19318 (e) In or near an area of minority concentration but meets overriding housing needs which cannot otherwise feasibly be met. (Attach supporting documentation.)------------ 3. Improved location for low(er) income families Superior Adequate Poor Proposed housing will provide opportunities for low(er) income families to live in a neighborhood which is: (a) In a section which contains little or no subsidized housing. 4. Relationship to orderly growth and development Proposed housing will: (a) Be consistent with officially approved land-use or other development plans which are consistent with metropolitan or regional plans.... (c) Implement a policy adopted by the local governing body for providing for and dispersing housing for low- and moderate-income families.. 6. Ability to perform Superior Adequate (a) Sponsor or staff has experience and resources to proceed promptly to construction and completion to meet target dates.. (d) Applicant has complied and/or will comply with Equal Opportunity guidelines and requirements 7. Project potential for creating minority employment and business opportunities Superior Adequate O Poor (a) Project will provide an opportunity for training and/or employment of minority persons INSTRUCTIONS FOR EVALUATION OF REQUESTS ING are a General-Final feasibility approval is dependent upon satisfying all statutory and administrative requirements which normal part of processing. Rehabilitation projects, Indian Reservation housing, section 235 existing housing, or leasing of existing housing under section 23 consisting of fewer than 25 units, and proposed construction projects of fewer than five (5) dwelling units are excluded. 1. Need for low(er) income housing. Ojective: To identify the proposed projects which will best serve the most urgent unmet needs for housing for low(er) income households, including elderly. A superior rating shall be given to a proposed project (1) which responds well to the most urgent housing needs of low(er) income households in terms of number of bedrooms and structure-type, with due regard for the needs of large families and elderly; or (2) as to which there is documented evidence that the housing is needed to serve families displaced or to be displaced by governmental action, including families or individuals being displaced by the proposed project, and that the applicant will give preference to those so displaced. An adequate rating shall be given to a proposed project which responds to the housing needs of low(er) income households in terms of number of bedrooms and structure type, with due regard for the needs of large families and elderly. A poor rating shall be given to a proposed project which (1) does not respond to the housing needs of low(er) income households, or (2) duplicates or competes unreasonably with other subsidized projects in the same locality in such a way as to overbuild the market. A poor rating shall also be given (a) to any proposed rental project in a market area where vacancies available for rent in nonseasonal, standard rental ac⚫commodations exceed 6 percent for the rentsize category proposed, or, if information by rent-size category is not available, 8 percent for all rental ranges combined; and (b) to sales units in any market area where vacancies available for sale in nonseasonal, standard accommodations exceed 2 percent in the price-size category proposed, or 21⁄2 percent of standard sales housing in all price categories. 2. Minority housing opportunities. Objective: To provide minority families with opportunities for housing in a wide range of locations. To open up nonsegregated housing opportunities that will contribute to decreasing the effects of past housing discrimination. A superior rating shall be given if the proposed project (1) is located so that, within the housing market area, it will provide opportunities for minorities for housing outside existing areas of minority concentration; or, (2) will be located in an area which is substantially racially mixed and on the basis of factors such as existing demographic trends it appears that the project will have no significant effect on the proportion of minority to non-minority families; or, (3) will be located in or near an area of minority concentration, but the location is part of an Urban Renewal, or Model Cities Area, or other official local development plan which part will include housing which is expected to serve a wide range of income levels and a racially varied population. (The plan should not currently be experiencing unusual delays in execution, nor should there be any indication that such delays Will be encountered.) An adequate rating shall be given if the proposed housing will be located in or near an area of minority concentration, but is necessary to meet overriding housing needs which cannot otherwise feasibly be met in that housing market area. Such a need could be demonstrated, for example, by evidence that land costs for appropriately zoned land in all other acceptable locations in the housing market area are too high to accommodate tions are in parts of the housing market area such housing; the only other acceptable locawhich are or are becoming areas of minority concentration; or the residents of the project area or prospective residents of the proposed housing have expressed a desire for the project to be built in or near that area because they have strong cultural, social or economic ties to it. A need based on strong cultural, social or economic ties should be supported by citizens' participation in Model Cities planning, or resolutions or other communications from citizens' associations or other broadly based neighborhood groups; opposing vlews should be accorded full consideration. All "adequate" ratings shall be accompanied by documented findings based upon relevant racial, socioeconomic and other data and information supporting both the overriding need and the unavailability of alternate housing. An overriding need may not serve as the basis for an "adequate" rating if the only reason the need cannot otherwise feasibly be met is that discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin renders sites outside areas of minority concentration unavailable. A poor rating shall be given to any proposed project which does not satisfy any of the above conditions and to any proposed project which is likely to cause a substantially racially mixed area to become one of minority concentration. 3. Improved location for low(er) income families. Objective: To avoid concentrating subsidized housing in any one section of a city or metropolitan area. To provide lower (er) income families with opportunities for housing in a wide range of locations. To locate subsidized housing in neighborhoods containing facilities and services that are typical of those found in neighborhoods consisting largely of unsubsidized housing of a similar price range. To locate subsidized housing in areas reasonably accessible to job opportunities. A superior rating shall be given if the proposed project is to be located in a section (consisting of the project neighborhood and the surrounding neighborhoods) that contains little or no subsidized housing and (a) the project is, or will be in the near future accessible to social, recreational, educational, commercial, health facilities and services, and other municipal services that are equivalent to or better than those typically found in neighborhoods consisting largely of unsubsidized housing of a similar price range; and (b) travel time and cost via public transportation or private auto from the neighborhood to employment providing a range of Jobs for low(er) income workers (excluding elderly) is considered excellent for such families in the metropolitan area or town. A superior rating may also be given if the housing 13 to be located in an Urban Renewal, Model Cities Area or a New Community and such housing is required to fulfill, respectively, the Urban Renewal Plan, Comprehensive City Demonstration Programs, or New Community Development Plan approved under title VII of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1970. An adequate rating shall be given to a proposal (1) in a section already containing a significant amount of subsidized housing f the addition of the proposed housing will not establish the character of the section as one of subsidized housing and the housing will 19319 provide an expanded range of housing opportunity for low(er) income families; or, (2) in an undeveloped area, if the scale of the project will not be such that it establishes the character of the section as one of subsidized housing; and, in the event of either (1) or (2). (a) the project is, or will be in the near future, accessible to social, recrestional, educational, commercial, health facilities and services, and other municipal services that are equivalent to those typ!cally found in neighborhoods consisting largely of unsubsidized housing of a similar price range, and (b) travel time and cost via public transportation or private auto from the neighborhood to employment providing a range of jobs for low(er) income workers (excluding elderly) is reasonable for such families in the metropolitan area or town. A poor rating shall be given if the proposed project is to be located in a section characterized as one of subsidized housing. or if the proposed project would establish the character of the section as one of subsidized housing; or facilities and services accessible to the project are inferior to those generally found in neighborhoods consisting largely of unsubsidized housing of a similar price range, and there is little likelihood for improvement in the near future; or travel time and cost to employment providing a range of jobs for low(er) income workers (excluding elderly) will be appreciably greater than that usually required in the metropolitan area or town. 4. Relationship to orderly growth and development. Objective: To assure that the development is consistent with principles of orderly growth and development and to prevent urban sprawl and the premature development of land before supporting facilities are available consistent with officially approved local or multijurisdictional plans. A superior rating shall be given if the proposed housing: (1) Will be consistent with officially approved land use or other development plans which are consistent with metropolitan or regional plans; or (2) will be located in and is consistent with plans for a neighborhood that is undergoing improvement via Urban Renewal, Model Cities, New Communities or other similar Federal, State, or local programs; or (3) is consistent with a policy adopted by the local governing body for providing for and dispersing housing for low- and moderate-income families, especially where this policy implements a multijurisdictional approach. An adequate rating shall be given if the project is consistent with a locally approved land use or development plan (either in the absence of a metropolitan or regional plan or where the local plan is not consistent with the metropolitan or regional plan), or if it is consistent with sound growth patterns, although located in a community that does not have officially approved land use or other development plans. A poor rating shall be given if the location of the proposed project is inconsistent with established official plans or is contrary to sound growth patterns. 5. Relationship of proposed project to physical environment. Objective: To provide an attractive and well planned physical environment. To prevent any adverse impact on the environment resulting from construction of the housing. To avoid site locations whose environmental conditions would be detrimental to the success of an otherwise sound project. A superior rating shall be given if the proposed housing will embody outstanding land planning and excellent architectural treatment, and will be free from adverse environmental conditions, natural or man made, such as instability, flooding. septic tank backups, sewage hazards; or mudslide; harmful air pollution, smoke or dust; excessive noise, vibration, or vehicular traffic; unsan!tary rodent or vermin infestation; or dangerous fire hazards; and construction of the project will not impact or disrupt ecologically valuable or unique natural areas such as wildlife areas, ground water or surface water areas, and parklands. An adequate rating shall be given if the proposed project will embody a sound land use plan and good architectural treatment, will not be subject to unreasonably adverse environmental conditions that cannot be corrected and will not have an unreasonably adverse impact on the environment. A poor rating shall be given if the proposed project will embody a poor land use plan or poor architectural treatment; or will be subject to serious environmental conditions which cannot be corrected; or will substantially or unreasonably disrupt the environment or ecologically valuable or unique natural areas. 6. Ability to perform. Objective: To produce housing promptly and to provide quality housing at a reasonable cost, taking into account Equal Opportunity guidelines and requirements. A superior rating shall be given if the applicant, his staff, or other staff which he will utilize (including contractors, subcontractors, architects, consultants, etc.) and help he will receive, considered together, has demonstrated good ability in past performance (in either subsidized or unsubsidized or conventionally financed developments or related fields), based on considerations such as the following: (a) ability to perform well within program target dates; (b) high quality of housing produced; (c) ability to produce housing at a cost at or below similar units of comparable quality; (d) compliance with Equal Opportunity guidelines and requirements. An adequate rating shall be given if the applicant, his staff, or other staff which he will utilize, and help he will receive, considered together, has demonstrated an acceptable ability to: (a) Meet program target dates; (b) produce housing of good quality; (c) produce housing at a reasonable cost. comparable to similar units; (d) comply with Equal Opportunity guidelines and requirements. In the case of an applicant without previous experience in housing or related fields, or an LHA with no units under management, an adequate rating will be given. if there is no demonstrable reason to believe that it will be unable to meet the above conditions. A poor rating shall be given to any proposal which shows no potential for adequately satisfying the above conditions. 7. Project potential for creating minority employment and business opportunities. Objective: To encourage housing proposals which will generate job opportunities for minority workers. To provide opportunities for business concerns owned in substantial part by minority persons. A superior rating will be given if the proposal shows good potential, based on the applicant's stated goals, hiring timetables and past performance, if any, for (1) providing training and/or employment for minority persons; and (2) utilizing business concerns owned, controlled, or managed in substantial part by minority persons. This potential may include training, employment and business opportunities in all phases of development, including but not limited to planning, site development, building, maintenance, and management. An adequate rating will be given to a proposal which has acceptable potential for satisfying either of the two conditions set forth above for a "superior" rating. A poor rating shall be given to a proposal which shows no potential for satisfying any of the above conditions unless the area from 19320 which labor would customarily be recruited and business concerns customarily contracted has a minority population so low that it would be impossible for the applicant to achieve a "superior" or "adequate" rating. In such cases an "adequate" rating shall be assigned. 8. Provision for sound housing manage ment: Objective: To encourage the development of well-managed and maintained projects. To foster good relations between tenants and management and the surrounding community. A superior rating shall be given if the applicant or staff which will be utilized shows definite potential for significantly exceeding program requirements as defined in applicable Housing Management issuances. Particular attention should be given to defined management-sponsor relationship; total management operation plan including an fiscal initial occupancy plan, appropriate controls, realistic operating expense estimates; plans for administration and project maintenance; plans for good tenant-management relationship and provision for social services as needed. An adequate rating shall be given (1) if management of the proposed project shows good potential for meeting program require-. ments relating to management, or (2) if the project is proposed by a local housing authority with no units under management but which has an understanding of program requirements and can demonstrate adequate plans to meet these requirements. A poor rating shall be given (1) if the applicant in the past has not been able to provide sound housing management, or (2) if the management of the proposed project does not demonstrate potential for providing the minimum management as required by Housing Management issuances. In those cases where there is inadequate past performance but applicant demonstrates to reviewer that deficiencies have been corrected, then an adequate rating shall be given. GEORGE ROMNEY, [FR Doc.71-14385 Filed 9-30-71;8:45 am] C. Is it true that housing assisted by HUD through State and Local housing programs will not be required to conform to the proposed regulations? If this is true, why are different selection criteria applied to housing in the same community under the same Federally assisted programs merely because State and Local agencies are involved in some cases but not in others? Answer. It has been decided that the project selection criteria will be applied to housing assisted by HUD through State and local housing programs. D. What, if any, relief will be given to those developers who in good faith and reliance upon existing HUD policies have acquired land in expectation of future funding under the 235 program? Answer. There is no basis, under present procedures, and there will be no basis under the proposed project selection criteria for assuring a developer of funding under the Section 235 program. At present, a developer can obtain a priority of registration for use of Section 235 funds for financing sales of low cost housing. This is not an assurance that the funds will be available when needed. It is only an assurance that the developer will be able to obtain the funds, if available. The project selection criteria will provide the same type of priority. E. Will these criteria be applied to public housing projects which met the site selection criteria in effect at the time of site approval or designation of the developer? Answer. Yes, the project selection criteria will be applied to public housing projects which met the site selection criteria in effect at the time of site approval or designation of the developer to ensure that all applications (a proposed public housing program that has not yet been placed under Annual Contributions Contract is considered to be an "application") will be considered under the same criteria in order to determine the distribution of available contract authority. On July 6, 1971, HUD Regional Administrators and Area Directors were instructed to use the project selection criteria as an interim guide in approving projects. Under these interim procedures no projects will be placed under Annual Contributions Contract unless the minimum requirements of the selection criteria rating system are met. To carry out his policy the offices were instructed to take the following actions: 1. To return all applications not yet approved or under Program Reservation to the initiating local housing authorities with instructions for providing sufficient information to the field office to enable them to evaluate the application; 2. To return all applications for which a Program Reservation had been issued but Preliminary Site Approval had not yet been given to the initiating LHA with instructions as above; 3. To return applications for programs beyond the Preliminary Site Approval stage which had not had Annual Contributions Contract lists approved unless the Area Director judged that an evaluation could be made with information on hand or supplementary information submitted by the LHA. 11. COMMUNITY NEED FOR LOWER INCOME HOUSING A. The Instructions for determining a "Superior" rating refer to "needs of the housing market area” without defining need. What is meant by need? Answer. Need for lower income housing can generally be defined by some measure of the number of low income families in a housing market area who are inadequately housed, i.e., living under substandard conditions or paying a disproportionate amount of their income (usually more than 25 percent) for housing. B. According to the Instructions, the difference between a "Superior" and an "Adequate" rating on the criterion of community need is the difference between a "shortage" and the lack of "substantial supply". What is the difference between these two similar expressions? Answer. The revised project selection criteria, being published in the Federal Register, have eliminated the language referring to the supply of standard housing because of the difficulty in defining such terms as "shortage" and "substantial supply." C. Need for housing is determined by employment opportunities. Why would employment opportunities be considered in evaluating a site for the elderly? Answer. The reference to employment opportunities in this criteria has also been eliminated in the revised version. Employment opportunities are not, of course, a factor to be considered in evaluating a housing for the elderly project; and under the revised provisions such opportunities would not be applied as a test criteria for evaluating a housing for the elderly project. D. Need for housing is determined by substantial waiting lists for existing projects. Where do such lists exist for the 235 program? Answer. There are no waiting lists for Section 235 housing, and reference to waiting lists has been eliminated in the revised version. III. EFFICIENT PRODUCTION A. With the competition that exists in the housing industry, how is it possible to produce housing for 10 per cent less than comparable units when the FHA appraisals currently allow only an approximate 10 percent profit (including loan discounts) without encouraging poor quality, inferior design or use of substandard land? Answer. This criterion has been renamed "Ability to Perform." The requirement for a "Superior" rating that the housing be produced at a cost at least 10 percent below prototype costs has been dropped. The revised version places emphasis on a sponsor's demonstrated capabilities in terms of efficiency of production, quality of housing, cost, and compliance with Equal Opportunity guidelines and requirements. B. If a combination of all or part of the anticipated results of this section of the proposed regulations is not desired, then why was the statement on the forms for sections 235 and 236 "that cost savings shall be obtained without sacrificing good design or a marketable project” deleted from the instructions. Answer. With regard to cost and quality, this criterion, as redrafted, deals with the ability to produce housing at a cost at or below similar units of comparable quality. One of the reasons for the change in the criterion was to make clear the fact that we are not seeking cost savings at the expense of quality housing. IV. A. Do the criteria limit the right of people to choose where they want to live? What consideration is given to the individual's desire to be close to his friends, relatives, and church? B. Should ethnic groups have the right to live in areas of minority housing if they choose to do so? Answer to questions A and B. This criterion has been renamed "Minority Housing Opportunities." The Project Selection Criteria do not limit the right of people to choose where they want to live. The criteria are intended to extend that right to those, particularly minorities, who have not been able to live where they would like to live. The revised version of this criterion allows for the location of a project in or near an area of minority concentration, if the housing is necessary to meet overriding needs which cannot otherwise feasibly be met in that housing market area. Such a need may be demonstrated by residents of the proposed project area or prospective residents of the proposed housing who have expressed a desire for the project to be built in or near that area. C. In addition to limiting choices, would the requirements for a "Superior" rating that there is no present likelihood that the area will become one of minority group concentration have a discouraging effect on central city areas where efforts are being made to upgrade the quality of their neighborhoods? Answer. There is no longer the condition for a "Superior" rating that there be no likelihood of the area becoming one of minority group concentration. Rather, the condition is that the project will not significantly affect the proportion of minority to non-minority families in the area. In addition, a project is rated "Superior" in an area of minority concentration if it is part of an Urban Renewal or Model Cities Area, or other official local development plan which will provide housing to serve various income levels and a racially varied population. D. Why is only an "Adequate" score earned when subsidized housing is located in area of minority concentration in response to an overriding need? Answer. A prime objective of this particular criterion is to open up new nonsegregated housing opportunities that will contribute to decreasing the effects of past housing discrimination, one of the major thrusts of the President's policy on housing. To rate a project to be located in an area of minority concentration as "Superior" (except as noted above) would not sufficiently reward those sponsors or Local Housing Authorities proposing housing outside of such areas. 66-842 0-71- -20 |