plan. Section

2.2 addresses the housing needs of various populations in Elmira. These populations

include renters and owners; extra-low income, low income, moderate income, and

middle income households; single person, large, elderly, and disabled households;

people with mental illnesses, people with HIV/AIDS, and households using public or

subsidized housing or are on a waitlist for subsidized or public housing. Since some

of these categories necessarily overlap, all relevant combinations are addressed.

Population needs with respect to lead hazards are also addressed.

2.2.1. Needs of Extra-Low Income Households

$16,650 or less for a family of four

Extra-low income households are defined as households that make less than

30% of the area median income (AMI). HUD determined that the FY 2009 AMI for

the Elmira Metropolitan Statistical Area (Elmira MSA; which includes all of Chemung

County) was $55,500. This means that extra-low income households are defined as

those households that earn $16,650 or less.

Owners

In the CHAS 2009 report, of the estimated 350 extra-low income households

42

that own their housing, 320 or 91%, are moderately or severely cost burdened

(moderately cost burdened is defined as a housing cost burden of over 30%, severely

cost burdened is defined as a housing cost burden of over 50%). The data do not

provide an estimate of how many of these households are elderly or disabled, but it is

likely that a significant number of these extra-low income households are on fixed

Social Security or SSI incomes. Interviews with housing professionals throughout

the city have expressed concern over the burden that extra-low income homeowners

face in maintaining their homes. Fortunately, as outlined by the CHAS 2009 Report

there are few other problems that extra-low income owners face. For example, very

few, if any, owner-occupied homes lack a kitchen or bathroom, and overcrowding is

not a problem. This is actually true for all owner-occupied housing in the city

regardless of income.

Renters

The CHAS 2009 data indicates that of the estimated 5,665 renter households in

the city, only approximately 100 experienced moderate overcrowding (defined as more

than one person per room). Of those moderately overcrowded households, 80% had

an AMI of 30% or less. The report also estimated that no renter households

experienced severe overcrowding (defined as more than 1.5 persons per room).

It is a struggle for Elmira's poorest households to find decent housing at a price

they can afford. This is demonstrated through the CHAS 2009 Report's statistics on

cost burdens for extra-low income renters. The report indicates that an estimated

1,460 extra-low income households out of 1,805 are either moderately or severely

cost burdened. This amounts to 81% of the extra-low income households in the

city.

While there are apartments available at very low rates, the quality of these

units is quite poor. The neighborhoods with the most affordable housing options

43

are also of a poorer quality, and residents have concerns over illegal drug-use,

violence and other crimes (as expressed by housing professionals in interviews).

2.2.2. Needs of Low-Income Households

$16,651 to $27,750 for a family of four

Low income households are defined as households that make between 30.1%

and 50% of the area's median income (AMI). HUD determined that the FY 2009 AMI

for the Elmira Metropolitan Statistical Area (Elmira MSA) was $55,500. This means

that low income households are defined as those households that earn between

$16,650 and $27,750.

Owners

Of the 485 low-income homeowners estimated in the CHAS 2009 report 320,

or 66%, are moderately or severely cost burdened. Like the extra-low income

owners discussed above, the data do not indicate the number of low-income elderly or

disabled owners. However, it is likely that these populations make up a significant

proportion of low-income homeowners that are cost burdened because of their fixed

incomes. The CHAS 2009 report estimates no overcrowding and minimal housing

problems, besides a high cost burden, for this group.

Renters

Of the estimated 100 renter households that experienced moderate

overcrowding, 20% were low-income. An estimated 1,250 of the 1,640 low-income

renter households (76%) experience a moderate or severe cost burden. As

mentioned above, the number of elderly or disabled renters was not included in the

CHAS 2009 Report, but it is likely that these populations, which tend to live on small

fixed incomes, contributes to this high percentage. As mentioned in the section on

44

extra-low income renters, low-income renters struggle to locate well-maintained

housing that is affordable and in a safe neighborhood.

2.2.3. Needs of Moderate-Income Households

$27,751 to $44,400 for a family of four

Moderate income households are defined as households that make between

50.1% and 80% of the area's median income (AMI). HUD determined that the FY

2009 AMI for the Elmira Metropolitan Statistical Area (Elmira MSA) was $55,500.

This means that moderate income households are defined as those households that

earn between $27,751 and $44,400.

Owners

Of the 1,215 moderate income households that own their homes 380, or 31%,

are moderately or severely cost burdened. While this percentage is high, this group is

considerably less burdened than extra-low and low-income owners.

Renters

The CHAS 2009 report estimated that no moderate income renters experience

any overcrowding. However, the report does indicate that 37% of the 1,130 moderate

income renters are moderately or severely cost burdened. While this percentage is

smaller than what extra-low and low-income renters experience, it is still a large

portion of the group.

Recommendations: E1: Intensify funding for energy efficiency upgrades for all

housing types. E2: Increase funds for rental rehabilitation through the

existing program (NWNA). E6: Continue funding owner-occupied housing rehabilitation

through NWNA and city programs.

45

2.2.4. Needs of Middle-Income Households

Owners

The CHAS 2009 Report estimates 3,290 owner households in Elmira with an

income over 80% AMI. An estimated 6% of these households are moderately cost

burdened, while only about 1% are severely cost burdened. No owner households

above 80% AMI are estimated to be overcrowded.

Renters

The CHAS 2009 Report estimates that there are 1,090 households in Elmira

with an income over 80% AMI. An estimated 1% of these households are moderately

cost burdened, while none are estimated to be severely cost burdened. No renter

households with an income over 80% AMI are estimated to be overcrowded.

2.2.5. Needs of Elderly People

The elderly population in the city has declined in the past 20 years. In the 1990

Census, the population of people 62 years and over in the city was 5,937. In the 2000

Census, the population of people 62 and over was 4,782. The 2008 American

Community Survey (ACS) estimate puts the number of people 62 and over at 4,517, a

24% decrease since the 1990 Census. In addition, the percent of the population that

is 62 or older has decreased in the same time period, from 18% of the population

in 1990 to an estimated 15% of the population in 2008, based on 2008 ACS data.

In the past, housing for the elderly was identified as a significant need in the

city. Although the demand for elderly housing in Elmira began in the 1960’s and

continued into the 2000’s, it seems that the market may now be meeting that demand.

This is demonstrated by EHA’s vacancy rates for elderly housing units, which

46

according to its Executive Director is the highest it has been in years. As of December

2009, there were eight vacancies in Flannery Apartments and two vacancies in Bragg

Towers. Also in December 2009, there were only three elderly households on the

waitlist.

There have also been a series of residential developments that accommodate

elderly residents both within the city and its suburbs. Clemens Manor opened in 1999

and provides 30 elderly residences, and Carpenter Apartments, which opened in 1998,

provides 40 elderly housing units, both within the city. As of December 2009, two

new developments for elderly housing had been approved in the county. A 120-unit

development was approved in the Town of Horseheads, a few miles north of Elmira,

and a 32-unit development was approved in the Town of Southport, immediately south

of Elmira.

Owners

Of the estimated 1,980 owner-occupied elderly households in the city cited by

the CHAS 2009 Report, 535 of them, or 27%, were listed as moderately or severely

cost burdened. Specifically, 295 elderly households, or 15%, were estimated to be

moderately cost burdened, while 240 elderly households, or 12%, were estimated to be

severely cost burdened.

As discussed in section 2.1.3., the city's Home Repair Program, which works

closely with extra-low to moderate- income homeowners who need home repairs, has

seen an increase in hoarding behavior by elderly homeowners. These behaviors

compromise the value and quality of the owner's housing and jeopardize the

investment that the city and homeowner may put into the structure.

Renters

The CHAS 2009 Report estimates a slightly smaller number of elderly renter

households than owner households, an estimated 1,165. However, of those elderly

47

renter households, 51% have a moderate or severe cost burden, almost twice as

high as for elderly homeowners. Specifically, 24% of elderly renter households are

estimated to have a moderate cost burden, while 27% is estimated to have a severe

cost burden.

While it is unclear whether hoarding behavior has increased in elderly renter

households similar to elderly owners, proper home upkeep is a growing city-wide

concern. Specifically, housing professionals have expressed concern about the

growing problem of the lack of proper tenant home upkeep. Since hoarding and

poor home upkeep has been observed in both the tenant population at large as well as

elderly homeowners, it is possible that this is also a problem for elderly tenants.

Recommendations A6: Consider re-establishing the city’s rental rehabilitation

assistance program for owners of low- and moderate-income rental properties.

C4: Prosecute tenants that violate codes. C5: Re-establish the Home Upkeep Program for homeowners

and tenants. C6: Create a city/non-profit or city/county partnership to

address the home upkeep needs of elderly and disabled residents. Possible partners are the county’s Office for the Aging or a non-profit that works with people with disabilities.

E1: Intensify funding for energy efficiency upgrades for all housing types.

E2: Increase funds for rental rehabilitation through the existing program (NWNA).

2.2.6. Needs of People with HIV/AIDS and Their Families

Southern Tier AIDS Program (STAP) provides services to people with

HIV/AIDS and their families. Of the eight counties served by this organization in the

48

region, STAP has seen that Chemung County has the highest incidence of new

HIV/AIDS cases. Of the 27 new HIV/AIDS patients processed in the period from

November 2009 through February 2010, 8 (30%) were from Chemung County. STAP

attributes this high infection rate to several factors.

First, although the Chemung County’s minority population is low compared to

other parts of the state, (18% of the total population according to 2008 ACS data), it is

still greater than the other counties that STAP serves. While STAP does not have

county-by-county statistics on its clients, the overall percentage of its clients who are

members of a minority group is 37%. African-American and Latino populations tend

to be at higher risk than other racial groups due to cultural norms. Second, many

Elmira residents are partners of prison inmates, which is a group that is at high risk of

infection. These risk factors prompted STAP to establish Project VIBES, a resource

center for HIV testing and education in Elmira, that seeks to better reach the city’s

minority communities.

STAP identifies housing as a significant factor in people's ability to adhere to

medical treatment regimes. Without stable housing, medications can become a

secondary priority, reducing effectiveness of treatment and facilitating the evolution of

drug-resistant strains of the virus. The potential transmission of such drug-resistant

strains poses a public health risk. For this reason, some HUD-funded housing

programs designate HIV/AIDS patients as top priorities for housing. However,

this practice is not in place in Elmira.

STAP reports that assisting their HIV/AIDS clients in need of housing in

Elmira is especially challenging because of the lack of housing that is in safe, stable

neighborhoods, below FMR, and able pass inspection. Drug use in some

neighborhoods in Elmira is also a concern to STAP and affects the availability of

suitable housing for its clients. This is because some of their clients are recovering

49

addicts, and housing former drug users that are also HIV positive in a neighborhood

where drug use is present poses a public health risk; if the client lapses and uses drugs

again, there is a risk of infecting other drug users in the neighborhood.

While yearly data is not available prior to 2008, STAP has seen a definite

increase in the need for services for HIV/AIDS patients in Chemung County. This is

partly due to STAP's outreach and health education efforts in the community, which

continues to identify new infections. Fifty-two people were served in 2008 in

Chemung County, 13 of which used STAP's housing services. In 2009, about 70

people were served in Chemung County, 20 of which used STAP's housing services.

Ninety percent of STAP's clients in Chemung County in 2009 were extra-low income,

while 10% were low income.

Recommendations A6: Consider re-establishing the city’s rental rehabilitation

assistance program for owners of low- and moderate-income rental properties.

C1: Work with STAP and Tri-County Housing Council to facilitate rapid placement of people with HIV/AIDS in safe, affordable housing.

C4: Prosecute tenants that violate codes. C5: Re-establish the Home Upkeep Program for homeowners

and tenants. E1: Intensify funding for energy efficiency upgrades for all

housing types. E2: Increase funds for rental rehabilitation through the

existing program (NWNA)

2.2.7. Needs of People with Mental Illnesses

Catholic Charities is Chemung County's sole provider of housing assistance for

50

people with mental illnesses. As of January 2010 Catholic Charities reported a large

unmet need in the County for housing for this population; there were nearly 200

people with mental illness referrals on the waitlist for housing assistance. The director

of residential programs at Catholic Charities stated that to her knowledge, there have

never been so many people on the waitlist. In total, the housing programs available to

people with mental illnesses through Catholic Charities is currently at 115% capacity;

while it has funding to accommodate 146 people the programs are currently serving

168. Catholic Charities is able to do this because of the relatively low rents in

Chemung County.

Like STAP's clients, Catholic Charities’ clients that receive housing subsidies

have difficulty locating housing that passes inspection but that is also under

FMR; they perceive a shortage of decent but affordable housing.

Recommendations A6: Consider re-establishing the city’s rental rehabilitation

assistance program for owners of low- and moderate-income rental properties.

C4: Prosecute tenants that violate codes. C5: Re-establish the Home Upkeep Program for homeowners

and tenants. C6: Create a city/non-profit or city/county partnership to

address the home upkeep needs of elderly and disabled residents. Possible partners are the county’s Office for the Aging or a non-profit that works with people with disabilities.

E1: Intensify funding for energy efficiency upgrades for all housing types.

E2: Increase funds for rental rehabilitation through the existing program (NWNA).

51

2.2.8. Needs of People with Disabilities

According to the 2000 Census, 26% of the population living in Elmira over the

age of five years has at least one disability, amounting to a total of 8,044 people. It is

not unusual for householders with a disability to live on a fixed income, and likely

make up a large portion of the extra-low, low, and moderate income households. Also,

similar to elderly households, home upkeep is a concern for disabled households.

And, like the extra-low, low, and moderate income households described above, these

households are in need of affordable housing that is in good condition.

Owners

The CHAS 2009 Report indicates that an estimated 720 owner households

contain one or more people with a mobility or self-care limitation. Of the 720

households, an estimated 29% of them have a household income that is at or below

50% AMI (for the Elmira MSA 50% AMI is equal to $27,750 for a family of four).

Also, an estimated 19% of them have housing problems, which are defined by the

CHAS 2009 report to include one of the following four issues: 1) lacks complete

kitchen facilities, 2) lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3) more than one person per

room, or 4) a cost burden over 30%. While it is impossible to determine how many

disabled households experience each of these issues, other parts of the CHAS report

indicate that very few, if any, households in the city experience incomplete kitchen or

plumbing facilities, while many households experience a cost burden of over 30%.

This indirectly implies that the disabled households that have housing problems

most likely experience high cost burdens more than any other housing problem.

Renters

The CHAS 2009 report indicates that an estimated 695 renter households

contain one or more people with a mobility or self-care limitation. Of these 695

52

households, an estimated 74% of them have a household income that is at or

below 50% AMI, while 63% of them have housing problems. The definition of the

term “housing problems” for renters is the same as it is for homeowners, and the city-

wide trends hold true for renters as well (see above section). This implies that most

disabled renter households with housing problems primarily face high cost burdens

rather than the other possible housing problems. The Elmira Housing Authority has

noted an increase in demand for housing from disabled households on fixed incomes.

Recommendations A7: Address the gap in New York State Section 8 funding by

creating a city program to subsidize housing for tenants who earn between 30.1% and 50% AMI.

C5: Re-establish the Home Upkeep Program for homeowners and tenants.

C6: Create a city/non-profit or city/county partnership to address the home upkeep needs of elderly and disabled residents. Possible partners are the county’s Office for the Aging or a non-profit that works with people with disabilities.

E1: Intensify funding for energy efficiency upgrades for all housing types.

2.2.9. Needs of Single People

Many people who are homeless, mentally ill, or elderly are also single.

However, it does not seem that the fact that they are single is the primary factor

determining what the housing needs are of individuals in these groups. Therefore, the

needs of these groups have been addressed in other sections.

53

2.2.10. Needs of Large Households

A “large household” is defined as having five or more members. Of the

estimated 11,005 households in the CHAS 2009 report, less than 9%, or an estimated

945, are large households. Approximately half of these large households are renters

and half are owners. Approximately 51% of the large renter households experience

housing problems, while only 26% of the large owner households experience housing

problems (see the definition of “housing problems” in the Needs of People with

Disabilities section above). No housing professional expressed housing needs specific

to large families.

2.2.11. Needs of Section 8 Voucher Recipients and Households on the

Section 8 Wait List

As of January 29, 2010 there were 1,220 eligible households on the wait list for

a tenant-based Section 8 voucher. During an interview with the Executive Director of

Tri-County Housing Council, which is the non-profit organization that oversees the

New York State Section 8 Program in Chemung County, she stated that it was not

unusual for households to remain on the wait list indefinitely. This is especially

common for those households with an income between 30.1% and 50% AMI.

Because of the slow turnover in vacancies and because households below 30% AMI

are given preference, there are rarely openings for any household that earns over 30%

AMI.

Seventy-eight of the households on the wait list, or 6% of the total, are elderly

households (Table 7). Sixty-two percent of those elderly households are disabled or

handicapped. The remaining households, or 94%, are non-elderly. Twenty-seven

54

percent of the non-elderly households are considered disabled or handicapped.

Twenty-four percent are Black, which is disproportionately larger than the Black

population in the city, which according to 2008 ACS data is estimated to be 11%. Six

percent of the households on the waitlist are Hispanic. Fifty-two percent of the

households requested either a two- or three-bedroom residence, 43% requested a one-

bedroom residence, and 5% requested a four-bedroom residence or larger. Based on

the Census 2000 data in Table 8, there is no shortage of these housing types in the city.

Table 7: Demographic Summary of Households on the Wait List for a Section 8 Voucher

Household Type Percent waitlist total

Household sub-type

Percent households in sub-type

elderly 6% disabled 62% non-disabled 38%

non-elderly 94% disabled 27% non-disabled 73%

Black 24%* . . Hispanic 6% . .

Source: Tri-County Housing Council *11% of Elmira's total population is Black according to the 2008 ACS estimate

Table 8: Number of Dwellings per Housing Type in Elmira Housing Type Dwelling Units Percent Total No Bedroom 296 2% 1 Bedroom 2,226 17% 2 Bedrooms 3,655 28% 3 Bedrooms 4,651 36% 4 Bedrooms 1,715 13% 5 or More Bedrooms 352 3% Total Dwelling Units 12,895 .

Source: Census 2000

Despite the long wait list for Section 8 tenant-based vouchers, there are 11

project-based vouchers that are, as of January 29, 2010, unused. These project-

55

based vouchers are located at Hathorn Court, a privatized housing project. As

mentioned in section 2.1.7., it is understood that these apartments remain empty

because the project has developed a poor reputation for safety and has other

management issues. As of March 2010 this project was under threat by the energy

company of having its electricity shut off because Sheldrake Organization, which

owns the facility, had not paid the energy bill.

The most pressing need of applicants on the Section 8 waitlist is a loosening of

the requirement that 75% of Section 8 recipients have an income of 30% AMI or

lower. There is a great need for housing assistance for households with an income

31%-50% AMI, as well. With the very slow turnover in the program, it is

essentially impossible for these families to receive assistance.

The most pressing need for voucher holders is housing that is at or below

FMR, but that can also pass inspection. The Tri-County Housing Council perceives

a shortage of decent and affordable housing.

Recommendations A6: Consider re-establishing the city’s rental rehabilitation

assistance program for owners of low- and moderate-income rental properties.

A7: Address the gap in New York State Section 8 funding by creating a city program to subsidize housing for tenants who earn between 30.1% and 50% AMI.

C4: Prosecute tenants that violate codes. C5: Re-establish the Home Upkeep Program for homeowners

and tenants. E1: Intensify funding for energy efficiency upgrades for all

housing types. E2: Increase funds for rental rehabilitation through the

existing program (NWNA).

56

2.2.12. Needs of Public Housing Residents

There are three federal housing projects managed by the EHA. Two, Flannery

Apartments (built in 1977) and Bragg Towers (built in 1969), are designated for

elderly and/or disabled households and contains a combined 335 housing units. The

third, Hoffman Plaza (built in 1944), provides housing for families and disabled

households and contains 144 housing units. The annual Uniform Physical Condition

Standards score in 2009 for EHA housing was a 27 out of 30, indicating that EHA's

housing is in good condition. The EHA is successful in maintaining its housing

through federal operating and capital subsidies.

No public housing has been built or demolished in the past five years, and

none is anticipated to be built or demolished in the next five years. Although the

public housing facilities are aging, they are in good condition and can remain in place

for many years to come. While there is a great need in the city for affordable housing

in good condition, EHA has no plans to build additional federal housing.

The waitlist for federal public housing is much smaller than the waitlist for

Section 8 vouchers. As of December 2009, there were 22 households on the waitlist

for public housing, nine applications taken, 15 applications rejected, eight households

that moved out, and 11 households that moved in. The estimated wait time for a one-

bedroom apartment at Hoffman Plaza was 18 months. About half the households on

the waitlist at Hoffman Plaza requested a one-bedroom apartment, while the other half

requested either a two- or three-bedroom apartment.

57

2.2.13. Lead Hazards

Owners

Because there is no data for the City of Elmira to estimate the number of

houses that may contain lead hazards, the age of the housing is a good proxy. The

CHAS 2009 report estimates that 715 families with young children own a house that

was built prior to 1979, suggesting that these families may be exposed to lead paint

hazards.

Renters

As mentioned above, because there is no data for the City of Elmira to estimate

the number of houses that may contain lead hazards, the age of the housing is a good

proxy. The CHAS 2009 report approximates that 1,700 families with young children

rent a home that was built prior to 1979, suggesting that 1,700 families with young

children may be exposed to lead paint hazards.

Because of Elmira’s old housing stock and lead’s widespread presence in older

housing, lead contamination is likely to continue to be an issue in the city for many

years to come.

Recommendation: E5: Continue to fund lead remediation through city programs

and the NWNA Historic District Paint Program.

58

2.3 How the Housing Market and Residents’ Needs May Influence the

Use of Funds Made Available for Rental Assistance, Production of

New Units, Rehabilitation of Old Units, or Acquisition of Existing

Units

HUD requires that the city consider how current conditions will affect its use

of funds. This section briefly summarizes how the housing market and housing needs

of the city and its residents may affect the use of HUD funds. The needs revealed in

this report will primarily affect the use of funds for 1) rental assistance and 2)

rehabilitation of old units. As for the production of new affordable units, this report

indicates that the market cannot support new units of affordable housing unless

redevelopment resulted in a net decrease in the number of units.

2.3.1. Rental Assistance

There is a shortage of suitable housing for rental assistance. While there is a

great need for housing for people with mental illnesses, households on the Section 8

waitlist, and people with HIV/AIDS, the housing stock has a limited ability to absorb

more subsidized housing funds because there is currently a shortage of rental units that

can pass inspection. Overall, the rental housing stock is in poor condition, making it

challenging for service providers to assist their clients despite available funding.

There are several possible ways to improve the availability of affordable housing:

• Assist landlords in rehabilitating their rental units, thus creating more

affordable housing that will pass inspection.

• Raze the most dilapidated and chronically vacant rental structures, which

would lead to a decrease in vacancies and create incentives for remaining

59

landlords to rehabilitate their housing.

• Continue or increase support to programs providing housing assistance to

people with HIV/AIDS or mental illnesses.

• Leverage HUD funds to subsidize Section 8-eligible residents that fall between

30.1% and 50% AMI. With 1,220 households on the waitlist, there is a very

high demand for rental assistance through Section 8 tenant-based vouchers. A

severe bottleneck in this program is the current New York State policy that

75% of the vouchers assigned each year are given to households under 30%

AMI. This results in hundreds of families never receiving assistance because

they earn between 30.1% and 50% AMI, even though they qualify for Section

8 vouchers.

2.3.2. Rehabilitation of Old Units

Because the housing in Elmira is so old, rehabilitation can be very costly. The

main factors limiting rehabilitation are:

• Often times the rehabilitation costs more than the house is worth.

• Rehabilitation often does not lead to significant value appreciation.

• Over the past five to seven years the city has seen an increase in hoarding

behavior and poor home upkeep in owner-occupied housing, and continued

poor home upkeep in much renter-occupied housing, that can damage newly

improved housing.

Despite the challenges facing housing rehabilitation, in some cases it is more cost

effective than rebuilding, particularly when coupled with a series of policy changes:

• Restore the Cornell Cooperative Extension Home Upkeep Program.

• Renew efforts to prosecute tenant codes violations through a revival of the

60

Code Office’s Appearance Ticket Program.

• Emphasize energy efficiency upgrades when rehabilitating housing.

2.4. Implementation of Policy Recommendations

The 25 recommendations outlined in each section of Chapter 2 are intended as

suggestions only and represent possible solutions given ideal circumstances. Budget

constraints were not considered, and it is likely that further research must be

conducted before any of them could be implemented. Table 9 provides further detail

on how each recommendation may be implemented. The recommendations are

arranged into five categories: Category A: Additional Data Collection and Analysis;

Category B: Middle- and Upper- Income Housing; Category C: Education, Outreach,

Partnerships, and Enforcement; Category D: Alternative Uses; and Category E:

Housing Rehabilitation and Redevelopment. Possible public and private players that

may be involved in implementing each recommendation are listed, as are short-term

and long-term goals and a rough estimate of relative cost.

61

Table 9: Implementation of Recommendations

Recommendation Possible Local Government Participants

Possible Local Non-Profit Participants

Possible Local Private For-Profit Participants Short-Term Goals Long-Term Goals Cost

Category A: Additional Data Collection and Analysis

A1*

Update and expand the housing plan for the city so that the city’s changing housing needs are carried out by actions that build towards identified, complementary goals. City Council

general public, all housing non-profits

general public, planning consultant, county or regional housing developers

increase communication, organize and coordinate efforts of all sectors to maximize results

decrease vacancies, increase property values, improve quality of housing stock, create housing for untapped markets: middle- and upper- income homeowners and renters who want new housing $$

A2

Conduct a spatial analysis of the city to determine areas to target for rental rehabilitation, homeowner rehabilitation, demolitions, and redevelopment of new housing.

Office of Community Development none

planning consultant, real estate developers, real estate agents

increase availability of information in order to maximize positive impacts of housing rehabilitation, demolition, and redevelopment

maximize positive impacts of housing rehabilitation, demolition, and redevelopment $$

A3

Collect data on the physical quality of the city’s housing for use in developing a city-wide systematic and strategic housing plan.

Office of Community Development none planning consultant

increase availability of information in order to maximize positive impacts of housing rehabilitation, demolition, and redevelopment

maximize positive impacts of housing rehabilitation, demolition, and redevelopment $$

A4

Improve accuracy of total assessed value database to help with determining where to concentrate rehabilitation, demolition, and redevelopment efforts.

Tax Assessor's Office, Office of Community Development none planning consultant

increase availability of information in order to maximize positive impacts of housing rehabilitation, demolition, and redevelopment

maximize positive impacts of housing rehabilitation, demolition, and redevelopment $$

A5

Evaluate the city’s relationship with the county’s real estate auction. Is this system contributing to slum housing, vacancies, and depressed real estate values in the city?

City Council, Office of Community Development, County Legislature, Chemung County Tax Foreclosure Auction none none

determine what is best for the city when dealing with foreclosed properties

decrease number of dilapidated buildings, decrease long-term vacancies, improve quality of the housing stock, increase property values $

A6

Consider re-establishing the city’s rental rehabilitation assistance program for owners of low- and moderate-income rental properties.

City Council, Office of Community Development NWNA local contractors

increase access of rehabilitation funds to landlords of low- and moderate- income housing

improve rental housing stock without increasing the housing cost burden of low-income residents $

A7

Address the gap in New York State Section 8 funding by creating a city program to subsidize housing for tenants who earn between 30.1% and 50% AMI.

City Council, Office of Community Development

Tri-County Housing Council none

Decrease cost burden on low- income households same as short-term goals $$$

A8 Determine when the affordable housing contracts for privately owned, subsidized developments will expire.

Office of Community Development none none

the city is aware that eventually contracts will expire

the city can prepare for the loss of affordable housing units or negotiate a continuation of affordable housing contracts $

Category B: Middle- and Upper- Income Housing

B1

Create incentives for developers to rehabilitate housing for middle- and upper-income renters in the city, in the most stable neighborhoods throughout the city as well as loft apartments downtown.

City Council, Office of Community Development, City Tax Assessor, City Codes Office none

real estate developers, local contractors

stabilize neighborhoods, provide housing for unmet demand

increase middle- and upper- income population in city, increase property tax revenue, stabilize neighborhoods, stabilize housing prices, increase population living downtown $$

B2

Create developer incentives to build new middle- and upper-income housing in the city, strategically targeting stable areas near neighborhoods with the highest real estate prices.

City Council, Office of Community Development, City Tax Assessor, City Codes Office none

real estate developers, local contractors

stabilize neighborhoods, provide housing for unmet demand

increase middle- and upper- income population in city, increase property tax revenue, stabilize neighborhoods, stabilize housing prices, increase population living downtown $$

Category C: Education, Outreach, Partnerships, and Enforcement

C1

Work with STAP and Tri-County Housing Council to facilitate rapid placement of people with HIV/AIDS in safe, affordable housing.

City Council, Office of Community Development

STAP, Tri-County Housing Council landlords

protect public health, provide housing for population in need same as short-term goals $

62

Table 9 continued

Recommendation Possible Local Government Participants

Possible Local Non-Profit Participants

Possible Local Private For-Profit Participants Short-Term Goals Long-Term Goals Cost

C2* Improve working relationships with the county and surrounding municipalities.

City Council, County Legislature, all municipal governing bodies in Chemung County, Corning City Council none none

foster a sense of collaboration and collective problem-solving

facilitate a collaborative process of decision-making that considers regional needs and goals, increase recognition within each municipality that decisions made by an individual municipality may have an adverse impact on its neighbors $

C3* Collaborate with the county and surrounding municipalities to develop a regional comprehensive plan.

City Council, County Legislature, all municipal governing bodies in Chemung County

all non-profits relevant to planning in the county

all for-profits relevant to planning in the county, planning consultant

identify county-wide needs (besides economic development) and possible solutions

address county-wide planning needs and implement effective solutions that benefit all county municipalities $$

C4 Prosecute tenants that violate codes. City Codes Office, City District Attorney none none

hold tenants accountable for day-to-day maintenance and cleanliness of their housing, improve tenant treatment of their housing

improve quality of housing stock by decreasing damage to housing caused by tenants and increasing incentives to landlords to improve housing $$

C5 Re-establish the Home Upkeep Program for homeowners and tenants.

Cornell Cooperative Extension, Office of Community Development, City Codes Office, City Court none none

increase tenant and homeowner day-to-day maintenance and cleanliness, improve tenant and homeowner treatment of their housing

improve quality of housing stock by decreasing damage to housing caused by tenants and homeowners $$

C6

Create a city/non-profit or city/county partnership to address the home upkeep needs of elderly and disabled residents. Possible partners are the county’s Office for the Aging or a non-profit that works with people with disabilities.

County Office of the Aging, Cornell Cooperative Extension unknown none

to assist elderly and disabled residents with home maintenance and upkeep

improve quality of housing stock by decreasing damage to housing caused by tenants and homeowners $

C7

Foster the development of neighborhood groups and block associations that are interested in neighborhood issues such as neighborhood safety, vacant buildings, empty lots, street upkeep, and sense of community.

City Council, Office of Community Development NWNA none

increase resident involvement in neighborhood issues

improve neighborhood quality, property values, safety, and sense of community; increase desirability of Elmira neighborhoods to prospective residents $

C8

Create public/private partnerships with major employers within the city to incentivize middle- and upper-income employees to purchase homes within the city. Possible incentives are: a grant for a down payment, a grant for home improvements, or tax incentives. Possible partners include: Elmira College, hospitals located within the city, and manufacturers in the area. City Council none

All major city and county employers with middle- and upper- income employees none

increase middle- and upper- income population in city, increase property tax revenue, stabilize neighborhoods, stabilize housing prices $$

Category D: Alternative Uses

D1

Consult with neighborhood groups, block associations, etc. to determine the best use of vacant lots throughout the city, and particularly in the less stable neighborhoods such as those in census tracts 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10. Just a few possible uses are: community gardens, pocket parks, side yards to adjacent homes, new housing, and corner stores.

City Council, Office of Community Development NWNA

landscape architects/ designers, contractors, small business owners

increase community involvement in neighborhood issues

Increase community involvement in neighborhood issues, put vacant lots to productive use, increase property values, increase property tax revenue, stabilize neighborhoods $

Category E: Housing Rehabilitation and Redevelopment

E1 Intensify funding for energy efficiency upgrades for all housing types.

Office of Community Development NWNA Local contractors

decrease cost burden on Elmira households

decrease cost burden on Elmira households, increase property values, increase property tax revenues $$$

E2 Increase funds for rental rehabilitation through the existing program (NWNA).

Office of Community Development NWNA Local contractors

improve housing quality for renters without increasing housing cost burden for low-income residents

improve housing quality for renters without increasing housing cost burden for low-income residents, improve city's overall housing stock, increase property values, increase property tax revenues $$

63

Table 9 continued

Recommendation Possible Local Government Participants

Possible Local Non-Profit Participants

Possible Local Private For-Profit Participants Short-Term Goals Long-Term Goals Cost

E3

Resume demolition of houses that are unsafe, causing blight and/or financially infeasible to rehabilitate. Target buildings in areas that can be used to redevelop middle- and upper- income housing.

City Council, City Codes Office, City Tax Assessor, Office of Community Development none

local contractors, real estate developers

reduce blight, unsafe housing, long-term vacancies

stabilize neighborhoods, reduce long-term vacancies, improve housing stock, provide opportunities for redevelopment, increase property values, increase property tax revenues, increase middle- and upper- income population in city $$$

E4

Target demolition, rehabilitation, and redevelopment in tracts with highest vacancy rates, concentrating activity near most stable areas.

City Council, City Codes Office, City Tax Assessor, Office of Community Development NWNA

local contractors, real estate developers stabilize areas with highest vacancy rates

stabilize neighborhoods, reduce long-term vacancies, improve housing stock, increase property values, increase property tax revenues, increase middle- and upper- income population in city $$$

E5 Continue to fund lead remediation through city programs and the NWNA Historic District Paint Program.

Office of Community Development NWNA

local contractors, lead remediators increase health and safety in Elmira homes same as short-term goals $$

E6 Continue funding owner-occupied housing rehabilitation through NWNA and city programs.

Office of Community Development NWNA local contractors

enable homeowners to improve their housing quality without prohibitively increasing their housing costs

decrease housing cost burden on Elmira households, improve housing stock, increase property values, increase property tax revenues $$

*Although these recommendations are worth considering, they are auxiliary to this report and were not explicitly addressed in the professional report.

64

CHAPTER 3

CONCLUSIONS AND REFLECTIONS

3.1. Conclusions

This professional report provided a housing market analysis and housing needs

assessment for the City of Elmira, New York. Results indicate that while there is a

great deal of housing available within the city for very low cost, there is a shortage of

affordable housing that can pass inspection. This has put a strain on subsidized

housing programs for people with mental illnesses and people with HIV/AIDS, and in

the Section 8 tenant-based voucher program. Housing values in the city are low and

property taxes are high compared to Elmira’s suburbs. The city’s old housing stock

and relatively poor real estate market discourage capital improvements in residential

real estate and suppress new building within the city. For the most part, middle- and

upper-income homeowners choose to buy homes in the suburbs where there are newer

houses and lower property taxes. Those who work for housing programs that assist

elderly and disabled households have seen a decline in household upkeep practices.

Tenant upkeep practices continue to be a concern in the city and may dissuade

landlords from maintaining and investing in their properties. The city suffers from a

high residential vacancy rate, with nearly 600 dwelling units vacant for over one year

and 300 dwelling units vacant for over three years as of September 2009.

Twenty-five policy recommendations to address the issues identified and a

proposal for their implementation are included in this report. The recommendations

focused on:

• Stabilizing neighborhoods.

• Increasing property values and property tax revenues.

65

• Improving the overall housing stock through demolition, redevelopment, and

rehabilitation.

• Diversifying the city's housing stock.

• Fostering partnerships with private institutions and other municipalities.

• Collecting and maintaining data to help determine areas to target for

rehabilitation, demolition, and redevelopment.

3.2. Reflections

This section includes my thoughts upon concluding this project.

How Can Elmira Improve Its Standing in the County and Region?

Elmira’s housing problems were primarily caused by regional economic

factors, inefficient government structures and outdated federal policies. Like other

post-industrial cities in the Rust Belt, Elmira has lost almost half its population and a

large portion of its jobs for middle-class families. The government structure of New

York State creates overlapping and inefficient municipalities that are reluctant to give

up their autonomy while they compete, rather than collaborate, to acquire finite

resources. The outdated federal policies that encourage sprawl without growth, such

as highway subsidies, have led to the sprawling Elmira metropolitan area. While I

encountered plenty of examples of the consequences of these regional and national

dynamics throughout the course of this project, they were well outside the scope of

this report and so I did not investigate them closely. This is certainly an area that is

ripe for additional research.

Meaningful County or Regional Planning

Elmira and Chemung County as a whole would benefit from a concerted

66

county or region-wide long-term comprehensive planning effort that focuses on

development that is best for the region, not just for a particular municipality. A

concerted effort to pool resources to help Elmira would benefit the region as a whole

in the form of better housing and job opportunities, streamlined delivery of services

such as police, fire, and social services.

Tax Breaks for New Housing in Elmira

Elmira has federal public housing, subsidized housing, Section 8, and hundreds

of thousands of dollars ear marked for affordable housing initiatives. Also, most of

the human and health services in the county are based in Elmira. Combined, these

conditions mean that Elmira has become a magnet for those in need of services and

cheap housing. Cheap, as opposed to affordable, housing is not in short supply in the

city. What is in short supply is jobs, lower property taxes, an influx of the middle and

upper-classes, and extensive housing rehabilitation. Elmira also needs new housing.

As mentioned in the professional report, nearly 1,200 new housing units have been

built in the county from 1998 to 2008, while in the same period only 22 new housing

units were built in the city. And, despite the fact that Chemung County’s population is

slowing decreasing, it is also true that the county’s overall vacancy rate outside of

Elmira is 2%.

There must be something that Elmira and the county can do to mitigate this

situation. In a move to attract middle- and upper-income families, could the city

provide property tax breaks to owners who purchase and live in new housing

developed in the city? There are several key locations new housing could be targeted.

One such place is on the edge of the West Elmira neighborhood and any other

neighborhood in the city that has a healthy real estate market and commands high

prices. These new houses would ideally replace run down housing and/or long-term

vacant housing that is not contributing to the population or tax base of Elmira. The

67

city can identify and target parcels in close proximity to desirable neighborhoods that

do not generate tax revenue, or generate minimal tax revenue, and rebuild these

parcels in order to generate more revenue. Parcels that are near healthy

neighborhoods, such as West Elmira, and that are near desirable amenities should also

be targeted. The idea here is that if the city can replace a house with an assessed value

of $10,000, that generates very little tax revenue, even with high taxes, and replace it

with a house assessed at $150,000 but with lower taxes to attract a buyer, the city

could actually get more money from the parcel, even if it was taxed less. For this

purpose, a housing inventory of the city would need to be conducted and potential

sites identified. There may be several complications obstructing such an approach.

Principally, I am unclear whether there is a legal mechanism to create such an

incentive. If there is one, it may be infeasible due to complications caused by New

York State’s government structure. This is a subject worth additional study.

The Nature of Plans

My sense of what a “plan” is has been broadened by my work on Elmira’s

Consolidated Plan. Previously, I thought of a comprehensive plan as tool used

primarily by the municipality that commissioned or created it, with varying degrees of

success and levels of implementation. In this model, I had the idea that there is

limited accountability or consequences if the plan is not followed. However, in the

case of the Consolidated Plan, the plan is used as an oversight tool by the federal

government to ensure that the city has “done its homework” in the sense that it knows

what its most pressing housing issues are, and also that there is a degree of community

input and participation in the decision-making process. HUD holds the city

accountable for spending funds appropriately and implementing the approved

Consolidated Plan. While the purposes of these two types of plans may be different,

68

they may also have similar goals where housing is concerned, although a

comprehensive plan may include private development as well as subsidized and public

housing considerations. The processes in which the housing section of a city’s

comprehensive plan and the Consolidated Plan are created are also similar.

Planner’s Skills

There were several practical skills I learned in graduate school that helped

prepare me to complete this project. Particularly helpful were interview and

communication skills, but also GIS and graphic design skills, among others. Also,

while I was wrapping up my work with the city, it was helpful to keep in mind several

of the principles that I learned in Forester’s negotiation and mediation class, such as

creating solutions before claiming resources. I struggled a little in figuring out how to

work with population projections and demographic information, which was not

covered in the program. The Introduction to Planning Methods core class, which was

essentially a workshop that created a comprehensive plan for Ithaca’s West End

neighborhood, laid out the process and format of comprehensive planning, including

collecting background information, designing and conducting surveys, setting up focus

groups, conducting expert interviews, developing an implementation timeline, and

presenting the plan to the community. Although the HUD Consolidated Plan is used

for a different purpose than a neighborhood comprehensive plan, the process that the

city was required to use was very similar to the process I experienced with the West

End project. This classroom experience was instrumental in preparing me to carry out

my assigned portion of the Consolidated Plan. The Introduction to Physical Planning

course was also helpful in that I was able to analyze the implementation proposals of

several comprehensive plans.

69

My education also helped put the conditions on the ground in the City of

Elmira into the larger regional and national context. For example, my classes

discussed the history of US cities, the rise of suburban residential and retail

development, federal policies that influence development patterns, such as highway

subsidies and tax breaks for homeowners, all of which influenced Elmira’s

development.

70

APPENDIX

SUMMARY OF THE MAJOR HOUSING PROGRAMS THAT

SERVE ELMIRA

Home Repair Program, City of Elmira

The city’s Home Improvement Program assists extra-low to moderate-income

homeowners with home improvements, through a grant, a 0% interest loan, or a 3%

interest loan. Many of the extra-low to moderate-income homeowners that take

advantage of the city’s Home Repair Program are elderly or disabled. This program

has also seen a rise in hoarding and poor household upkeep throughout the city. It

continues to see a huge need for rehabilitation assistance for these income groups,

which is indicated by the fact that the program succeeds in allocated all its funds every

year.

Mortgage Foreclosure Prevention Services, Catholic Charities

Catholic Charities’ Mortgage Foreclosure Prevention Services helps

homeowners in six counties who are facing foreclosure. In the quarter ending

December 2009, the program assisted 28 new foreclosure cases. Of those 28, five

(18%) were from the city. In the quarter ending September 2009, the program assisted

with 23 new foreclosure cases. Of those 23, 12 (52%) were homeowners in Elmira.

There has been a sharp increase in homeowners seeking foreclosure prevention

counseling in the past year, although the number of Elmira homeowners seeking help

fluctuates.

First Time Home Buyers Program, Catholic Charities

This First Time Homebuyer Program provides a $10,000 grant towards down

71

payment and closing costs for low- and moderate-income homebuyers. There have

been 393 homes purchased through the Program since it began in 1994. However, the

number of houses purchased through the Program has declined. Initially, the Program

was able to serve 35 new homeowners, but a decreasing demand prompted the city to

cut funding to the Program to 22 homeowners, and then finally to 10 in the 2008-2009

fiscal year. While the Program only had seven closings in the 2008-2009 fiscal year,

the 2009-2010 fiscal year had already seen five closings as of January, 2010.

One House at a Time Program, Near Westside Neighborhood Association

The NWNA purchases, rehabilitates, and sells one house per year. The houses

are sold to a low- to moderate-income buyer. To date, this program has renovated

eight houses, is in the process of renovating another, and is searching for its next

project house.

Rental Rehabilitation Program, Near Westside Neighborhood Association

This program is a grant to improve rental units that house low- or moderate-

income tenants that matches landlord funds for improvements, up to $7,500. While

NWNA has far fewer funds available for rental rehabilitation than for owner-occupied

improvements, NWNA reported that the demand from landlords for rental

rehabilitation assistance has spiked in the past year (2008-2009). Because of the great

need in the city for improved rental housing, programs like this one should be

supported.

Home Upkeep Program, Cornell Cooperative Extension

The Home Upkeep Program taught basic home upkeep and maintenance skills

to renters and homeowners. This program was funded in the 1990’s and worked with

72

the Code Office’s Appearance Ticket Program to improve housing conditions in

Elmira. Unfortunately, this program was cancelled due to lack of funding. Because of

the increasing problems with home upkeep and hoarding in Elmira, a similar program

could make a positive impact on the city’s housing stock.

Historic District Paint Program, Near Westside Neighborhood Association

This is a popular program that provides exterior paint to homeowners. It

particularly targets homes in the Near Westside Historic District because the District

has restrictions on installing aluminum or vinyl siding, yet lead paint hazards are very

high due to the age of the houses.

Home Improvement Program, Near Westside Neighborhood Association

The NWNA reports that in the past year, there has been a spike in demand for

the Home Improvement Program from owners in need of improvements. This

program provides up to 60% of the cost of rehabilitating the homes of low- to

moderate-income owners, up to $7,840.

73

REFERENCES

Byrne, Tom. 1976. Chemung County 1890-1975. Elmira, NY: Chemung County Historical Society.

City of Elmira Department of Finance. Property Tax Rates of City of Elmira Residents. City of Elmira, NY. http://www.cityofelmira.net/offices/chamberlain.html (accessed April 16, 2010).

City of Elmira’s Office of Community Development. Consolidated Plan 2000-2004. (Elmira, 2000).

Chemung County Planning Department. Chemung County Data Book. (Elmira, 2004).

Chemung County Treasurer’s Office. Tax Search Program. Chemung County, NY. http://chemung.sdgnys.com/search.aspx (accessed April 16, 2010).

Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act of 1990, §105 et seq. http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/about/conplan/laws/ (accessed November 23, 2009).

Myers, Dowell, John Pitkin, Julie Park. 2002. Estimation of Housing Needs amid Population Growth and Change. Housing Policy Debate. 567, issue 5, http://www.knowledgeplex.org/programs/hpd/pdf/hpd_1303_toc.pdf (accessed November 11, 2009).

PAD Projection of Chemung County, NY. http://pad.human.cornell.edu/ (accessed March 15, 2010).

The Saratoga Associates. Comprehensive Master Plan Update City of Elmira, New York. (Saratoga Springs, 1998).

Sheppard, Stephen. 1999. Hedonic Analysis of Housing Markets. In Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, volume 3, ed. E. S. Mills and P. Cheshire, 1596-Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing. 2006. Affordable Housing Needs Assessment: Population and Household Projection Methodology. http://flhousingdata.shimberg.ufl.edu/docs/PopHousingProjMeth.pdf (accessed November 21, 2009).

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Consolidated Plan Management Process. Consolidated Planning. http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/about/conplan/ (accessed April 5, 2010).

74

U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Neighborhood Stabilization Program Data. http://hud.gov/offices/cpd/communitydevelopment/programs/neighborhoodspg (accessed June 9, 2010).

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Office of Community Planning and Development. Guidelines for Preparing Consolidated Plan and Performance Evaluation Report Submissions for Local Jurisdictions. http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/about/conplan/toolsandguidance/guidance/pdf/local_guidelines.pdf (accessed November 11, 2009).

Village Clerk- Treasurer. Property Tax Rate History (Fiscal Year June to May). Village of Horseheads, NY. http://www.horseheads.org/index.php?n=Govt.Clerk#taxes (accessed April 16, 2010).