taba arget rea ssessmentarget rea ssessment tc able of

SUMMARY...............................................................................i

.....................................................................1

.......................................................................5Goals and Performance Objectives ..............................5

City Actions .....................................................................5

Analysis Method .............................................................7

........................8

Goals and Performance Objectives ..............................8

Population and Household Characteristics .................9

Education and Schools ................................................12

Economic Characteristics............................................16

....................................................19

Goals and Performance Objectives ............................19

..............................................................................29


.............................................................34


Streets and Sidewalks ..................................................35

Water ..............................................................................37

Storm Sewer ..................................................................37

Sanitary Sewer ..............................................................37

Irrigation Tiling ..............................................................39

Summary of Infrastructure Needs ...............................39

INTRODUCTION

R P G POEDEVELOPMENT LAN OALS AND ERFORMANCE

BJECTIVES

S E DOCIAL AND CONOMIC EVELOPMENT

L U ZAND SE AND ONING

HOUSING

INFRASTRUCTURE

P SUBLIC AFETY .................................................................41


Police Protection...........................................................42

Fire Protection...............................................................43

...................................................44


Parks, Recreation and Library .....................................45

Social Services..............................................................49

Medical Services ...........................................................51

Public Transportation ...................................................52

...............................................54


Programs and Description ...........................................54

Housing Programs........................................................54

Neighborhood Stabilization Programs........................57

Small Business Programs............................................60

Funding Sources...........................................................61

........................................................62

.............................................................66

Assessment Methodology ...........................................66

Relationship to Existing Plans ..................................66

Results of the Resident and Business Survey .........70

C F

N R PF S

OMMUNITY ACILITIES

EIGHBORHOOD EVITALIZATION ROGRAMS

AND UNDING OURCES

RECOMMENDATIONS

A TPPENDIX OPICS

Page Page

Prepared by the City of Phoenix Planning DepartmentJune 1998

T Cable of ontentsT Cable of ontentsT Cable of ontentsT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessment

* Page numbers have changed from the original printed plan.

1

10. Educational Attainment for Target Area B and Phoenix ...13

11. Student Enrollment ..............................................................13

12. Student Ethnic Composition ...............................................13

13. Student Achievement Essential Skills (Grade 3) ...............14

14. Student Achievement Essential Skills (Grade 8) ...............14

15. At-Risk Student Indicators ..................................................15

16. Roosevelt School District Concerns and Needs ...............16

17. Median Household Income by Census Tract .....................17

18. Household Income by Year .................................................17

19. Household Below Poverty Level .........................................18

20. Land Use Comparison .........................................................21

21. 1978 Existing Land Use Map ...............................................22

22. 1996 Existing Land Use Map ...............................................23

23. Zoning Acreage ....................................................................24

24. 1996 Existing Zoning Map ...................................................25

25. Vacant Land by Zoning Category Map ...............................27

26. Neighborhood Development Projects and

City Owned Land Map ......................................................28

27. Total Number of Housing Units ...........................................30

28. Housing Units by Year Structure Built ...............................30

29. Housing Conditions by Number of Dwelling Units ...........29

. Target Area B Boundaries Map .............................................3

2. Neighborhood Revitalization Subareas Map .......................4

3. Change in Population ............................................................9

4. Average Number of Persons Per Households .....................9

5. Household Type and Size ....................................................10

6. Population by Age ................................................................11

7. Ethnicity by Census Tract ....................................................11

8. Ethnicity Pie Chart ...............................................................12

9. Educational Attainment by Census Tract ...........................12

30. Home and Yard Conditions .................................................29

31. 1978 Housing Conditions Map by Subareas .......................30

32. Housing Conditions by Census Tract ................................33

33. Average Home Value and Rent ............................................33

34. Owner Occupied Housing Units ..........................................33

35. Street Paving ........................................................................36

36. Sidewalks ..............................................................................36

37. Water Lines ...........................................................................38

38. Storm Sewers .......................................................................38

39. Infrastructure ..........................................................................39

40. Sanitary Sewers .....................................................................40

41. Irrigation Tiling ......................................................................40

42. Crimes by Grid Ranking ......................................................42

43. Crimes Per 1,000 Population ...............................................43

44. Public Facilities Map ............................................................46

45. Park Services and Facilities ................................................47

46. Library Usage and Needs ....................................................48

47. South Mountain Family Services Center Programs ..........49

48. Other Human Resources Services .....................................50

49. Transit Service Levels ...........................................................52

50. Transit Routes Map ...............................................................53

51. TAB Preliminary Community Facilities Needs ...................55

52. Total Programs Need in Target Area B by Subareas .........56

53. Housing Rehabilitation - Major ............................................58

54. Housing Rehabilitation - Minor ...........................................59

55. Neighborhood Revitalization Programs and

Funding List ......................................................................61

56. Recommended Strategies ...................................................63

57. Phoenix General Plan Land Use Map .................................68

58. 1985 Amended Land Use Map .............................................69

PageFigure No. Figure No. Page

T A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentL Fist of iguresL Fist of iguresL Fist of igures

* Figures are listed in the same order of the original printed plan. Page numbers have changed from the original printed plan.

CITY COUNCILSkip Rimsza, Mayor

Dave Siebert, Vice Mayor, District 1Tom Milton, District 2Peggy Bilsten, District 3Phillip B. Gordon, District 4

John Nelson, District 5Sal DiCiccio, District 6Doug Lingner, District 7Cody Williams, District 8

TARGET AREA B CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEEGeorge Young, Chairman Geraldine HankinsJoe Banks Craig HendrixJean Bergstrom Sal HernandezLillian Blanton Jack JacksonCharlene Caron Emily LillyMr. & Mrs. Juan De La Torre Manual R. Lopez Sr.La Shan Ellison Tina LoringGeneva Farthing Mr. & Mrs. Wayne ReddJesse Farthing Richard ThompsonAnna Gable

CITY MANAGEMENTFrank Fairbanks, City Manager

Jacques Avent, Deputy City ManagerJack Tevlin, Deputy City Manager

DEPARTMENT MANAGEMENT/SUPERVISION

David E. Richert, Planning DirectorMaryann Ustick, Neighborhood Services DirectorJoy Mee, Assistant Planning DirectorJerome Miller, Deputy Neighborhood Services DirectorKim Dorney-Rodriguez, Deputy Neighborhood Services DirectorTammy J. Perkins, Deputy Neighborhood Services DirectorBill Allison, Planner IIICarol Johnson, Planner III

PROJECT TEAM

Kathy L. Flemons, Planner II, Project ManagerRafael Pizarro-O'Byrne, Planner IJudith J. Burke, Planning Technician IV, Graphic DesignerDiane F. Rogers, Administrative Secretary

AcklowledgmentsAcklowledgmentsAcklowledgmentsAcklowledgmentsT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessment

Upon request this publication will be made available within areasonable length of time through appropriate auxiliary aids orservices to accommodate an individual with a disability. Thispublication may be made available through the following auxiliaryaids or services: large print, Braille, or computer diskette. ContactTheresa Damiani 262-6368/v or 534-5500 TDD.

STAFF/DEPARTMENT CONTRIBUTORS

E L

F

F

H

H S

N S

DUCATIONAL IAISON

INANCE

IRE

OUSING

UMAN ERVICES

EIGHBORHOOD ERVICES

Deborah J. Dillion, Education DirectorErik Kropp, Youth Coordinator

Barry Mora, Property Management REOSBetty Russell, Right Of Way Agent II

Kevin Roche, Fire Protection Engineer

Elizabeth DeMichael, Housing Development Manager

Lance Craw, South Mountain Family Service Center SupervisionMaria Hyatt, Management Assistant II

Sarah Armistead, Project Management AssistantAlton Bruce, Information System ManagerHarry Garewal, Economic Development OfficerPat Hendrick, Economic Development OfficerAmelia Hughes, Neighborhood Coordination SupervisorKate Krietor, Housing Rehabilitation OfficerElizabeth Martin-Parker, Management Assistant IIErnest Martinez, Management Assistant IIGerri McDonald, Community Worker IIILalie Melton, Project Management AssistantLouis Pete, Program CoordinatorTraci Pete, Project Management AssistantHolly Puckett, Administrative AideEllen Stanley, Rehabilitation Loan ProcessorTed Thurman, Redevelopment Program Manager

P R L

P

P

P T

S T

W S

A S U

ARK, ECREATION & IBRARY

LANNING

OLICE

UBLIC RANSIT

TREET RANSPORTATION

ATER ERVICES

RIZONA TATE NIVERSITY

Bruce A. Swanson, Parks Development AdministratorRaul H. Daniels, Recreation Coordinator IIIKim R. Schneider, Administrative Assistant II

Remy Autz, Planner IIAmy Ellis, Planner IISally Heinrich, Planner IJoy Rich, Planner IIFred Osgood, Planner III

Tiffanie Ross, Detective, Planning and Research Bureau

Dale Hardy, Transit Planning Manager

J. Donald Herp, Deputy DirectorDan Matthews, Civil Engineer IIIRama Inti, Civil Engineer

Roger Olson, Civil Engineer III

School of Planning and Landscape Architect Senior Planning Studio

AcklowledgmentsAcklowledgmentsAcklowledgmentsAcklowledgments T A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessment

i

PURPOSE

Needs Identified in 1978 and 1979

This report assesses progress in achieving thegoals and performance objectives of the TargetArea B Redevelopment Plan for the three squaremile area bounded by Broadway Road andSouthern Avenue, Seventh Avenue to 24thStreet. It describes accomplishments over the17 year period since the area’s designation andadoption of the Redevelopment Plan and howthe $25.9 million allocated to the project hasbeen spent. The report also identifies theremaining needs, priorities for addressing thoseneeds and recommended strategies.

Target Area B was one of three areas which thecity of Phoenix identified in 1978 for acomprehensive revitalization approach called forby the federal Community Development BlockGrant program. The intent of the program wasfor cities to target several areas in which theywould address social, economic, and physicaldevelopment needs simultaneously and over anumber of years. Citizen identified needs andparticipation were to drive the program usingpublic, private and non-profit resources with agoal toward leveraging of public dollars to themaximum extent feasible.

A Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) worked withcity staff and area residents and businessowners to identify goals as well as general andspecific performance objectives designed to:

Eliminate blight and physical developmentinhibitors, including dilapidated structures;Rehabilitate housing and build new housing

affordable for area residents, including anydisplaced as a result of redevelopment;

Install infrastructure--sidewalks and paved streets,water and sewer lines, storm sewers, tiling ofirrigation ditches, and sidewalks;

Develop or expand public facilities and shoppingopportunities;

Improve area maintenance;

Rezone land to correspond with the desired landuse plan;

Provide small businesses with counseling andloans;

Provide jobs and job training to area residents;and

Expand the availability of social services.

The Steering Committee identified $38.6 milliondollars of housing rehabilitation, publicinfrastructure and facility needs. The list ofneeds did not address the costs to eliminateother blighting influences or address economicand social needs.

Target Area B (TAB) grew from 12,946 personsin 1980 to 13,665 persons in 1995. This growthmostly occurred in the western third of the area;the eastern third lost residents. The number offamily nonmarried households increased from24% in 1980 to 33% in 1990 compared to 16% in1990 for the City. The percentage of minoritypopulations increased from 77% in 1980 to 90%in 1995 with the Hispanic population increasing

Key Demographic Facts - Then andNow

from 38% to 62% of the total population. TheBlack population has always been most heavilyconcentrated in the eastern third of the area andthe Hispanic population in the western portion.The percentage of adults 25 and over with lessthan a high school diploma was 58% in 1990which was more than twice the citywide averageof 22%. Student achievement in the RooseveltElementary District schools which serve the areais uniformly below the district’s standardspartially due to the high percentage of “at risk”students enrolled in the schools. The report liststhe many special programs and partnershipsavailable at the schools.

The median household income in 1980 was$11,291 or 65% of the city’s median householdincome. By 1990, the TAB median householdincome had increased to $15,567 but was only53% of the city’s median household income. Thepercentage of households living below thepoverty level rose from 29% in 1980 to 37% in1990 compared to the 12% the citywide averagein 1990.

Land use in TAB is 47% single-family housing,30% vacant or farmed, 9% public or quasi-public,5% commercial, 4% multi-family housing, and3% parks and open space. Since 1978, allcategories have increased slightly in percentageexcept for multi-family, commercial and vacant.Commercial uses declined by 54 acres; multi-family uses increased by 12 acres but remainedconstant in percentage.

Land Use & Zoning Characteristics -Then and Now

T A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessment SummarySummarySummarySummary

Despite this land use pattern, 44% of the land iszoned for multi-family uses. The area’s zoningpattern is based on what the land was zoned inMaricopa County at the time of annexation in1960. Vacant land remains undeveloped due toblighting factors such as illegal dumping andnonconforming uses including open andunscreened storage, small parcels scatteredthroughout the area, and lack of market demand.Vacant multifamily zoned land exists primarily inthe center of the area; vacant single-familyzoned land is located primarily in the southeastquadrant of the area. Vacant commercial land isscattered along the major streets. City-ownedvacant land, shown on the map islocated along Central Avenue near BroadwayRoad, along both sides of Broadway Road fromSeventh Avenue to 24th Streets, and on or closeto the west side of 16th Street. It is mostlyzoned for commercial purposes.

In 1978 area residents identified abandonedvehicles and structures, illegal uses, automobilestorage and junk yards, and secondhand storesand appliance repair stores with displaymerchandise on the sidewalks as blightingconcerns. The TAB program has funded thepurchase and demolition of structures,boardups, and lot cleanups. There have been634 property maintenance and zoningenforcement/violation cases since 1990involving blighted conditions of structures andyards. Of those, 112 were active in March 1997.

Since 1985, six small (24-116 units) multi-familycomplexes, 24 single-family homes and 72townhouses have been constructed. The mostrecent single-family subdivision of 24 homesstarted in 1992. A small shopping center, a few

(Figure 26)

office buildings, and slightly over 300,000 squarefeet of industrial space have also been built. Thecity has provided assistance to 19 developmentprojects as shown on

The total number of housing units in TABincreased from 4,039 n 1980 to 4,430 in 1995.Most of the increase has been in multi-familyunits. There have been 38 housing unitsdemolished. Half of the TAB housing was builtprior to 1963 versus 1973 for the city as a whole.A housing condition survey in 1978 determinedthat 88% of the units were in good condition orneeded minor repair; 12% needed major repairor were not feasible to repair. The 1978 surveyalso identified 136 abandoned, boarded-up orburned-out housing structures. A 1994 surveyusing the same criteria found 91% in goodcondition or only needing minor repair and 9%needing major repair or not feasible to repair.The improvement in structural housingconditions, despite the relative increase ofpoverty of area residents, is a reflection of thecity’s investment in housing programs in thearea.

Owner occupied housing units in TAB decreasedfrom 59% in 1980 to 51% in 1990; the city’sownership rate experienced a similar decreaseduring this period. Homes in TAB increased inmedian value from $27,300 to $48,600 in 1990but remained lower than the city’s median valueof $94,335 in 1990. Average rents of $253 in1990 in TAB were also lower than the city’saverage rent of $394. Overcrowding continuesto occur in about 20% of the housing units.

Figure 26.

Housing Conditions - Then and Now

Crime Rates and Programs - Thenand Now

In 1978, the CAC identified the need to providemore police officers and resources to reducecrime rates, particularly arson and juvenile gangactivities. At that time the crime rate againstpersons in TAB was 50% higher than the city’scrime rate; crimes against property were 40%higher than the city’s rate. In 1979, the SouthMountain Police Precinct was constructed in TABadding to the resources available. The SouthernCommand Station built in 1990 on South CentralAvenue just north of TAB serves the greaterPhoenix area and included specialty units suchas the Neighborhood Response Unit.

In 1996, there were 6.8 gang related crimes per1,000 people in TAB compared to 1.6 for the city.Robbery, aggravated assault, rape, homicide,burglary, auto theft, domestic violence, gangrelated crime, drug related crime and calls forservice also are significantly higher in TAB thanthe city-wide rates per thousand persons. Arsonrates were not available. The Gang and DropoutPrevention programs are being implemented inTAB to avert gang activity and increase citizenawareness. The Anti-Gang Initiative Programwas also introduced in TAB in 1996. Otherprograms used in the area have included DrugAbuse Resistance Education (DARE), GangTask Force, New Turf Project, Drug Free Zones,Neighborhood Fightback, and NeighborhoodBlock Watch. Two Fightback programs and threeneighborhood block watch programs have beenestablished in TAB.

ii

T A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentSummarySummarySummarySummary

The TAB crime rate increased 14% over the lastthree years compared to an increase of 4% forthe city-wide crime rate for the same period.The highest crime grid in TAB is the area fromRoeser Road to Southern Avenue, CentralAvenue to Seventh Street, partially because ofthe larger amount of commercial activity in thisgrid than in others in TAB.

Citizens and staff identified the following needs:16 miles of streets pavement or improvement; 43miles of sidewalk installation; 31 streetlights; 7.5miles of water line installation or replacement; 6miles of storm sewer installation; 2.5 miles ofsanitary sewer installation; and 9 miles ofirrigation ditch tiling.

The following percentages of infrastructureneeds remain: street paving 2% or .3 miles;water lines 27% or 2 miles; storm sewers 10% or.6 miles; sanitary sewers 3% or .8 miles;irrigation tiling 13% or 1 mile; and sidewalks38% or 16.4 miles. Some of these needs will bemet as vacant land develops; none is seen as acritical problem.

The Redevelopment Area Plan proposed fullydeveloping parks and expanding recreationalopportunities, expanding library services,developing more social services and providing24 hour access to medical services. Morespecific objectives included: expanding HaydenPark; improving Momo Mini Park, HermosoPark, and Nueve Park; developing a Job

Infrastructure Needs - Then and Now

Public Facility and Service Needs -Then and Now

ACCOMPLISHMENTS

Economic development and jobtraining: $242,079

Housing: $9,922,649

Blight Elimination: $5,591,298

Infrastructure: $7,079,297

Job Clearing Center provided 439 job referrals toarea residents through June 1981.

Arizona Small Business Development Centerunder contract to the city provided managementassistance to 82 firms and processed 28 loanpackages for area businesses.

A privately developed shopping center was builtat the southeast corner of Central and Roeser,but no shopping center exists on the easternperimeter of TAB.

883 homes rehabilitated through variousprograms

630 homes assisted with painting andlandscaping

Property acquisitions, demolitions, boardups, andlots cleaned up

16.3 miles of local, collector, and major streets

26.8 miles of sidewalks

4.7 miles of water lines

1.7 miles of sewer lines

4.0 miles of irrigation ditches tiled

iii

Clearing Center; remodeling and expanding theHuman Resource Center No.Ê1; purchasing theSouth Phoenix Youth Center, and developing ahospital in South Mountain Village. Fire serviceresponse times were not identified as a problemand today are better than city standards eventhough the number of incidents for fire andemergency medical service in the area are morethan twice the number of city total incidents per1,000 persons. There are more bus routesserving TAB than there were in 1978.

Most of the public service and facility goals andobjectives were met. Parks were expanded orimproved and the Youth Center was purchasedand began operating in 1980. A new HumanResources Center will be under construction inlate 1997. Additional social services areprovided at the South Mountain CommunityCenter for all, particularly the elderly anddisabled. Two setbacks are that a Job ClearingCenter is no longer operated, and Jesse OwensMemorial Medical Center no longer providesovernight medical care. However, medicalservices in the area have increased. Whilelibrary services, resources, and hours havegenerally increased, there are still unmet needsfor Friday service, additional materials inSpanish, and literacy tutoring.


iv

Public Facilities: $1,980,506

Non-Profit Organization Support:$1,091,323

Parks, Human Services, Youth and CommunityCenters and graffiti removal


P NRESENT EEDS

TAB Committee Recommendations

Or

Economic development and jobtraining

Provide greater support to small businesses inobtaining funding and provide a contact list forcity programs.

Organize a business alliance to encourageeconomic development along South CentralAvenue.

Develop the Rio Salado river walk.

Provide job linkages for residents.

Increase zoning enforcement.

Rezone incompatible land uses.

Develop commercial design guidelines.

Develop city-owned properties.

Expand the Target Area to include the north sideof Broadway Road up to Pueblo Street from 7thAvenue to 24th Street.

Expand the Target Area to include the northeastcorner of 7th Avenue and the northwest corner of24th Street and gradually include all of the northside of Broadway.

Land use and zoning

Rezone vacant multi-family residential land tocommercial zoning designations along BroadwayRoad.

Provide better quality housing in TAB.

Complete the 1978 recommended improvements.

Provide more police officers and resources, andcontinue the partnership between Police andZoning Enforcement.

Conduct more undercover police operations.

Provide housing incentives for police officers tolive in the area.

Organize more block watches, bettercoordination, and neighborhood participation inreporting crime.

Secure vacant structures.

Provide more programs at elementary schools todeter crime and gang activities at an early age.

Provide more youth programs.

Construct a swimming pool at Hayden Park.

Construct a minibus terminal at Broadway Roadand Central Avenue on one of the city’sproperties similar to the one in Sunnyslope.

Housing

Infrastructure

Crime

Public facilities and services


v

Extend the proposed light rail transit on CentralAvenue to Southern Avenue.

Improve bus frequency.

Extend library hours.

Assemble and sell vacant land for development.

Remove structurally substandard buildings topromote neighborhood stability.

Eliminate unsuitable land uses.

Increase the number of adequate jobs.

Reduce crime and gang problems.

Remove or curtail vandalism, graffiti, blightedstructures, and lack of residential maintenance.

Provide more information on marketingstrategies, market research, city taxes andbusiness counseling services.

Attract more businesses to the area.

Resident and Business OwnerConcerns as identified in the 1996sample survey

Top Five Ranked Recommendationsby Committee

Priority Ranking of StaffRecommendations by TAB Committee

1. Improve transit and transportation services.

a. Construct a minibus terminal south ofBroadway Road on Central Avenue onone of the city’s properties similar to theterminal in Sunnyslope.

b. Improve bus frequency.

c. Extend any future proposed light railtransit on Central Avenue to SouthernAvenue.

2. Provide more programs at elementaryschools to deter crime and gang activities atan early age.

3. Organize a business alliance to encourageeconomic development along South CentralAvenue.

4. Develop city-owned properties.

5. Provide more police officers and resources;and continue the partnership betweenPolice, Zoning Enforcement, and ParksDepartments.

1. Expand the redevelopment area to includethe north side of Broadway Road from 7thAvenue to 24th Street as far north as thealley or the first street. West of 13th Streetthe redevelopment area may have to extendfurther north. An additional option would be

to establish a new redevelopment area fromthe boundary north of Broadway Road up tothe river from 7th Avenue to 24th Street. Thelatter would require significant fundingsources and would address Rio Saladoconcerns. Another alternative would beexpand TAB based on neighborhood areas.

2. Create attractive gateways at South CentralAvenue and Broadway Road and at 24thStreet and Broadway Road.

3. Encourage the participation of privatelenders in developing programs that addressthe specific needs of TAB.

4. Upgrade commercial uses along SouthCentral Avenue and address housing nearHayden Park.

5. Target blight elimination and codeenforcement efforts along South CentralAvenue from Broadway Road to RoeserAvenue which is the village core, 24th Street,Broadway Road and Southern Avenue whichserve as major gateways. Identify specificproperties in greatest need and work withZoning Enforcement and property owners toachieve compliance with city standards.Identify funding sources or marketopportunities for screening of outside usesor conversion to other commercial uses.

6. Develop city owned land on the southeastcorner of Central Avenue and BroadwayRoad: market study of potential commercialuses.

7. Assist first-time homebuyers to acquireand/or rehabilitate single-family homes forhome ownership.

8. Rezone city-owned properties to theappropriate zones after market studies havebeen conducted for them. Give first priorityto C-3 zoned sites on South Central Avenue.

9. Plan strategy for the comprehensiverevitalization of TAB and explore what canbe done to stimulate the development orrehabilitation of quality housing.

10. Install landscaping and screening along 24thStreet from the river to Southern Avenue toimprove the north/south eastern gatewayimage.

11. Develop city-owned land on the southwestcorner and west side of 16th Street, south ofBroadway Road: market study of potentialemployment uses and impact of blight onthese sites.

12. Expand the Target Area B Citizens AdvisoryCommittee to include representation fromeach neighborhood in the area and developan annual work program, meeting schedule,and set of objectives.

13. Place a zoning overlay over Broadway Roadand South Central Avenue to eliminateexpansion of outside storage and usesexcept with a use permit. This may warranta city-wide text amendment.

14. Encourage new market rate single-familyhousing south of Roeser Road east of 21stStreet over to 24th Street.

15. Address Rio Salado development in a futureredevelopment area.

16. Conduct an assessment every five yearscorresponding to the most recent censusyear to determine changes in demographicsand to make recommendations forprograms.

17. Conduct Systematic Code Enforcement inTAB.

18. Screen commercial uses next to HaydenPark.

19. Pursue the elimination of illegal uses at thesouthwest corner of 12th Street andBroadway Road, the parking on the westside of 24th Street south of Sunland Avenue,and the storage warehouse on South FifthStreet.

20. Focus on improving residential areas aroundSouth Mountain High School, the proposedNFL Y.E.T. Academy on Second Street,south of Broadway Road, and the area eastof Rose Linda School on 12th Street.

21. Explore the feasibility of rezoning vacantmultifamily zoned parcels along RoeserRoad to single-family or R-2 zoning.

22. Focus future funding on job linkage andtraining.

23. Cleanup vacant lot and promote economicdevelopment on the northeast corner ofRoeser Road and Central Avenue.

24. Help to stabilize neighborhoods in the TABby encouraging the acquisition andrenovation of existing multifamily properties.

25. Rehabilitate homes in the area south ofHayden Park, near the large vacant site atthe southeast corner of Wier and FourthAvenue.

26. Develop public-private partnerships toconstruct new single-family and multifamilyproperties.

27. Relocate the auto repair facility at thenortheast corner of Southern Avenue andCentral Avenue and redevelop the shoppingcenter after Safeway relocates if necessary.

28. Pursue establishment of a South CentralAvenue property owners association toimprove the image and profitability ofbusinesses as well as expansion and newdevelopment opportunities.

29. Focus on the north side of Roeser Roadbetween Ninth Street and 12th Street.There is vacant land at all four corners of12th Street and Roeser Roads.

30. Construct half street improvements adjacentto Sunland Elementary School on ChambersStreet and 5th Avenue.

31. Develop a new name and identity for thearea.


vi

121

What is the purpose of the TargetArea B Redevelopment Plan?

What is the purpose of the TABRedevelopment Plan Assessment?

The Target Area B Redevelopment Planprovides residents, businesses, neighborhoodorganizations, and city government with anoverall guide and framework for stabilizing,developing, and revitalizing Target Area B (TAB).City Council approved the Redevelopment Planin January 1980, and a subsequent Action Planin October 1980. The Redevelopment Planprovides the legal basis to enable publicacquisition and disposition of property for thepurpose of eliminating blighted conditions.

The purpose of this assessment is to evaluatewhether or not the redevelopment goals andobjectives of the Plan have been met. Theassessment compares past and presentconditions to determine the amount of blighteliminated over the years; the number of capitalimprovement projects that have been completed(i.e., streets, sidewalks, lights, sanitary sewers,storm sewers, and housing rehabilitation); andthe type of programs and amount of fundingresources used to accomplish redevelopmentgoals and objectives. It also includesrecommendations for future expenditures.

What are the boundaries and subareaboundaries of TAB? Why were theseboundaries selected?

What are the U.S. Census Tract areasin TAB?

Target Area B is located in South MountainVillage. It is bounded by Broadway Road to thenorth; Southern Avenue to the south; 7th Avenueto the west; and 24th Street to the east

. The area east ofCentral Avenue is situated in City Council District8; while the area west of Central Avenue issituated in Council District 7.

The target area is divided into 14 geographicalareas called neighborhood revitalizationsubareas. These subareas were selected as away of identifying and characterizing healthy,declining, deteriorated, or strip-developedneighborhoods

.

There are three (3) census tract areas in TAB:1158, 1159, and 1160. All three census tractsextend north and south from Broadway Road toSouthern Avenue. From west to east, censustract 1158 extends from 7th Avenue to 7th Street;census tract 1159 extends from 7th Street to16th Street; and tract 1160 extends from 16thStreet to 24th Street. Census tract data wasused in this report as a standardized means ofcomparing a one square mile geographical areato another at the same time and over a 20 yearperiod.

(seeBoundary Map, Figure 1)

(see Neighborhood SubareaMap, Figure 2)

What is and has been the role of theTAB Citizens’ Advisory Committee?

According to the Citizens Advisory Committee(CAC) by-laws, the purpose of the committee isto identify, review, recommend, and participate inactions and projects that assist the target arearesidents, businesses, neighborhoodorganizations, and city government to improveand revitalize the target area. Specifically, thecommittee’s role is to study and determine thehousing, transportation, open space, communityfacilities, infrastructure, and redevelopmentneeds in the target area that benefit low andmoderate income persons and special groups.

The Redevelopment Plan states that alldevelopment, both residential and commercialresulting from public action includingredevelopment activities and land purchase, willbe subject to review and recommendation by theCAC for appropriateness as measured againstthe objectives of the plan.

Membership and participation in the CAC havedeclined since the committee was established18 years ago. Membership peaked during theearly years of the Redevelopment Plan when all14 subareas were well represented byneighborhood residents. Since the late 1980's,sustaining membership representation for thesubareas has been a challenge. Currently, thecommittee has 15 members. However,committee members are no longer beingselected to represent the subareas.

T A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessment IntroductionIntroductionIntroductionIntroduction

What role has been played by theTAB neighborhood organizations?

Neighborhood organizations have played amajor role in encouraging property maintenanceand neighborhood rehabilitation in Target AreaB. They have participated in programs such asNeighborhood Block Watches and Fight Backsto discourage criminal activity and safeguardtheir community by installing additional streetlights, conducting neighborhood clean-ups, andproviding after-school programs. There are 18neighborhood organizations in the arearegistered with the City of PhoenixNeighborhood Notification Office. Althoughsome neighborhood organizations are basedoutside Target Area B, their geographicalboundaries overlap into the target area. Thefollowing is a list of groups located in the threesquare mile area:

1. AMC Block Watch

2. Black United Fund

3. Braewood Neighborhood Association

4. Concerned Citizens Block WatchAssociation

5. Hayden Park Fight Back

6. Julian Neighborhood Association

7. Monte Vista Association

8. Neighborhood “Spirit” Association

9. Park South (Original Block Watch)

10. People United Fight Back

11. Rio Vista Neighborhood Association

12. South Mountain Chamber of Commerce

13. South Mountain Vistas of TomorrowCouncil

14. South Phoenix Action NeighborhoodAssociation

15. South Phoenix Neighborhood SuperCoalition

16. Southern Estates Block Watch

17. Sunland Avenue HomeownersAssociation

18. Women’s Block Club

The assessment included a 1996 Land UseSurvey, a TAB Resident and Business Survey,continued input from the TAB Citizens AdvisoryCommittee as well as review of otherdepartments’ records and recent census data.The methods used are further described in theAppendix.

How was the assessment prepared?

122

T A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentIntroductionIntroductionIntroductionIntroduction

CarlHayden

Park

Nueve

Park

BOUNDARYFigure 1

LEGEND

Prepared bythe City of Phoenix

Planning Department1996

NORTH

GRAPHIC SCALE IN MILES

0 1/41/8

Target Area B Boundary

24T

HS

T.

7T

HA

VE

.

CE

NT

RA

LA

VE

.

7T

HS

T.

12T

HS

T.

BROADWAYRD.

ROESERRD.

SOUTHERNAVE.

20T

HS

T.

16T

HS

T.

WIER AVE.

SUNLANDAVE.

Hermoso

Park

123

T A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessment IntroductionIntroductionIntroductionIntroduction

24T

HS

T.

7T

HA

VE

.

CE

NT

RA

LA

VE

.

7T

HS

T.

12T

HS

T.

BROADWAYRD.

ROESERRD.

SOUTHERNAVE.

20T

HS

T.

16T

HS

T.

WIER AVE.

SUNLANDAVE.

NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION SUBAREAS

Figure 2



NORTH


0 1/41/8

VII-A V-A

V-B

VII-C

VII-D

VI

IV-B

IV-C

IV-A

IIIII-B

I

II-A

VII-B

124

T A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentIntroductionIntroductionIntroductionIntroduction

G PO

OALS AND ERFORMANCE

BJECTIVES

What were the initial goals andperformance objectives of the TABRedevelopment Plan?

In 1979, the following Redevelopment Plangoals were established to guide redevelopmentactivities and revitalization efforts:

Ensure the stability of existing viableresidential areas and stabilize decliningresidential neighborhoods by removingstructurally substandard buildings andblighting influences which act as adisincentive for private reinvestment.

Eliminate environmental deficiencies,including small and irregular lot subdivisions,incompatible land uses, and inadequatestreet layout.

Remove impediments to land disposition anddevelopment through assembly of land intoreasonably sized and shaped parcels servedby improved public utilities.

Encourage and assist in the provision of asufficient number of low and moderateincome housing units in a suitable livingenvironment.

1. Blight Removal:

2. Physical Development Inhibitors:

3. Land Assembly and Improved Utilities:

4. Low/Moderate Income Housing:

5. Appropriate Population Densities:

6. Relocation Housing:

7. Improved Utilities:

8. Safe, Functional Transportation System:

9. Sense of Community and AttractiveNeighborhoods:

Ensure the establishment of appropriatepopulation densities and concentrations thatwill contribute to the well-being of persons,neighborhoods and preservation of theenvironment.

Provide a sufficient number of adequatehousing units for those householdsinvoluntarily displaced as a results ofredevelopment activity so that thosehouseholds that choose to may continueliving in the area.

Provide adequate public services andfacilities to meet the needs of the TargetArea.

Encourage the location and design oftransportation routes, compatible with landuses and the existing streets system, whichwill promote the free and safe flow of traffic.

Create a sense of community andneighborhood throughout the Target Area inorder to enhance it attractiveness as a placeto live, work, and play.

C AITY CTIONS

The following city actions were identified in 1978to guide the TAB program. The city wasinstructed to take the following proposedredevelopment actions to achieve the objectivesof the redevelopment plan:

Examine thoroughly the existing conditionswithin the target area, and of the needs anddesires of current area residents.

Acquire and clear deteriorating anddilapidated structures and assemble land forsale for redevelopment.

Provide relocation assistance to residentsand businesses displaced as a result ofpublic actions in accordance with the city’srelocation policy. Every effort shall be madeto relocate those residents and business thatrequest it within the target area, inaccommodations which are adequate, safeand sanitary.

Clear structures which are substandard,incompatible with the land use objectives,and/or necessary for parcel assemblage andredevelopment.

Remove or install public improvements asrequired to achieve plan objectives.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

125

T A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessment R P G Obedevelopment lan oals and jectivesR P G Obedevelopment lan oals and jectivesR P G Obedevelopment lan oals and jectivesR P G Obedevelopment lan oals and jectives

What were the long and short-termobjectives identified by the citizensteering committee?

In 1978, a citizen steering committee wasappointed by the Planning Commission to studyhousing, community facilities, transportation,open space, and redevelopment needs. In1979, based on the study’s conclusions, thecommittee recommended long and short-termobjectives for the area. These objectives wereused in preparing the Redevelopment Plan.

Bring housing up to code and removedwelling units not feasible for repair.

Improve level of home maintenance in theneighborhood and make area attractive todevelopment.

Citizen Steering Committee Long-Term Objectives:

1.

2.

3. Eliminate or screen incompatible land uses.

4. Develop neighborhood implementationprograms (i.e., neighborhood clean up).

5. Eliminate or minimize vacant lot hazards.

6. Improve appearance of area businesses.

7. Resolve animal control complaints inaccordance with city policy and ordinance.

8. Provide news media with positive stories onrevitalization efforts.

9. Development land use plan and rezoneland where feasible to promote residentialconstruction.

10. Provide small and minority businesses withcounseling and loans.

11. Place TAB residents in training programsand jobs.

12. Increase accessibility by expanding transitservice and improving street network.

13. Beautify by cleaning streets and alleys.

14. Reduce crime and arson rates.

15. Provide 24-hour access or service tomedical facilities.

16. Fully develop parks and expandrecreational facilities.

17. Develop a shopping center.

18. Expand library services.

19. Develop more social services and provideprograms for disabled citizens.

20. Improve streets, sidewalks, irrigationditches, street lights, storm sewers, sanitarysewers, water lines, and construct bridges.

1. Infrastructure improvements (i.e., water andsewer lines, streets, sidewalks, andirrigation ditches).

Citizen Steering Committee Short-Term Objectives:

2. Housing rehabilitation (i.e., blightelimination, rehabilitation loan pool, urbanhomesteading and purchase/rehabilitation,and site office operation).

3. Recreation facilities (i.e., Hayden Parkexpansion, Momo Park improvement,Hermoso Park improvement, and NuevePark improvement).

4. Economic development (i.e., job clearingcenter, small business technical assistance,and commercial rehabilitation loans).

5. Service Center (i.e., Family Violence Center,Youth Recreation Center and expansion ofHuman Resource Center #1).

What have the expenditures been foractions pursuant to the Target Area BRedevelopment Plan?

Since the beginning of the redevelopment plan,the city has linked over $17 million of CommunityDevelopment Block Grant (CDBG) funds withprograms and plan objectives to stabilize,develop, and revitalize Target Area B. Inaddition, bond funds and private investmentmonies has been used to provide maximumleveraging. Most of the funding has been usedto eliminate blighted conditions, provide housingrehabilitation, expand park sites, and makeinfrastructure improvements to streets,sidewalks, sewer lines, storm sewers. Theoverall expenditures in TAB have beenapproximately $25,907,152 (see

) In 1978, the estimated total amount neededto redevelop Target Area B was $38,651,000.

.

NeighborhoodRevitalization Programs and Funding List, Figure55

126

T A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentR P G Obedevelopment lan oals and jectivesR P G Obedevelopment lan oals and jectivesR P G Obedevelopment lan oals and jectivesR P G Obedevelopment lan oals and jectives

127

T A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessment R P G Obedevelopment lan oals and jectivesR P G Obedevelopment lan oals and jectivesR P G Obedevelopment lan oals and jectivesR P G Obedevelopment lan oals and jectives

This amount was identified in the “TotalProgram Need in Target Area B by Subareas”report developed by the Citizen SteeringCommittee .

The Plan’s goals and performance objectivesremained the same in 1985. However, the Planwas amended in 1985 to include a proposedland use map. The proposed map indicatedsome substantial changes from the PhoenixGeneral Plan map. A reduction of commercialuses along Broadway Road from 7th Avenue to22nd Street; a reduction of high-densitymultifamily residential along Southern Avenuebetween 7th Avenue and Central Avenue; anincrease in public/quasi-public uses throughoutthe area and a decrease in industrial uses;commercial and multifamily on the northwestcorner of 24th Street and Southern Avenuewere proposed. In addition, the proposed landuse map added a new land use category, calledmixed use, that was not shown on the PhoenixGeneral Plan map. Also, the northwest cornerof 24th Street and Southern Avenue was notdesignated for commercial and multifamily onthe amended 1985 Target Area B ProposedLand Use Map .

(see Figure 52)

(see Figure 58)

How did the Plan’s goals andperformance objectives change in1985?

A MNALYSIS ETHOD

In the following pages goals and performanceobjectives have been grouped by eight maincategories:

In each chapter, the goals and objectives arereviewed and progress toward achieving themdocumented. The Appendix covers theMethodology, Relationship to Other Plans, andResults of the Residents and Business Survey.

1. Social and Economic Development

2. Land Use and Zoning

3. Housing

4. Infrastructure

5. Public Safety

6. Community Facilities Services

7. Neighborhood RevitalizationPrograms and Funding Sources

8. Recommendations

8

G PO

OALS AND ERFORMANCE

BJECTIVES

What goals and performanceobjectives did the Plan includeregarding social and economiccharacteristics?

Plan Goals:

1. Create a sense of community andneighborhood throughout the Target Area inorder to enhance it attractiveness as a placeto live, work, and play.

2. Ensure the establishment of appropriatepopulation densities and concentrations thatwill contribute to the well-being of persons,neighborhoods and preservation of theenvironment.

1. Improve appearance of area businesses.

2. Provide small and minority businesses withcounseling and loans.

3. Place TAB residents in job training programs.

4. Develop a shopping center.


6. Provide new media with positive stories onrevitalization efforts.

Citizen Steering CommitteeObjectives:

Plan Performance Objectives:

The following 1978 goals and performanceobjectives were accomplished:

1. Refer jobs through the Job Clearing Center(number not quantified).

2. Provide small business technical assistance.

3. Provide commercial rehabilitation loans.

4. Provide site office operation to assist inproject coordination, implementation andcitizen participation.

1. A Job Clearing Center (JCC) was funded withCommunity Development Block Grant from1978 until June 30, 1981. This programmade employment referrals to area residents.Approximately 439 job referrals were made toTAB residents.

2. The Arizona Small Business DevelopmentCenter (ASBDC) contracted with the city toprovide technical and managementassistance to businesses for commercialdevelopment. According to a 1981 statusreport, the contract was not designed at thattime to provide physical improvements tosmall businesses. The total impact ofASBDC assistance was limited because:

Which goals and performanceobjectives have been met and whichremain to be accomplished? Howwere the goals and performanceobjectives?

1) the size of TAB was very large,

2) interest rates were high, which influencedan economic slow down,

3) the center had limited staff, and

4) no specific quantitative goals were set forTAB.

The Center provided management assistance to82 firms and processed 28 loan packagestotaling $1,329,539 for TAB businesses.

3. In 1985, a privately developed shoppingcenter was constructed on the southeastcorner of Central Avenue and Roeser Road.However, the performance goal to construct ashopping center on the eastern perimeter ofTAB has not been met. During 1995-96,design plans for a commercial retail area at24th Street and Broadway Road, referred toas the Four Corners Proposal, weredeveloped.

4. Target Area B residents, businesses, andcommunity

1. Provide greater small business support andassist smaller businesses in completingrequests for proposals (RFPs).

leaders continuously providepositive news stories to the media. However,strategies to implement a public relationsprogram with area news media were notdeveloped.

What social and economic needshave the community identified in1997?

T A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentS E Docial and conomic evelopmentS E Docial and conomic evelopmentS E Docial and conomic evelopmentS E Docial and conomic evelopment

9

2. Develop Rio Salado River Walk similar toSan Antonio, Texas’ River Walk to encourageeconomic development along Central Avenuewithin the Target Area.

3. Develop a contact list for city programs andhave Grants Compliance supervisor attendTAB meetings on an regular basis.

4. Organize a business alliance, asrecommended by the South Central AvenueCorridor Study.

5. Provide job linkage with residents.

6. Develop all city-owned vacant properties forappropriate commercial or residential use.

P HC

OPULATION OUSEHOLD

HARACTERISTICS

Is the Target Area gaining or losingpopulation and households?

AND

Target Area B as a whole has been gainingpopulation and households since 1970.According to the U.S. Census, there wereapproximately 12,788 people living in TAB in1970. By 1980, the population had increased by158 residents to 12,946. In 1990, it wasestimated that 13,216 people lived in the area;an increase of 270 persons since 1980 and 428persons over the past 20 years. The TABpopulation represented 16% of the totalpopulation for South Mountain Village (80,765persons) in 1990.

Census tracts 1158 and 1160 experienced somesignificant changes in population between 1980and 1995. During that fifteen year span, censustract 1158 experienced a population increase of1,575 people while census tract 1160experienced a population decrease of 853persons. The area’s third census tract, censustract 1159, experienced a decrease of only 4people. denotes population from 1970to 1995.

Figure 3

How do the household compositionand size in the Target Area compareto those in the city? How have theychanged since the establishment ofthe Target Area relative to the city?

There are approximately 4,206 households inTarget Area B. Based on the 1995 U.S. Census,the average household size is 3.23 persons,which is higher than the City of Phoenixhousehold average of 2.68 persons. Theaverage household size for Target Area B hasbeen increasing and decreasing over the pasttwenty-five years. In 1970 the number ofhouseholds was 3,397, and the averagehousehold size was 3.8 persons. By 1980 thenumber of households was 3,767, but theaverage household size had declined to 3.0persons.

Comparatively, the City of Phoenix averagehouseholds steadily decreased from 3.1 personsin 1970, to 2.7 in 1980, and 2.6 persons in 1990.

shows the change in household sizebetween 1970 and 1995.Figure 4

CHANGE IN POPULATIONFigure 3

Source:U.S. Census

Change in PopulationCensus Year 1970- 1980- 1990-Tract 1970 1980 1990 1995 1980 1990 1995115811591160Total

4,815 4,606 5,554 6,182 209 +948 +6283,081 3,408 3,357 3,404 +327 51 +474,892 4,932 4,305 4,079 +40 627 226

12,788 12,946 13,216 13,665 +158 +270 +449

AVERAGE NUMBER OF PERSONSPER HOUSEHOLD

Figure 4

Source: U. S. Census.

1970 1980 1990 1995

Year

0

Phoenix

Number ofPersons

1

2

3

4

TargetArea

B

3.12.62.7

3.8

3.03.4 3.2

2.7

T A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessment S E Docial and conomic evelopmentS E Docial and conomic evelopmentS E Docial and conomic evelopmentS E Docial and conomic evelopment

10

How does the age composition of thepopulation compare to that of thecity? How has it changed sinceestablishment of the Target Arearelative to itself and the city?

The population group identified as "under age18" showed an increase for tract 1158 and adecrease in population for census tract 1160.From 1980 to 1990, population "under 18 years"for census tract 1158 increased from anestimated 1,665 to 2,021 persons, an increaseof 356 people. During the same period of time,population “under 18 years” for census tract1160 decreased from 1,923 to 1,429 persons,which is a decline of 494 persons.

Between 1980 and 1990, population betweenthe age of 25 and 44 has showed an increase of484 persons for census tract 1158. The "24 to44" age category, together with the "under age18", category made up 89% of the populationincrease for census tract 1158. There was anapparent increase in population “under 5 years”for census tract 1158 by 1990. It appears thatmost of the births for Target Area B between1980 and 1990 occurred in this census tract.

on the following page showspercentage of population by age group.Figure 6

HOUSEHOLD TYPE AND SIZE

Figure 5


Family, Non-married Non-Family One PersonFamily, Married

Percentage of Units

Target Area B Phoenix60% 60%45%75%

71%

75%45%30% 30%15% 15%0%

1980

52% 58%

6%3%

23%

13%

21%

24%

1990

50%

7%

26%

33% 16%

42%

22%

3%

1970

69%

2%

20%

9%

0%

17%

12%

TAB TAB TAB TABPHX PHX PHX PHX


Over the years, there has been a significantamount of change in household type. In 1970,the percent of married families in TAB wasslightly larger than that of the City; with 71% and69%, respectively. The key difference was in thenon-family and one-person categories. Thepercent of non-family households showed zero(0%) percent for TAB, and 20% for Phoenix.The percent of one-person households was 17%for TAB, and two (2%) percent for Phoenix.

In 1980, the percent of married families startedto decrease and the percent of family, non-

married increased. The U.S. Census Bureaudefined family, non-married as a single head ofhousehold, male or female, with children. Themost significant trend by 1990, was the highincrease of family and non-married households.In 1990, 33% of the households in TAB werenon-married families (almost tripled since 1970),and 16% of the households in the City ofPhoenix were non-married families (almostdoubled since 1970). Poverty rates tend to behigher in single-headed households withchildre shows the percentage ofhousehold type and size from 1970 and 1990.

n. Figure 5

11

POPULATION BY AGEFigure 6

Under 5 5-17 18-54 55-74 75+

1970

1980

Percentage of People

Target Area B Phoenix

12%

33%

43%10%

2% 3%

15%

3%

27%

47%14%

21%

11%

28%

46%13%

53%

3%

8%

9%

30%30% 40%40%50% 50% 60%60% 20%20% 10%10% 0

19903%

8%

19%

13%4%

55%

11%

25%

46%

13%

19954%

8%20%

12%4%

55%

10%25%

49%

12%

TAB TABTABTAB TABPHX PHXPHXPHX PHX


TAB ETHNICITY BY CENSUS TRACTFigure 7

Total Total Total Total1158 1159 1160 Percent 1158 1159 1160 Percent 1158 1159 1160 Percent 1158 1159 1160 Percent

WhiteBlackNative AmerAsian/PacificOther RaceHispanicTotal

1970 1980 1990 1995

76% 47% 0% 39% 42% 22% 4% 23% 25% 12% 2% 14% 15% 11% 2% 10%3% 27% 71% 35% 7% 35% 68% 38% 8% 30% 65% 32% 7% 24% 61% 27%1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% 1%0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%9% 25% 26% 24% 48% 41% 26% 38% 66% 57% 31% 53% 76% 65% 36% 62%

100% 100% 100% 100%


How does the ethnic composition ofthe population compare to that of thecity? How has it changed since theestablishment of the Target Arearelative to itself and the city?

Ethnic composition in TAB is considerablydiverse compared to the City of Phoenix. In1995 approximately 90% of TAB’s populationwas minority, compared to 35% for the city.

Since 1970, the White population in TAB hassteadily decreased from 39% in 1970, to 23% in1980, to 14% in 1990, and 10% in 1995. Whilethe White population has decreased, theHispanic population has increase from 24% in1970, to 38% in 1980, 53% in 1990, and 62% in1995. The Black population has been decliningsince 1980 in TAB. It rose three percent in 1980to 38%, and then declined by six percent in 1990to 32%; and again in 1995 to 27%. In 1995,Blacks made up only 5% of the city’s population.Native American/Asian/Pacific population hasbeen consistent with the city’s, with one percent(1%) in TAB since 1970, and two (2%) percent inthe city. shows the percentage ofpopulation ethnicity by TAB census tracts.

In 1995, persons of Hispanic origin made up62% of Target Area B population, compared to26% for the City Phoenix. The U.S. Bureau ofCensus states that persons of Hispanic originmay be of any race. The census defines originas the ancestry, nationality group, lineage, orcountry of birth of the person or the person'sparents or ancestors before their arrival in theUnited States on the following pageshows an ethnic comparison for TAB and thecity.

.

Figure 7

Figure 8

12


POPULATION BY ETHNICITYFigure 8

Source: U. S. Census. * This group includes American Indians, Eskimos, Aleutians, Asians and Pacific Islanders.

39%

38%

24%

23%

1%0.7%

38%

35% .4%

Target Area B

Phoenix

White OtherBlack American Indian/Asian* Hispanic

1970 1980 1990 1995Year

1%1%

82%11%

5%

78%

2%5% .2%

15%

53%

27%

32%

10%

.3%62%

1%

1%.3%

14%

3%

3%

.1%

5%

20%

72%65%

5% 1%

26%

TAB TABTAB TAB TABPHX PHXPHX PHX PHX

1%

1990 EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

Persons 25 Years and Over

Census Tract TAB Citywide

Figure 9

Total Total Total1158 1159 1160 Number Percentage Percentage

Less than 9th Grade9th - 12th Grade, No DiplomaHigh School GraduateSome College, No DegreeAssociate College DegreeCollege Graduate or Professional DegreeTotal

996 544 662 2,202 32% 9%690 464 639 1,793 26% 13%558 261 478 1,297 19% 25%361 332 442 1,135 16% 26%121 94 66 281 4% 7%114 14 94 222 3% 20%

2,840 1,709 2,381 6,930 100% 100%Source: 1990 U.S. Census

E SDUCATION AND CHOOLS

How do the Target Area’s educationalattainment rates compare to those ofthe city? How have the rateschanged since establishment of theTarget Area?

What elementary schools serve theTarget Area?

The percent of adult residents (age 25 years andolder) in TAB that had graduated from highschool increased from 21% in 1970 to 27% in1980. The percentage of high school graduatesdecreased to 19% in 1990.

Although there was a decline in high schoolgraduates, there was a rise in the number ofadults residents who had some collegeeducation. In 1970, 13% of the area residentshad some college education. That percentageclimbed to 16% in 1980, and 20% in 1990.However, the percent of college graduates haschanged very little over the past twenty years.Comparatively, the number of college graduateshas steadily increased in the City of Phoenixfrom 12% in 1970 to 16% in 1980, and 20 % in1990. shows educational attainment bycensus tract; on the following pageshows attainment for TAB and the city from 1970to 1990.

There are three elementary schools and onemiddle school serving the Target Area: Sunland(K-8), Rose Linda (K-8), Martin Luther King Jr.(K-4), and Percy Julian (5-8). These schools are

Figure 9Figure 10

According to the 1990 U.S. Census,approximately 50% of the population five yearsand older spoke a primary language other thanEnglish.

What percentage of persons in theTarget Area speak a primarylanguage other than English?

13

What is the ethnic composition of thestudent at these schools? How hasthis changed since establishment ofthe Target Area?

During the 1996-97 enrollment year, studentethnicity for each school was estimated asshown in .Figure 12


How do the test scores of theseschools compare to the schooldistrict and/or Maricopa Countyaverages? How has this changedsince establishment of the TargetArea?

Students in the third and eighth grades weretested on their achievement of the ArizonaEssentials Skills using district-selectedassessments. An Essential Skills CompletionReport (ESCR) was compiled by each school toindicate the percentage of students meetingachievement standards determined by thedistrict for competency in reading, mathematicsand writing skills.

Each subject area for each grade has severalclusters of skills which are tested separatelythroughout the school year until mastery isachieved. For each cluster the standard to bemet is given as a percentage of the possiblepoints on the test. on thefollowing page show achievement skills forgrade 3 for each school, and grade 8,respectively.

Figures 13 and 14

part of the Roosevelt School District. In general,students from the area attend South MountainHigh School. There are three Private/CharterSchools in TAB: Esperanza MontessoriAcademy, NFL YET Academy, and Teen ChoiceLeadership Academy. (See

for the location of schools.Figure 44, Public

Facilities Map

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

Figure 10


26%

20% 3%

32%

Target Area B Phoenix

9th to 12th Grade-No Diploma 4 or more years

of CollegeHigh School Graduate

< 9th Grade Some College

Persons 25 Years and older

19%

20%

16%

12%

13%

9%

14%

33%

21%

25%

35%

15%

21%

27%

22%

3%

5%

12%13%

12%

33%25%

23%

18%

37%

33%

Year

TAB TABPHX PHX

1970

1980

1990

How many students are enrolled inthese schools? How has thischanged since establishment of theTarget Area?

Figure 11 indicates student enrollment at TABschools. Enrollment has increased anddecreased at these schools since TAB wasestablished.

ELEMENTARY AND MIDDLE SCHOOLSTUDENT ENROLLMENT

Figure 11

K-8 889 649 722 711 676K-8 842 551 687 648 663K-4 664 591 516 618 5755-8 N/A 450 423 470 464

2,395 2,241 2,348 2,447 2,378

Schools Grade Student Enrollment ClassroomLevels 1970 1978 1985 1996 Capacity

SunlandRose LindaM.L. KingPercy JulianTotal

Source: Roosevelt School District, Phoenix, AZ, 1996

1996-97 STUDENT ETHNIC COMPOSITIONFigure 12

Native HispanicSchool White Black Amer. Asian Origin Total

SunlandRose LindaM.L. KingPercy Julian

10% 1% * * 89% 100%4% 3% * * 92% 99%1% 69% * * 30% 100%3% 60% 1% * 36% 100%

* Native American and Asian populations were so few they are estimated at 0%.Source: Roosevelt School District

14

How many “at risk” students areenrolled at these schools? How hasthis changed since establishment ofthe Target Area?

Based on certain “at risk” indicators, it isestimated that as high as 93% of studentenrollment in some TAB schools havecharacteristics of being “at risk”. Theseindicators include: attendance/absentee rates,Limited English Proficiency (LEP),socioeconomic status based on familyparticipation in the free and reduced lunchprograms, low standardized test scores, andmobility indexes.

As one “at risk” indicator, recording attendanceand absenteeism (percent of student populationattending on a given day), can be used to helpmeasure the amount of academic instructionneeded for each student. Students who missvaluable learning and instructional informationfrom chronic absenteeism or due to transferringin and out of school (defined as the mobility rate)are at a higher level of being at risk. In addition,the ability to speak and read English determinesstudent academic performance and the ability tocompete in a predominantly English speakingsociety. Many schools provide Limited EnglishProficiency classes to students who have alimited capacity for speaking English. Becausethe district has a high percentage of Hispanicpopulation, Spanish is often a primary languageand English is often used as a secondarylanguage. Limited English Proficiency candetermine the educational achievement ofstudents. The Roosevelt District providesLimited English Proficiency (LEP) classes whichgive students who have a limited capacity to


STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT ESSENTIAL SKILLS1995-96 (GRADE 8)

Figure 14

District Percent PercentPercy Julian School Standard Tested Mastery

MATHEMATICSStatisticsProbabilityAnalyzing DataMeasurementGeometryGeometry PrinciplesExpressions & EquationsPatternsMathematicalReasoning

READINGPersonal ExperienceNarrativeStoryInformative ReportCommunicationPoemSummaryEssay

WRITINGPersonal ExperienceNarrativeStoryReportCommunicationPoemSummarySpecialized Expository Paper

75% -- --75% 86% 11%75% 79% 48%75% 76% 9%75% -- --75% 79% 7%75% -- --75% 73% 4%

75% 82% 5%

75% -- --75% -- --75% 80% 13%75% 73% 6%75% -- --75% 83% 20%75% 85% 45%

75% -- --75% -- --75% 76% 41%75% 69% 35%75% -- --75% 84% 39%75% 87% 57%

Source: Arizona School Report Card 1995-1996

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT ESSENTIAL SKILLS1995-96 (GRADE 3)

Figure 13

District Rose M.L. Rose M.L.Standard Sunland Linda King Sunland Linda King

SchoolsPercent Tested Percent Mastery

MATHEMATICSSorting/

ClassifyingConjecturingFractionsUsing MoneyMeasurementPatternsIdentifying

ShapeInterpreting

WordProblems

READINGPersonal

ExperienceNarrative

StoryInformative

ReportCommunicationPoem

WRITINGPersonal

ExperienceNarrative

ImaginativeStory

ReportCommunicationPoem

75% 73% 72% 77% 54% 45% 52%75% 86% 86% 62% 11% 27% 49%75% 77% 7% 67% 44% 60% 34%75% 88% 86% 88% 24% 31% 50%75% 76% 75% 77% 47% 16% 31%75% 69% 72% 69% 66% 50% 67%

75% 67% 65% 63% 73% 30% 54%

75% 80% 88% 89% 2% 34% 64%

75% 77% 7% 67% 27% 0% 27%75% 69% 72% 69% 62% 25% 52%

75% 88% 86% 61% 28% 39% 59%75% 86% 89% 89% 27% 30% 60%75% 80% 79% 81% 48% 16% 46%

75% 77% 7% 68% 63% 20% 40%

75% 86% 89% 84% 11% 51% 34%75% 88% 86% 63% 12% 37% 46%75% 69% 72% 68% 92% 52% 55%75% 80% 67% 76% 66% 31% 56%

Source: Arizona School Report Card 1995-1996

15


1995-96 AT RISK STUDENT INDICATORSFigure 15

Free/ Limited AdjudicatedReduced Attendance English Mobility Through

School Lunch Rate Proficient Rate Court

Sunland

Rose Linda

M.L. King

Percy Julian

90% 95% 20% 15% 4293% 94% 15% (not given) 3392% 94% 20% 12% 487% 94% 21% 7% 53

Source: City of Phoenix Youth and Education Office

speak English a greater chance to compete andsucceed. In 1996, there were 3,769 studentsparticipating in Limited English Proficiencyclasses in the Roosevelt School District.

Another “at risk” indicator that helps determinethe socioeconomic status of students is bylooking at income guidelines established for freeand reduced lunches. These guidelines indicateif a student’s family is in poverty. To be eligiblefor the free lunch program, a family income mustbe at 130% of the federal poverty guidelines and180% of the guidelines for reduced lunch.

ndicates percentage of students at-risk by factor by school.Figure 15 i

What types of city and schoolprograms are available at theseschools?

Sunland School: In the 1996-97 academicyear, the city has sponsored the PRL-Prevention& Enrichment Program, Gang ResistanceEducation and Training (GREAT), Drug AbuseResistance Education (DARE), School ResourceOfficer (SRO), and Urban Survival Schools.

The school offers the following programs:DARE, GREAT, CRCM Algebra Club, UrbanSystemic Initiative, English as a SecondLanguage (ESL), Bilingual Education, and On-site Special Education.

In the 1996-97 academicyear, the city has sponsored the PRL-Prevention& Enrichment Program, Gang ResistanceEducation and Training (GREAT), Drug AbuseResistance Education (DARE), School ResourceOfficer (SRO), and Urban Survival Schools.

The school offers the following programs: JuniorAchievement (JA), Urban Survival, After-SchoolTutorial, Fame, Fase Club, Urban SystemicInitiative, English as a Second Language (ESL),Bilingual Education, Full-day Kindergarten, andHead Start.

In the 1996-97academic year, the city has sponsored theUrban Survival Schools.

The school offers the following programs:Bilingual Magnet, Gifted Magnet, SpecialEducation, Head Start, Project Start All-DayKindergarten, Regular Program Half-DayKindergarten, and School-wide Chapter IProgram. In addition to the programs offeredabove, the school offered the following programsduring the 1994-95 academic year: UrbanSystemic Initiative, Gifted Bilingual, At-RiskPreschool, English as a Second Language(ESL), and School Recycling.

Rose Linda School

Martin Luther King Jr. Schoo :

:

l

Percy Julian

Sunland School:

Rose Linda School:

Martin Luther King Jr. School:

Percy Julian:

Sunland School:

:

Have these schools received anyhonors or awards?

Do these schools have anycommunity partnerships?

In the 1996-97 academic year,the city has sponsored the PRL-Prevention &Enrichment Program, Gang ResistanceEducation and Training (GREAT), Drug AbuseResistance Education (DARE), and SchoolResource Officer (SRO).

The school offers the following programs: UrbanSystemic Initiative, Bilingual Education, On-siteSpecial Education, and Magnet Programs forgifted and bilingual students.

CHAMPS National ArtContest (Student Awarded)-1995.

Student of the Month,Principal’s Honor Roll, Student PerfectAttendance, Staff Perfect Attendance.

Fourth GradeEssay Winner, School Achievement (1990-91-92).

No honors or awards werereported for Percy Julian.

The school has establishedcommunity partnerships with the followingcorporations and organizations: Project toImprove Minority Education (PRIME), RunningStart (1992), Project PRIME (1994), ArizonaScience Center (1995).

16


ROOSEVELT SCHOOL DISTRICTCONCERNS & NEEDS

Figure 16

1978

1996

Need for quality staff.

Lack of community leadership.

Need for better news coverage to improve the image of SouthPhoenix.

Need to reorganized the schools (K-5, K-6, 6, 7, 8).

Concern about abandoning the neighborhood school which leads toincreased busing away from neighborhoods and potential loss ofstudents to private schools.

Concern about the increase in student population.

Need for gyms and media centers at school sites.

Need for additional bilingual staff to accommodate student needs.

Need for more facilities due to student population growth.

Need to repair aging facilities and equipment.

Source: Roosevelt School District, Phoenix, AZ, October 10, 1978 and April 1996

Rose Linda School:

Martin Luther King Jr. School:

Percy Julian:

What are the concerns and needs ofthe Roosevelt School District relatedto these schools?

The school hasestablished community partnerships with thefollowing corporations and organizations: Projectto Improve Minority Education (1992), RunningStart (1992), Project PRIME (1994), ArizonaScience Center (1995), American Express(1995), Apple (1995), and Sundt Corporation(1995).

The school hasestablished community partnerships with thefollowing corporations and organizations: JuniorAchievement (JA) (1992), Running Start (1992).

Junior Achievement (JA) (1992),Running Start (1992), Project to ImproveMinority Education (PRIME) (1992), and ProjectPRIME (1994).

indicates past and current concernsand needs identified by the Roosevelt SchoolDistrict.

Figure 16

E CCONOMIC HARACTERISTICS

How does the median householdincome of the Target Area compare tothat of the City? How has medianhousehold income changed since theestablishment of the Target Area?

What is the distribution of majorincome groupings in the Target Area?

There was a moderate rise in the medianhousehold incomes for Target Area B between1980 to 1990. Nevertheless, householdincomes have remained much lower than theCity’s median household income. In 1980, themedian household income in TAB was $11,291and the median household income in the citywas $17,419. At that time, incomes in TAB wereapproximately 65% of the city’s medianhousehold income. In 1990, the medianhousehold income in TAB was approximately$15,567 compared to $29,291 in the City. Thus,TAB’s median household income was equivalentto 53% of the city’s median household income.The median income for Phoenix increased to$32,950 in 1995. The 1995 median income forTAB is not available.

The distribution of major income groupingsindicate that, TAB household income groups arenot keeping up with the city’s income groups. In1990, almost half the households in TAB, 49%,had an income of less than $15,000, while 23%of the City’s households made less than

17


MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOMEBY CENSUS TRACT

Figure 17

Median Percentage PercentageCensus Household Income Change ChangeTract 1969 1979 1989 1969-1979 1979-1989

1158

1159

1160

Citywide

$5,924 $10,864 $12,687 83% 17%

$6,031 $11,230 $18,717 86% 66%

$7,179 $11,779 $15,298 64% 30%

$8,260 $17,419 $29,291 110% 68%

Source: U.S. Census

HOUSEHOLD INCOMEFigure 18

Target Area B

Source: U. S. Census. * Note: income range between $25,000 and $49,999 not deliniated in 1969.

<$15,000 $35,000-$49,999$15,000-$24,999 >$50,000$25,000-$34,999 $25,000-$49,999*

Phoenix

4%1%

17%

79%93%

7%

0.1%0.3%

5%10%

12%

23%

49%

23%

23%

19%17%

18%

23%9.0% 2%

2%

42%28%

64%

17% 9%4%

TAB TAB TABTAB TABTABPHX PHX PHXPHX PHXPHX

<$15,000 Income not reported$15,000-$29,999 $30,000-$59,999 >$60,000

15%

35%

9%

40%

1%

14%

15%

22%12%

38%

TAB TAB TAB TABTABPHX PHX PHX PHXPHX

Year

1989

1979

1969*

1995

$15,000. Household income groups, $15,000 to$29,999 and $30,000 to $50,000, are consistentbetween TAB and the city; at 30% and 15% forTAB, and 28% and 16% for the city, respectively.The $50,000 and over income distribution groupalso shows TAB not keeping up with the city’sincome group. In 1990, only two percent (2%) ofTarget Area residents made $50,000 and over,while 34% of the city’s households made morethan $50,000. shows medianhousehold income by census tract, and

compares income groupings for TAB and thecity.

Figure 17Figure

18

HOUSEHOLDS BELOW POVERTY LEVELFigure 19

Percentage Change PercentageChangeCensus Tract 1970 1980 1990 1970-1980 1980-1990115811591160TAB TotalCitywide Total

262 18% 350 24% 668 40% 36% 91%221 28% 285 32% 276 33% 30% -3%190 17% 464 33% 499 36% 144% 8%673 20% 1,099 29% 1,443 37% 63% 31%

22,072 13% 31,576 11% 45,207 12% 43% 43%

Source: U.S. Census

By 1995, 35% of TAB households made anincome of less than $15,000, compare to 14% ofthe city’s households. Again, the householdincome distribution group $40,000 and overshows a substantial gap with only 5% of TAB’shouseholds, and 25% of the city’s householdsmaking $40,000 and over.

What percentage of persons living inthe Target Area are below the povertylevel as defined by the census? Howdoes this compare to the city? Howhas this percentage changed sincethe establishment of the Target Area?

The number of households living below thepoverty level in TAB has risen since 1970. In1970, 20% of all TAB households were livingbelow the poverty level. In 1980, 29% werebelow the poverty level. By 1990, 37% of allhouseholds in TAB were below the poverty level.In comparison, the number of TAB householdsliving below the poverty level in 1990 was almost3 times higher than the city average of 12%.The level of household poverty is shown in

.Figure 19

Of the 3,905 households in TAB in 1990, 1,443households (37%) were identified as living inpoverty. The 1990 U.S. Census used a medianhousehold income of less than $25,000 as anindicator of poverty. Census tract 1158 had thehighest number of households, 668, earning lessthan $25,000. A total of 2,310 (59%) of allhouseholds in TAB receive some type of PublicAssistance Income, including Social Securityand retirement income, in 1990.

18


T A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessment L U Zand se and oningL U Zand se and oningL U Zand se and oningL U Zand se and oning

19

G PO

OALS AND ERFORMANCE

BJECTIVES

What goals and performanceobjectives did the redevelopmentplan include regarding land use andzoning?

Plan Goals:

In order to achieve the Plan Goals thefollowing planning principles fromthe Plan should be applied.

The Land Use Plan should acknowledge theexisting private and public use of landthroughout the Target Area at the prevailingland use intensity.

1. Ensure the establishment of appropriatepopulation densities and concentrations thatwill contribute to the well being of persons,neighborhoods and preservation of theenvironment.

2. Eliminate environmental deficiencies,including small and irregular lot subdivisions,incompatible land uses, and inadequatestreet layout.

3. Remove impediments to land dispositionand development through assembly of landinto reasonably sized and shaped parcelsserved by improved public utilities.

The Land Use Plan should recognize theinherent incompatibility of certain land usesand strive to segregate those that arepotentially incompatible.

The Land Use Plan should foster a diversityof housing types based upon the diverseneighborhood characteristics existingthroughout the Target Area.

The Land Use Plan should fosteraesthetically pleasing commercial areaswhich are conveniently situated anddesigned for the ease and safety ofpedestrian and vehicular access.

The Land Use Plan should ensure that allnew and existing housing will be served tothe best possible extent by adequatecommercial, recreational, educational, socialand transportation facilities, as well asemployment opportunities. In keeping withsound planning principles, theredevelopment plan attempts to achieve abalance of employment opportunities andresidential development.

Citizen SteeringCommittee/Performance Objectives:

1. Develop land use plan and rezone landwhere feasible to promote residentialconstruction.

2. Eliminate or screen incompatible land usesand zoning districts.

3. Eliminate or minimize vacant lot hazards.

Which land use and zoning goals andperformance objectives have beenmet and which remain to beaccomplished? How were the goalsand objectives met?

Many of the land use and zoning performanceobjectives have been addressed through zoningenforcement, demolition and clean up efforts,and land use acquisition and development.However, many of the objectives still need to beaddressed in TAB.

Requests have been made by residents toexpand the Target Area to include the northside of Broadway Road to

1. The land use and zoning performanceobjective to develop a land use plan for TABhas been accomplished. Since the TargetArea B Redevelopment Plan wasestablished in 1978, there have been threeland use plans developed for the area:

Neither the 1985 Land Use Map or theSouth Central Avenue Corridor Plan wasconverted into General Plan Amendments.

Pueblo Avenue,7th Avenue to 24th Street. Expansion of thearea would provide redevelopmentopportunities for both sides of a majorarterial street to stimulate futureredevelopment activities.

1)TAB Land Use Plan,

2)1985 Land Use Map, an amendment tothe original plan, and

3)South Central Avenue Corridor Plan.

20

L U Zand se and oningL U Zand se and oningL U Zand se and oningL U Zand se and oning T A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessment

2. Based on the existing land uses, there are anumber of zoning districts in TAB that areinappropriately classified. Even though 47%of the land is developed with single-familyresidential uses, approximately 44% of theland is zoned multifamily residential, whichwould allow a maximum density of 19,503housing units. The 1996 land use surveyindicates that only four percent (4%) of theland is developed with multifamily residentialland uses. In addition, there is a substantialamount of vacant land, 492 acres, in thearea that has the potential of beingdeveloped for housing and commercialuses. Many of these vacant infill propertiesare used for illegal dumping (containingbroken glass bottles and trash) andcontribute to the blighted situation in TAB.Land use strategies needs to be developedand implemented to eliminate the potentialof incompatible zoning districts in the area toencourage better quality housing.

3. The city has assisted in eliminating vacantlot hazards and incompatible land usesthrough demolition and clean up efforts withCDBG funds. Based on a 1981 statusreport, blight elimination was originallysuppose to be used to enhance the HousingRehabilitation Program by removingsubstandard and/or dilapidated single-familyhousing units. However, implementation ofthe performance goal changed because itwas determined that the single-familyhousing units identified for acquisition werefeasible for repair and could be rehabilitated.It was also indicated that the housing unitswere scattered throughout the Target Area,and the impact on the area would beinsignificant for the dollars spent. In 1981-

82 the CDBG Blight Elimination funds werenot authorized. (See status report datedDecember 15, 1981 in the Appendix)According to Neighborhood ServicesDepartment records, there have been 36structures demolished since 1982; eight (8)structures boarded up and 13 lot clean upssince 1987.

4. Property maintenance and zoningenforcement problems continue to be amajor issue in TAB. Since 1990 there were634 zoning enforcement/violation cases inTAB. Many of these cases have createdblighted conditions due to problems withyard maintenance, junked cars, graffiti,debris and outdoor storage.

5. The city has conducted land clearance andassembly throughout TAB.

1. Enforce the zoning ordinance.

2. Rezone incompatible land uses.

3. Develop commercial design standards.

4. Develop city-owned properties.

5. Expand the target area.

a. Include north side of Broadway Road toPueblo Avenue, 7th Avenue to 24thStreet, in the Target Area; or

What land use and zoning needshave the community identified in theTarget Area in 1997?

b. Include the northeast corner of BroadwayRoad and 7th Avenue and the northwestcorner of Broadway and 24th Street intothe target area, and gradually bring therest of the north side of Broadway Roadinto TAB.

6. Rezone vacant multifamily residential land tocommercial zoning designations alongBroadway Road.

What was the land use in Target AreaB in 1978?

In 1978, the area had a variety of land uses anda mixture of old and new structures. Mosthousing units were single-family detached, andmany were constructed on irregular sized lots.Multifamily housing included apartmentcomplexes in varying conditions. Commercialdevelopment was concentrated on CentralAvenue from Broadway Road to SouthernAvenue. Some of the commercial uses alongBroadway Road and Central Avenue wereidentified during the original survey as being inpoor quality. Commercial uses around theintersection of Central and Southern weredescribed as average to good in quality. Therewere various illegal and nonconforming landuses, including abandoned vehicles, mobilehomes, inadequate parking, and uses notallowed by the zoning district. The area wasalso marked with automobile storage andjunkyards; second-hand stores; and appliancerepair stores that displayed merchandise on thesidewalk in front of the stores.

depicts the land use comparisonanddepicts the existing land use in 1978.

on thefollowing page

Figure 20

Figure 21 (1978 Existing Land Use map)

21

LAND USE COMPARISONFigure 20

SF

MF-1

MF-2

COM

MU

I

PB/Q

P/OS

AG

V

Current1978 Existing 1996 Existing 1985 Proposed General Plan

Land Use Acres Percent Acres Percent Acres Percent Acres Percent

Single-Family

Multifamily(2-4 Dwelling Units)

Multifamily(5 or More Dwelling Units)

Commercial

Mixed Use

Industrial

Public/Quasi Public

Parks/Open Space

Agriculture

Vacant

Total

791 42% 880 47% 1,087 58% 950 51%

11 1% 17 1% 224 12% 234 12%

54 3% 60 3% 156 8% 244 13%

157 8% 103 5% 178 9% 272 14%

0 0% 0 0% 30 2% 0 0%

0 0% 46 2% 32 2% 88 5%

128 7% 167 9% 117 6% 35 2%

43 2% 51 3% 57 3% 59 3%

0 0% 112 6% 0 0% 0 0%

698 37% 445 24% 0 0% 0 0%

1882 100% 1882 100% 1882 100% 1882 100%


About a third (1/3) of the land in TAB wasclassified as vacant in 1978; much of this landwas used for agriculture. The largest parcels ofvacant land were concentrated in the southeastportion of TAB, from 10th Street to 24th Streeton both sides of Roeser Road. There were alsovacant, burned out, boarded up or abandonedhouses, and a few vacant retail stores in theTarget Area.

What is the land use in Target Area Btoday?

Theshows similar land use categories and acreageto the 1978 land use map. Single-familyresidential, which is still the predominant landuse in TAB, increased by 5% between 1978 and1996, from approximately 791 acres (or 42%) to880 acres (or 47%). There has also been aslight increase in multifamily residential land useof 12 acres since 1978, but the percentage ofmultifamily to total land use is still 4%.

The amount of commercial land use hasdeclined since the original survey wasconducted, as shown in Figure 21. The 1996

1996 Existing Land Use map (Figure 22)

survey shows 54 acres of commercial uses,which is three percent (3%) less than whatexisted in 1978. In the 1996 survey, 46 acreswere identified as industrial, which were notidentified in 1978. Public/quasi-public uses haveincreased over the years due to the constructionof the Department of Economic Security building,South Central Family Health Center and SouthMountain Precinct, and the expansion of SouthMountain High School and South Phoenix YouthCenter. Parks/open space has increased byapproximately seven (7) acres with theexpansion of Hayden Park.

There has been a 13% decline in vacant landsince 1978. This is partly due to the fact that allunused and undeveloped land was identified asvacant in 1978; there was not a separatecategory for agricultural uses. However, the1996 survey reclassified vacant land todistinguish it from agricultural uses. The 1996survey estimated that approximately 24% of theland in TAB was vacant and six percent (6%)was agricultural land. If agricultural land andvacant land in 1996 are combined, the amount ofvacant land has decreased from 37% to 30%.

There have been 41 rezoning applications filedin TAB since 1978. Most of these propertieswere rezoned from single or multifamilyresidential to a higher density residential use.Since 1978, there have been four additionalzoning districts approved in TAB, which did notpreviously exist; R3-A and R4-A MultifamilyResidential, Industrial Park, and CommercePark.

What rezonings have occurred in theTarget Area since 1978?

Commercial

Public/Quasi-Public

Single Family

MF-1 Multi Family Low Density

MF-2 Multi Family High Density

24T

HS

T.

7T

HA

VE

.

CE

NT

RA

LA

VE

.

7T

HS

T.

12T

HS

T.

BROADWAYRD.

ROESERRD.

SOUTHERNAVE.

20T

HS

T.

16T

HS

T.

WIER AVE.

SUNLANDAVE.

1978 EXISTING LAND USEFigure 21

LEGEND

(2-4 Dwelling Units)

(5 or More Dwelling Units)



NORTH


0 1/41/8

Parks/Open Space

Vacant


22

Single Family

MF-1 Multi Family Low Density

MF-2 Multi Family High Density

(2-4 Dwelling Units)

(5 or More Dwelling Units)

Commercial

Industrial

Public/Quasi-Public

Parks/Open Space

Agriculture

Vacant

24T

HS

T.

7T

HA

VE

.

CE

NT

RA

LA

VE

.

7T

HS

T.

12T

HS

T.

BROADWAYRD.

ROESERRD.

SOUTHERNAVE.

20T

HS

T.

16T

HS

T.

WIER AVE.

SUNLANDAVE.

1996 EXISTING LAND USEFigure 22

LEGEND



NORTH


0 1/41/8


23

ZONING ACREAGEFigure 23

TotalDensity/ Units

Zoning Units Per Census Tract Total Percent MaximumDesignation Acre 1158 1159 1160 Acres of Total Density

@

1-6

R-3

R-3A

P.A.D. 14

R-4

R-4A

R-5

PSC

C-1

C-2

C-3

P-1

A-2

Ind. Park

Com. Park

Total

5.3 109 160 504 773 41.0% 4,097

14.5 149 383 5 537 28.0% 7,787

22 10 0 7 17 1.0% 374

29 0 0 4 4 .2% 116

29 149 0 10 159 8.0% 4,611

43.5 1 0 1 .04% 44

43.5 81 19 27 127 7.0% 5,525

N/A 0 0 6 6 .3% N/A

N/A 9 1 0 10 .5% N/A

N/A 65 33 28 126 7.0% N/A

N/A 67 23 0 90 5.0% N/A

N/A 1 1 0 2 .08% N/A

N/A 0 5 0 5 .2% N/A

N/A 0 2 5 7 .3 % N/A

N/A 0 11 18 29 1.4% N/A

641 638 614 1,893 100.02% 22,554


24

Do zoning problems exist in theTarget Area?

What use permit/variance or specialpermits has the city issued in theTarget Area since 1978?

The Target Area’s zoning pattern is based onwhat the land was zoned in Maricopa County atthe time of annexation in 1960. At that timealmost half of the land, 819 acres, was zoned formultifamily residential uses; 760 acres werezoned single-family residential; and 242 acreswere zoned for commercial uses. Based on theabove acreage, the area was over-zoned formultifamily housing at the time of annexation. Alarge amount of the multifamily zoned landremains vacant because it exceeds the marketdemand for development. If the area were builtout at such a high intensity, the population,based on the amount of multifamily zoningdesignated, would have tripled the existingpopulation to over 35,000 people. During thetime the Target Area B Redevelopment Plan wasdeveloped, there was no market demand foradditional multifamily. depicts thenumber of acres in each zoning category in TAB.Nonresidential zoning is 15 percent of the total.

on the following page maps existingzoning.

There have been 191 use permit and/orvariance applications and ten special permitapplications filed in TAB since 1978. Of the tenspecial permit applications, three of theapplications were for care/group homes, threewere for nursery schools, three applicationswere filed for microwave communicationantennas, and one application was withdrawnfor a self storage warehouse.

Figure 23

Figure 24

Do property maintenance problemsexist in the Target Area?

According to the city’s computer trackingsystem, there have been 634 zoningenforcement/violation cases reported in TAB bythe Phoenix Neighborhood Maintenance andZoning Enforcement Section since 1990. As ofMarch 1997, 522 of these cases had beenclosed while 112 cases were still active. Thesecases included trash and litter, illegal outsideuses, excessive vegetation, unsound fences,roosters and swine, and electrical, structural andplumbing violations. Census tract 1160 reported204 violations which was more than the othercensus tracts. Tracts 1158 and 1159 reported165 and 145 violations, respectively. Althoughmore than one case may have been reported on

a specific property, these cases are notduplicated in the tracking system. In addition,more than one violation may be included in areport.

During the 1995-96 fiscal year there were 11zoning enforcement violation and propertymaintenance cases opened and 216 casesclosed in TAB. Comparatively, there were29,907 total cases opened in the city and 30,914cases closed in the 1995-96 fiscal year.

The Property Maintenance Ordinance isgenerally enforced on a citizen complaint basis.However, the city will conduct non-complaintbased inspections in cooperation withneighborhood groups and organizations. Theseinspections usually involve specialneighborhoods (Neighborhood Fight BackAreas, Neighborhood Initiative Areas,Neighborhood Preservation Partnership PilotProgram Areas) in need of blight elimination andrevitalization, or properties with environmental,imminent hazard, or fire safety conditions thatmay endanger residents. During an inspection,the inspector will identify the eight most commonblighting conditions defined in the NeighborhoodPreservation Code. These conditions include:

1) yard maintenance which include overgrownvegetation that creates fire and safetyhazards;

2) inoperable motor vehicles;

3) junk, litter and debris;

4) open and vacant buildings and structures;

5) outside storage;

6) fences in disrepair;

7) parking; and

8) graffiti.

R1-6 Single Family5.3-6.3Maximum Du/Ac.

R-3 Multi Family14.5-17.4Maximum Du/Ac.

R3-A Multi Family22.0-26.4Maximum Du/Ac.

R-4 Multi Family29.0-34.8Maximum Du/Ac.

24T

HS

T.

7T

HA

VE

.

CE

NT

RA

LA

VE

.

7T

HS

T.

12T

HS

T.

BROADWAYRD.

ROESERRD.

SOUTHERNAVE.

20T

HS

T.

16T

HS

T.

WIER AVE.

SUNLANDAVE.

1996 EXISTING ZONINGFigure 24

LEGEND



NORTH


0 1/41/8

Du/Ac. = Dwelling Units PerAcre Base Density

R4-A Multi Family 43.5Maximum Du/Ac.

R-5 Multi Family-P.R.D. Option

C-1 NeighborhoodCommercial

C-2 IntermediateCommercial

C-3 GeneralCommercial

P.S.C. Planned ShoppingCenter

P.A.D. Planned AreaDevelopment

Ind. Pk. Industrial Park

CP/ Commerce Park/GCP General Commerce Park

A-2 Heavy Industrial

P-1 Parking (Open)


25

What is infill, and what is thepotential for infill development inTAB?

What are the locations and types ofprojects assisted by the city in TAB?

The Phoenix Infill Housing Program defines infillas the process of developing vacant orextensively underutilized land parcels located inthe mature central portion of Phoenix, whichhave been bypassed during the course ofurbanization. The program provides incentivesto construct owner-occupied housing. Theprogram incentives include waiving buildingpermit fees, waiving water and sewerdevelopment occupation fees, and cityparticipation in the cost of off-site improvements.

The preliminary Infill Study was conducted bythe Planning Department in 1995. This studyidentified 64 parcels totaling approximately 492acres in TAB. These parcels are currently zonedfor single-family residential, multifamilyresidential, commercial, and industrial parkuses. Rezoning these parcels to less intenseuses may be necessary to attract moreappropriate land uses, such as single-familyresidential, retail, and other development thatwould be market driven. showsvacant land by zoning category.

The City of Phoenix has assisted in developing19 neighborhood development projects since1981, providing an estimated city investment of$279,371; with some projects funded throughIndustrial Development Authority (IDA) loanswith bonds issued for approximately $7.8 millionas leverage. The City provided fee waivers,

Figure 25


26

escrow cost, tenant referrals, technicalassistance with building permits, rezoningproperty, demolition, land acquisition, assemblyand write down. These projects help toeliminate slum and blight, redevelop blightedproperties, generate new jobs and sales taxrevenue, and provide new affordable housing forresidents. depicts the neighborhooddevelopment projects and city owned vacantland.

The City owns 21 parcels available forredevelopment. Most of these parcels, locatedalong Broadway Road, Central Avenue, and16th Street, are zoned C-3 Heavy CommercialZoning District; and/or R-5, R-4, R-3 MultifamilyZoning District; with one parcel zonedCommerce Park. The total square footage ofthe parcels is 811,863 or 18.64 acres. Theirlocation is also shown on

Most of the building permits that have beenissued in TAB since 1978 have been for single-family (245 permits, which includes 72townhouse and condominium permits) andmultifamily (556 permits) housing. The numberof residential building permits obtained does notnecessarily correspond to the actual number ofhouses built. The most recent single-familyhousing development, Chipman Estates,occurred in 1992. This development proposed atotal of 24 homes. Six small apartmentcomplexes have been built in TAB since the plan

Figure 26

Figure 26.

What vacant properties does the cityown in TAB?

What type of building permits havebeen issued in TAB since 1978?

was adopted. Together they make up 389 units;all were located in census tract 1158. Theyinclude:

In 1985, a shopping center containing 30,352square feet of building was built on thesoutheast corner of Roeser Road and CentralAvenue, adjacent to the TAB boundary. Thedevelopment of this shopping center fulfilled theTAB Redevelopment Plan objectives to build ashopping center in the target area. In addition,five office buildings and one medical officetotaling 121,037 square feet have been built inTAB. There have also been 309,719 square feetof industrial building space built in the area,primarily along Broadway Road, 16th Street andSouthern Avenue.

YearBuiltApartment Name Address

No.Units

Casa De Shanti 5236 South 5th Street 25 1996

Brighton Place 222 East Cody Drive 80 1991

Tierra Del Sol 40 East Sunland Avenue 116 1988

Corona Del Sol 27 East Corona Avenue 64 1986

None 5410 South 3rd Street 24 1986

Sunland Terrace 435 East Sunland Avenue 80 1983

24T

HS

T.

7T

HA

VE

.

CE

NT

RA

LA

VE

.

7T

HS

T.

12T

HS

T.

BROADWAYRD.

ROESERRD.

SOUTHERNAVE.

20T

HS

T.

16T

HS

T.

WIER AVE.

SUNLANDAVE.

VACANT LAND BY ZONING CATEGORY

Figure 25

LEGEND



NORTH


0 1/41/8

Single Family

Multi Family

Commercial

Industrial Park


27

12

13

7

8

24T

HS

T.

7T

HA

VE

.

CE

NT

RA

LA

VE

.

7T

HS

T.

12T

HS

T.

BROADWAYRD.

ROESER RD.

SOUTHERNAVE.

20T

HS

T.

16T

HS

T.

WIER AVE.

SUNLAND AVE.

12

3

4

5

6

14

10

15

9

16

11

18

17

19

NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS

AND CITY OWNED LANDFigure 26LEGEND



NORTH


0 1/41/8

City-Owned Properties (Undeveloped)

City-Assisted Development Projects

1. Corona Del Sol Apartments2. Ragsdale Office Plaza3. Department of Economic Security4. BF Goodrich5. Roeser Plaza

6. Baxter7. Bob's Meat Market8. Eagle Aviation9. MechTronics

10. Fiesta Bowl Float Pavillion

11. Salt Valley Lodge12. WEEBB Enterprises13. WEEBB Enterprises14. Greater Paradise Church

of God in Christ


28

15. Quality Printed Circuits16. South Valley Physicians17. Galaxy Business Park18. Second New Salem Baptist Church19. Chula Vista Shopping Center

29

G PO

OALS AND ERFORMANCE

BJECTIVES

What goals and performanceobjectives did the Plan includeregarding housing?

Plan Goals:

1. Provide a sufficient number of adequatehousing units for those householdsinvoluntarily displaced as a results ofredevelopment activity so that thosehouseholds that choose to may continueliving in the area.

2. Encourage and assist in the provision of asufficient number of low and moderateincome housing units in a suitable livingenvironment.

1. Bring housing up to code and removedwelling units not feasible for repair.

2. Improve level of home maintenance in theneighborhood and make area attractive todevelopment.


Performance Objectives:

1. Housing Rehabilitation

2. Urban Homestead Program

3. Scattered Site Program

1. According to a recent 1996 status report,there have been 787 housing unitsrehabilitated and 58 units reconstructed orprovided substantial rehabilitation sinceperformance objectives were established.

Rehabilitate 784 single-family housing units to4-family housing units using CDBG funds.

Repair 283 single-family housing units byChicanos Por La Causa.

Rehabilitate 14 multifamily complexes,containing 112 units in 30 structures, using 510Demonstration funds.

Repossess and rehabilitate 35 housing unitsusing Section 810 funding.

This program was created in 1978. It assistslow income families in renting single-familydetached housing units based on 30 percent oftheir adjusted annual income. The City ofPhoenix Housing Department purchasessingle-family homes and rents them to programparticipants.

Which goals and performanceobjectives have been met and whichremain to be accomplished? Howwere the goals and performanceobjectives met?

Therefore, this housing rehabilitationcomponent has met the numericalobjectives.

2. There have been 38 housing unitsrepossessed and rehabilitated through theUrban Homesteading Program.

3. There have been six housing unitspurchased through the Scattered SiteHousing Program in the target area.

4. According to a 1993 status report, therehave been 542 cases completed forOperation Paintbrush and 88 casescompleted for Operation Landscape.

1. Provide better quality housing in TAB.

In 1995 there were 4,430 housing units in TAB.Of that total, 4,206 units (95%)were occupiedand 224 units (5%) were vacant. Owner-occupied units make up about 51% of all units;renter-occupied units make up about 38% of allhousing units. Approximately half of the vacantunits were for rent, while the other half werevacant due to sales, seasonal occupancy,migrant workers, boarded up units, or otherreasons. The number of housing units is shownon

What housing needs has thecommunity identified in TAB in 1997 ?

Have the number and type of housingunits in the Target Area changedsince its establishment?

Figure 27.

T A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessment HousingHousingHousingHousing

which was constructed in the early to mid-1970's. Most of the housing units built weresingle-family subdivisions located in census tract1158 and 1160. on the following pageshows the number of housing units by the yearthe structure was built.

Figure 28

Housing occupancy dropped between 1980 and1990. In 1980, 93% of the area’s housing unitswere occupied compared to 89% in 1990. Inaddition, the number of owner-occupied housingunits decreased from 59% in 1980 to 50% in1990. As the number of owner-occupiedhousing units in TAB declined over the decade,renter-occupied housing showed a slight risefrom 34% in 1980 to 38% in 1990.

There have been 24 single-family housing unitsand 389 multifamily housing units constructed inTAB since 1978, and 38 housing unitsdemolished.

The median age of TAB’s housing stock,constructed in 1963, is about ten years olderthan the median age of the city’s housing stock,

How many housing units have beenconstructed and how many housingunits have been demolished sinceestablishment of the Target Area?

What is the median age of housingunits in the Target Area compared tothat of the city?

30

TOTAL NUMBER OF HOUSING UNITSFigure 27

Change in Numberof Housing Units

Census Year 1970- 1980- 1990-Tract 1970 1980 1990 1995 1980 1990 1995

1158

1159

1160

Total

1,520 1,552 1,924 1,994 +32 +372 +70

862 982 975 972 +120 7 3

1,190 1,505 1,496 1,464 +315 9 32

3,572 4,039 4,395 4,430 +467 +356 +35

Source: U.S. Census

T A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentHousingHousingHousingHousing

HOUSING UNIT BY YEARSTRUCTURE WAS BUILT

Figure 28

Number of Housing Units by Census Tract Total Number of1158 1159 1160 Housing Units

Year Built

1930-Earlier

1940-1949

1950-1959

1960-1969

1970-1975

1970-1979

1980-1984

1985-1988

1989-1990

Total

1975 1990 1975 1990 1975 1990 1975 1990

196 68 107 94 23 15 326 177

399 249 151 111 164 133 714 493

489 361 401 232 509 583 1,399 1,176

413 470 198 242 486 486 1,097 1,198

99 101 191 391

168 138 232 538

323 91 40 454

285 48 26 359

0 0 0 0

1,596 1,924 958 956 1,373 1,515 3,927 4,395

Source: 1975 Special U.S. Census and 1990 U.S. Census

How has the condition of housing inthe Target Area changed since itsestablishment?

The “1978 Existing Housing Condition Survey”determined that 11% of the area’s housing unitswere in “Good” condition; 77% needed “MinorRepair”; 9% required “Major Repair”; and 3%were “Not Feasible to Repair”. In addition, the1978 survey revealed that there were 136abandoned, boarded up or burnt-out housingstructures. Since 1978, many of the area’shousing units have been rehabilitated or havebeen removed through blight elimination efforts.

on the following page showsconditions in 1978 by subarea.Figure 31

Housing Conditions Comparison: 1972,1978, 1980, 1994

This assessment reviewed data from the 1972,1980 and 1994 City of Phoenix HousingCondition Evaluation Studies, to evaluate thechanges in housing conditions in TAB over time.The 1994 study was conducted in associationwith the City of Phoenix Housing Departmentand Arizona State University (ASU). Eachdocument provided a sample survey of selectedstructural and mechanical housing conditions forcensus tracts in TAB.According to the survey methodology, the samehousing condition information was collected forcertain structures each year the survey wasconducted. In other words, data for censustracts 1158, 1159, and 1160 was collected bysurveying the same addresses during all threestudy years. This methodology insuredconsistency between the studies.

Each housing study analyzed five keycomponents:

The components were given rating scores of 1,2, 3 or 4, which corresponded to the condition ofthe structure as follows:

1) electrical service;

2) plumbing;

3) natural light & ventilation;

4) structural appearance; and

5) home and yard conditions.

1 = Good, no repairs needed

2 = Minor repairs needed, $500 or less

3 = Major repairs needed, $500 - $2,000

4 = Not feasible, $2,000 or more

24T

HS

T.

7T

HA

VE

.

CE

NT

RA

LA

VE

.

7T

HS

T.

12T

HS

T.

BROADWAYRD.

ROESERRD.

SOUTHERNAVE.

20T

HS

T.

16T

HS

T.

WIER AVE.

SUNLANDAVE.

3

1

(0.8%)

(0.3%)

7

0

(25.0%)

(0.0%)

69

27

(18.9%)

(7.4%)

5

0

(3.4%)

(0.0%)

XX

XX

(X.X%)

(X.X%)

Number of Units inthe Section NeedingMajor Rehabilitation

Number of Units inthe Section NotFeasible for MajorRehabilitation

Percentage of Unitsin the Section NeedingMajor Rehabilitation

Percentage of Unitsin the Section NotFeasible for MajorRehabilitation

309

96

(8.5%)

(2.7%)

Total forTarget Area B-

All SectionsCombined

LEGEND



NORTH


0 1/41/8

1978 HOUSING CONDITIONS BY SUBAREASFigure 31

XX

Number of Units inthe Section NeedingMajor Rehabilitation

NORTH

23 (2.2%)

10 (0.9%)

2

1

(9.1%)

(4.5%)5

0

(1.5%)

(0.0%)

9129 (11.3%)

(35.4%)

31 (0.5%)

(1.4%)

36

12

(29.0%)

(9.7%)

41

8 (6.2%)

(31.8%)

6

0

(2.5%)

(0.0%)

1

0

(4.0%)

(0.0%)

(5.9%)

(2.4%)

17

7


31

One of the most significant findings concerningTAB was the decline in housing units that werecharacterized as in “good condition” for all threecensus tracts. From 1972 to 1980, the numberof housing units considered as in good conditionin census tract 1160 dropped dramatically fromapproximately 93% to only 9%. This changewas the result of a large number of units shiftinginto the “needs minor repair” category ashomeowners did not have the monetary meansto make repairs or maintain their unit in goodcondition.

A positive indicator related to the housingconditions in TAB is the low percentage ofhousing units considered “not feasible to repair”or “in need of major repair”. These percentagesremained low throughout the survey years. Ofthe 975 units surveyed in 1994, approximately2% were rated as “not feasible to repair”. Sevenpercent were in need of “major repair.”shows the number and percentage in eachcondition category for each survey date.

provides home and yard maintenancedata for 1980 and 1994. About two-thirds of thehomes suffered from minor or major neglect inboth time periods with a slight increase inneglect in 1994.

Figure 29

Figure 30

What were the home and yardmaintenance conditions?

32

T A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentHousingHousingHousingHousing

TAB HOUSING CONDITION BY

NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITSFigure 29

1972

Good Condition

Minor Repair

Major Repair

Not Feasible

Total

1978

Good Condition

Minor Repair

Major Repair

Not Feasible

Total

1980

Good Condition

Minor Repair

Major Repair

Not Feasible

Total

1994

Good Condition

Minor Repair

Major Repair

Not Feasible

Total

2,317 65%

895 25%

360 10%

0 0%

3,572 100%

408 11%

2,797 77%

311 9%

100 3%

3,616 100%

501 12%

3,064 76%

360 9%

116 3%

4,041 100%

1,072 24%

2,931 67%

304 7%

88 2%

4,395 100%Source:ASU/City of Phoenix Housing Condition Evaluation Studies

1978 Housing Conditions Survey was conducted by City of Phoenix Housing Inspectors

14%

TARGET AREA B HOME AND YARD CONDITIONSFigure 30

Source: ASU/City of Phoenix Housing Condition Evaluation.

Minor Neglect Major NeglectGood Yard Maintenance

Percentage of Units

Year

1980

1994

0 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

6%

36%

31%

58%

55%

How do housing conditions compareby Census Tract in 1994?

How do the average home values andrents in the area compare to that ofthe city? How have these rateschanged since the establishment ofthe Target Area?

Figure 32

Figure 33

indicates that tract 1160 has the leastproblems with 97 percent of the units in goodcondition or needing only minor repairs. In tracts1158 and 1159, 12 to 13 percent of thedevelopments need major repairs or are notfeasible to rehabilitate.

The average home values increased byapproximately 77% in TAB between 1980 and1990, which represents a substantial increase invalues. In 1980, the average home value wasapproximately $27,300, and increased toapproximately $48,600 in 1990. The city’s homeaverage in 1980 was $61,800, and $94,335 in1990. The average home values in the citybetween 1980 and 1990 increased by 53%.Based on these values, the average home valuein TAB is much lower than the city’s values, butincreased by a greater percentage than thecity’s. depicts the average value ofhomes in TAB, as well as the average rent price.


33

TAB HOUSING CONDITION BY CENSUS TRACTFigure 32

In Good Minor Repairs Major Repairs Not FeasibleCensus Condition Needed Needed for RepairTract 1972 1980 1994 1972 1980 1994 1972 1980 1994 1972 1980 1994115811591160

43% 16% 19% 39% 65% 70% 19% 15% 10% 0% 4% 2%65% 12% 8% 27% 76% 79% 8% 9% 8% 0% 3% 5%93% 9% 42% 6% 87% 55% 1% 2% 2% 0% 1% 0%

Source: 1994 ASU/City of Phoenix Housing Condition Evaluation Studies

AVERAGE HOME VALUE AND RENTFigure 33

Census Average Home Value Average RentTract 1980 1990 Percent Change 1980 1990 Percent Change115811591160

$27,600 $48,900 77% $156 $276 77%$25,100 $47,000 87% $146 $272 86%$29,300 $50,000 71% $130 $212 63%

Source: U.S. Census

Average rents in TAB increased 73% between1980 and 1990. The average rent in TAB in1980 was about $144; lower than the averagerent of $253 in 1990. The city’s average rent in1980 was $286, and $394 in 1990. Averagerents in the city increased by 27% between 1980and 1990. Average rents in TAB have remainedconsistently lower than the citywide averagerents between 1980 and 1990. However, theaverage rents increased by a greater percentageduring the same time period than the city’s.

Since 1970, there has been very little differencein the percentage of owner-occupied housingunits between TAB and the city. The percentageof owner-occupied housing units was at itshighest during the 1970's with 63% for TAB and61% for the city. There was a slight decrease for

How does the percentage of owneroccupied housing units in the TargetArea compare to that of the city?How has the percentage changedsince its establishment?

both TAB and the city by 1980, with a moresignificant decrease by 1990. showshousing occupancy by owner-occupied, renter-occupied, renter-occupied, and vacant units.

Figure 34

What percentage of residents havelived in the Target Area for ten ormore years?

How does the overcrowding rate ofthe Target Area compare to that of thecity?

What percentage of housing units inthe Target Area were vacant in 1995?How does this percentage compareto that of the city? How has itchanged since establishment of thearea?

In 1990, 39% of the households in TAB had livedin their homes for ten or more years. Thepercentages varied from a low of 27% in tract1158 to 54% in tract 1160.

housing units in TAB had more thanone person per room; in 1980, approximately20% had more than one person.

Housing unit vacancy has declined for TAB andthe City. According to the 1995 U.S. Census,approximately 224, or 5%, of housing units werevacant in TAB. Comparatively, approximately7% of the housing units in Phoenix were vacant.Based on the 1975 U.S. Census, approximately526 housing units, or 13%, were vacant in TAB,compared to the city with approximately 9%vacant units. The vacancy rate in 1975 washigher for both TAB and the city, but hasdeclined in 1995, indicating TAB’s vacancy ratewas lower than the city’s.

The 1990 U. S. Census indicated that 22% of alloccupied

HOUSING OCCUPANCY

Figure 34

20%

0%

10%

30%

40%

60%

70%

50%

Percentageof Units

63%61%

32%34%

5% 5%

1970

TAB TAB TABTABPhx Phx PhxPhx

34% 33%

60%59%

7%

1980

51%

36%

12%

52%

1990

42%

53%

38%

7%

55%

1995

Year

TAB TAB TABPHX PHX PHX

Owner


Renter Vacant

11%7% 5%

38%

34

T A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentInfrastructureInfrastructureInfrastructureInfrastructure

G PO

OALS AND ERFORMANCE

BJECTIVES

What goals and performanceobjectives did the Plan includeregarding infrastructure?

Plan Goals:



1. Provide adequate public services andfacilities to meet the needs of the TargetArea.

2. Encourage the location and design oftransportation routes, compatible with landuses and the existing street system, whichwill promote the free and safe flow of traffic.

1. Improve streets, sidewalks, irrigationditches, street lights, storm sewers, sanitarysewers, water lines, and construct bridges.

2. Increase accessibility by expanding transitservice and improving street network.

1. Pave 10 miles of local street surfaces, 3miles of major streets, and 3 miles ofcollector streets.

2. Construct 43 miles of sidewalks. The AdHoc Citizen Planning Committee identified43.2 miles of sidewalks needed in the TABPreliminary Community Facilities NeedsReport (see ).

3. Install 31 street lights in 13 different TABlocations.

4. Install or replace 7.5 miles of water lines.

5. Construct 0.8 miles of storm sewer lines.The Ad Hoc Citizens Planning Committeeidentified 5.8 miles of line needed in the TABPreliminary Community Facilities NeedsReport.

6. Install sanitary sewer lines (linear miles werenot quantified in the redevelopment planobjectives). The Ad Hoc Citizens PlanningCommittee identified two miles of sewerlines needed.

7. Install irrigation tiling on open ditches alongWier Avenue and Roeser Road (linear mileswere not quantified in the redevelopmentplan objectives, however the Needs andProblems Summary prepared in 1978 for theTAB Citizens Advisory Committee identifiedthat nine miles of irrigation tiling was neededto cover ditches throughout the area).

8. Provide additional bus routes (number ofroutes were not quantified in theredevelopment plan objectives).

Figure 51


What infrastructure needs has thecommunity identified in the TargetArea in 1997?

1. The City of Phoenix has madeimprovements to all infrastructure facilities inTAB. However, infrastructure needsidentified in 1978 Preliminary CommunityFacilities Needs Report indicate thatadditional improvements need to becompleted.

1. Improve Chambers Street between 5thAvenue and 6th Avenue, half-street behindSunland Elementary School.

2. Pave Montezuma Street, north of RoeserRoad.

3. Relocate water lines identified on the 1979infrastructure maps.

4. Complete irrigation tiling identified on the1979 infrastructure maps and locate anyadditional irrigation ditches not covered toeliminate potential environmental hazardsand water drainage issues.

5. Complete sidewalks identified on the 1979infrastructure maps.

Does the Target Area have adequatestreet lighting?

The City of Phoenix Street Light Policy generallyrecommends that street lights be placedapproximately 250 feet apart. In areas wherethere are crime, security and/or traffic concerns,the Street Transportation Director maydetermine that street lights may be spaced atless than 250 feet or existing street lights maybe upgraded to a higher intensity than the typicalresidential street light. A site survey would haveto be conducted by Street Transportation todetermine the number of lights needed in TAB.

The 1978 TAB Community Facilities NeedsReport determined that there were 13 targetarea locations below the street lighting spacestandards, which required a total of 31 streetlights. In 1978, the following street light spacingpolicy was recommended:

lighting on major streets shall be extendedon one side only at 200 feet intervals (wherenighttime accidents and crime statisticsshowed a need);

six lane major streets and major streetshaving landscaped medians will have 200feet interval lighting on both sides;

where need exists, one sided lighting shallbe provided on collector streets at 450 feetintervals;

mid-block residential lighting shall beinstalled at 450 foot intervals borderingschools, parks, community centers,churches and housing projects where needis demonstrated;

35

T A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessment InfrastructureInfrastructureInfrastructureInfrastructure

6. Provide additional lights on local streets.

7. Complete 7th Avenue improvements, takeout median, and install sidewalks on bothsides of the street.

Since 1978, most of the major arterial andcollector streets have been paved in TAB.However, there are still some local streets thatneed paving. Of the 84,480 linear feet, or 16miles, identified as in need of street paving in1978, only 1,716 feet (2%), or 0.325 miles,remain unpaved. Some of the unpaved streetsare located in areas where little developmenthas occurred.

Street improvements made since 1978 includedthree miles of major streets, 2.9 miles ofcollector streets, and 10.4 miles of local streets.During 1986-1987, a three mile segment ofstreet improvements was completed forSouthern Avenue, from 7th Avenue to 24thStreet. In 1989, a one and a half mile segmentof street construction was completed for 16thStreet, from Broadway Road to Vineyard Road.In addition, Roeser Road was paved, fromCentral to 24th Street; sidewalks, sewer andstorm drainage improvements were included inthis project. A majority of the street

S STREETS AND IDEWALKS

Are there any unpaved streets in theTarget Area? How has this changedsince its establishment?

improvements dollars in TAB were for majorarterial and collector streets; Southern Avenue,16th Street, Roeser Road, Sunland Avenue, andWier Avenue. However, quite a few local streetswere also improved; Cody Drive, 3rd Street, 4thStreet, 9th Street, and Chipman Road.Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)funds, revenue bonds, and Arizona HighwayUser Revenue Funds (AHUR) were used tofinance these projects (see

et paving. Almost all sidewalkneeds are on local streets. Abutting propertyowners are financially responsible for sidewalkson local streets by City Council policy.

In 1978, the TAB Preliminary CommunityFacilities Needs Report identified 43.2 miles ofsidewalks that were needed in the Target Area ata cost of $1,950,000. These needs wereidentified on a needs assessment map. Basedon that map, approximately 26.75 miles havebeen completed. At a cost of $10.40 per foot,the cost of the remaining 16.45 miles ofsidewalks is approximately $903,334. In manyneighborhoods, residents have indicated ageneralized preference for street that have arural character without development ofsidewalks. All three census tracts have a needfor sidewalks: tract 1158 needs 5.06 miles, tract1159 needs 5.91, and tract 1160 needs 5.48miles of sidewalks. on the followingpage shows sidewalks.

Figure 55 Figure35

Figure 36

).shows stre

What is the availability of sidewalksin the Target Area? How has thischanged since its establishment?


36

24T

HS

T.

7T

HA

VE

.

CE

NT

RA

LA

VE

.

7T

HS

T.

12T

HS

T.

20T

HS

T.

16T

HS

T.

BROADWAYRD.

ROESERRD.

SOUTHERNAVE.

WIER AVE.

SUNLANDAVE.

Completed Since1978

Improvement NeedsRemaining

LEGEND



NORTH


0 1/41/8

1996 STREET

PAVING

Figure 35

BROADWAYRD.

ROESERRD.

SOUTHERNAVE.

24T

HS

T.

7T

HA

VE

.

CE

NT

RA

LA

VE

.

7T

HS

T.

12T

HS

T.

20T

HS

T.

16T

HS

T.

WIER AVE.

SUNLANDAVE.

1996 SIDEWALKS

Figure 36

Completed Since1978


LEGEND


37

residential mid-block lighting may beinstalled upon petition of a majority ofproperties 100 feet from each side of theproposed light. In most subdivisions eighthouseholds per light would reside within 100feet of a proposed street light. If fivesignatures of approval were provided andthe location approved by the city, theproposed light would be installed, with theCity of Phoenix bearing the cost;

the majority approval on a petition wouldalso apply for street lighting improvementson a major street, provided the street wasnot included in the City’s Six Year MajorStreet Program.

According to the Water Engineering Division, citywater lines are available in streets and/or alleysthroughout the Target Area.

There were 39,600 linear feet, or 7.5 miles, ofwater line improvements identified in 1978.Most of the needed improvements consisted ofmoving the older water lines, located in alleys, tothe street right-of-ways. Today,

d,

WATER

What is the availability of water in theTarget Area?

What improvements in water lineshas the city made since the TargetArea was established?

Figure 37 on thefollowing page shows water lines complete

and improvements needed. Approximately10,758 feet, or 2.04 miles, need to be relocated.The facility inventory conducted in 1996indicates that future water line needs includeconstruction of lines on 12th Street and 18thStreet between Roeser Road and SunlandAvenue. Currently, these two areas areundeveloped. hows water linescompleted and improvements needed.

None has been identified although a need is stillshown in Street Transportation stafffeel that the streets are adequate to carry theflow.

There were 31,680 linear feet, or 6 miles, ofstorm sewers identified as in need of upgradingin 1978. Currently, only a short segment alongChambers Street, east of 16th Street, remains tobe completed. A section on Roeser Road, from7th Avenue to Central Avenue, that appeared onthe original inventory map as needingimprovements was reevaluated and deleted bythe Street Transportation Department; the streetright-of-way is used as a way of providing stormdrainage in this case. Figure 38 shows stormsewer improvements and needs.

.

Figure 37 s

S STORM EWER

Does the Target Area have anydeficiencies with storm sewers?

What improvements in storm sewershas the city made since itsestablishment?

Figure 38

S SANITARY EWER

What is the availability of sanitarysewers in the Target Area?

What improvements in sanitarysewers has the city made sinceestablishment of the Target Area?

How does the city plan to addressexisting deficiencies?

According to the Wastewater EngineeringDivision, city sanitary sewer lines are availablein streets and/or alleys throughout the TargetArea.

The 1978 inventory map indicated there were13,200 feet, or 2.5 miles, of sanitary sewerimprovements needed in the Target Area. Atthat time most of the households located inthese areas were on septic tanks. Since 1978,approximately 9,174 feet of sewer lines havebeen constructed in TAB as shown in Figure 40.

Given the future availability of funds, the Cityexpects to switch the remaining properties to thesanitary sewer system.


38

Completed Since1978

ImprovementNeeds Remaining

LEGEND



NORTH


0 1/41/8

1996 STORMSEWERS

Figure 38

BROADWAYRD.

ROESERRD.

SOUTHERNAVE.

24T

HS

T.

7T

HA

VE

.

CE

NT

RA

LA

VE

.

7T

HS

T.

12T

HS

T.

20T

HS

T.

16T

HS

T.

WIER AVE.

SUNLANDAVE.

BROADWAYRD.

ROESERRD.

SOUTHERNAVE.

24T

HS

T.

7T

HA

VE

.

CE

NT

RA

LA

VE

.

7T

HS

T.

12T

HS

T.

20T

HS

T.

16T

HS

T.

WIER AVE.

SUNLANDAVE.

1996 WATERLINES

Figure 37

Completed Since1978


Water and StreetImprovement Needsin UndevelopedAreas

LEGEND


39

I T

S IN

RRIGATION ILING

What improvements in irrigation tilinghas the city made sinceestablishment of the Target Area?

UMMARY OF NFRASTRUCTURE

EEDS

Most of the irrigation tiling needs identified inTAB Preliminary Community Facilities NeedsReport were constructed as part of the majorstreet improvement program for the area.Approximately four miles of irrigation ditcheshave been covered since 1978 as shown in

.

summarizes the improvements madefrom 1978 to 1996 and indicates the percentageand amount of remaining needs. The 1996numbers reflect what is shown on the 1996maps which may be slightly different than the1978 needs.

Figure 41

Figure 39

INFRASTRUCTUREFigure 39

Percentage ofUtility 1978 Needs 1996 Needs Remaining Need

Street Paving

Sidewalks

Street Lights

Water lines

Storm Sewer

Sanitary Sewer

Irrigation Tiling

84,480 linear feet/16 miles 1,716 linear feet/0.3 mile 2%

227,040 linear feet/43 miles 86,859 linear feet/16.4 miles 38%

31 lights in 13 locations locations undetermined undetermined

39,600 linear feet/7.5 miles 10,758 linear feet/2 miles 27%


13,200 linear feet/2.5 miles 4,026 linear feet/0.8 mile 31%


Source: Needs identified on the 1978 Community Facilities Needs Report and the revised 1981 CDBG Funded Public Improvements Map

Completed Since 1978


LEGEND

Prepared by

the City of Phoenix

Planning Department

1996

NORTH


0 1/41/8

1996 IRRIGATION TILING

Figure 41

BROADWAYRD.

ROESERRD.

SOUTHERNAVE.

24T

HS

T.

7T

HA

VE

.

CE

NT

RA

LA

VE

.

7T

HS

T.

12T

HS

T.

20T

HS

T.

16T

HS

T.

WIER AVE.

SUNLANDAVE.

Completed Since 1978


LEGEND

1996 SANITARY SEWERS

Figure 40

BROADWAYRD.

ROESERRD.

SOUTHERNAVE.

24T

HS

T.

7T

HA

VE

.

CE

NT

RA

LA

VE

.

7T

HS

T.

12T

HS

T.

20T

HS

T.

16T

HS

T.

WIER AVE.

SUNLANDAVE.


40

G PO

OALS AND ERFORMANCE

BJECTIVES

What goals and performance objectivesdid the Plan include regarding publicsafety?

Plan Goals:




2. Create a sense of community andneighborhood throughout the Target Area inorder to enhance it attractiveness as a placeto live, work, and play.

1. Reduce crime and arson rates.

1. Provide more police officers and resources.

2. Reduce juvenile gang activities.


1. Since 1978, the City of Phoenix hasprovided more police officers and resourcesin TAB. The Ad Hoc Citizens Committeeidentified the need for a police briefingstation at 400 West Southern Avenue in the1978 Preliminary TAB Community FacilitiesNeeds Report. In 1979, construction wascompleted on the South Mountain PolicePrecinct in TAB, providing more effectivepolice service to the area.

Most crime rates in TAB are higher than thecity’s crime rate, except for theft. In 1978,the crime rate against persons in TAB was50% higher than the city’s crime rate; andcrimes against property were 14% higherthan the city’s.

2. In 1996, there were 6.8 gang related crimesper 1,000 person in TAB compared to 1.6gang related crimes per 1,000 persons inthe city. This is indicative of high gangrelated activities in TAB. The PhoenixPolice Department and the EqualOpportunity Department Youth ProgramsDivision have implemented Gang andDropout Prevention Programs to avert gangactivity and make citizens more aware of

what is going on in their neighborhoods.The Police Crime Prevention Divisionintroduced the Anti-Gang Initiative Programin TAB in 1996. In recent years programshave included: Drug Abuse ResistanceEducation (DARE), Gang Task Force, NewTurf Project, Drug Free Zones,Neighborhood Fightback, andNeighborhood Block Watch.

1. Provide more police officers and resources,and continue partnership between Policeand Zoning Enforcement.

2. Conduct more undercover police operations.

3. Provide housing incentives for police officersto live in the area.

3. Organize more block watches, bettercoordination, and neighborhood participationin reporting crime.

4. Secure vacant structures.

5. Provide programs/classes at elementaryschools to deter crime and gang activities atan early age.

6. Provide more youth programs.

What public safety needs have thecommunity identified in the Target Area in1997?

T A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessment

41

P Sublic afetyP Sublic afetyP Sublic afetyP Sublic afety

What crime rates for the Target Areaare more than 10% above or belowthe city average?

Has the city established any crimeprevention programs in the TargetArea?

In 1996 in TAB, robbery, aggravated assault,rape/sexual assault, homicide, burglary, autotheft, domestic violence, gang related, and drugcrime were significantly higher than the cityaverage. Aggravated assault, homicide, andgang related rates were more than double thecity average. The Target Area showed no crimerates below 10% of the city’s average in 1996.Calls for police service were approximately 68%more than the city’s average in 1996, and 71%more in 1995. on the following pageshows the number of crimes per 1,000 persons.

There have been two Fight Back neighborhoods,Hayden and People United, established in TAB,and three neighborhood block watch; AMC, ParkSouth, and Southern Estates. The PhoenixPolice Department has initiated the Anti-GangInitiative to serve TAB in 1996.

Figure 43

What are the overall grid rankings inthe Target Area?

Crime is ranked by precinct grids (geographicalarea) in the City of Phoenix. The grid with thehighest amount of crime receives the lowestranking, which is 1. The grid with the lowestamount of crime receives the highest ranking.The lowest amount of crime in Phoenix receivedthe highest grid ranking of 328. Grids with thesame amount of crime are often tied for rankingwith other grids within the city. A “T” indicates atie with other city grids. In TAB, the highestamount of crime is occurring in grid AD28, anarea from Roeser Road to Southern Avenue,Central Avenue to 7th Street. showscrimes by grid ranking.

Figure 42

P POLICE ROTECTION

What police precinct serves the TargetArea?

Have crime rates for the Target Area beenincreasing or decreasing over the lastthree years? How does this compare toincreases and decreases with the city’srates?

The South Mountain Precinct, located at 400West Southern Avenue, serves TAB. Thisprecinct began in 1977, and provided moreeffective police services to the area. In 1990, anew precinct building was constructed on thesame site. Within the target area, police patrolgrids include ADE2732 and AE 27-32. Thesegrids correspond to census tracts 1158, 1159and 1160.

The Southern Command Station located north ofTAB on south Central Avenue was built in 1990and serves the greater Phoenix area. It includedspecialty units such as the NeighborhoodResponse Unit, Burglary Detectives, andMotorcycle Unit.

The citywide crime rate has increasedapproximately 4% over the last three years(1994-1996), while TAB’s crime rate hasincreased approximately 14%. There is greaterincrease in crime occurring in TAB compared tothe overall city.

TARGET AREA B CRIMES BY GRID RANKINGFigure 42

Rankings

Grids Area 1994 1995 1996

AD27

AD28

AD29

AD30

AD31

AD32

AE27

AE28

AE29

AE30

AE31

AE32

Roeser Rd. - Southern Ave./7th Ave. - Central Ave. 158T 106T 139T

Roeser Rd. - Southern Ave./Central Ave. - 7th St. 70 69T 55

Roeser Rd. - Southern Ave./7th St. - 12th St. 196T 152T 160T




Broadway Rd. - Roeser Rd./7th Ave. - Central Ave. 178T 151T 139T

Broadway Rd. - Roeser Rd./Central Ave. - 7th St. 151T 143T 80T

Broadway Rd. - Roeser Rd./7th St. - 12th St. 211T 173T 144T




Source: City Phoenix Police Department

P Sublic afetyP Sublic afety T A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentP Sublic afetyP Sublic afety

42

F PIRE ROTECTION

What fire stations serve the TargetArea? How are they equipped?

There are three fire stations in South MountainVillage available to serve TAB. The principal firestation serving the target area is Fire Station No.22 at 230 East Roeser Road (see ).This station is the site of the South DistrictOffice, which includes the battalion chief andstaff. The station provides Advance Life Support(ALS) services, and is equipped with aparamedic engine company, ladder company,ambulance, and brush truck. There are a total of12 full-time personnel; four firefighters areassigned to the engine company, four areassigned to the ladder company, two EmergencyMedical Technicians (EMT) are assigned to theambulance, and one firefighter is assigned to thebrush truck when needed.

Figure 44

Fire Station No. 23 is located at 4416 South32nd Street. This station has four firefightersassigned to the engine company, two part-timeparamedics on ambulance service. The stationis also equipped with a brush truck. Fire StationNo. 28, located at 7409 South 16th Street, hasfour firefighters responsible for a basic lifesupport engine, and two paramedics that equipa full-time 24-hour ambulance. Other equipmentincludes a brush truck and a radiocommunication tower that providescommunication linkage for both the Fire andPolice Departments serving southeast Phoenix.The service area of these stations is based on aone and a half mile travel distance. Fire StationNo. 272, located at 3025 S. Hardy Road inTempe, also serves TAB.

CATEGORY OF CRIMESFigure 43

Number of Crimes per 1,000 Population

1980 1990 1995 1996

TAB Citywide TAB Citywide TAB Citywide TAB Citywide

Robbery

Aggravated Assault

Rape/Sexual Assault

Homicide

Burglary

Theft

Auto Theft

Arson

Domestic Violence

Gang Related

Drug Crime

Calls for Service

5.3 3.8 8.3 3.5 6.1 3 5.6 3.3

10.5 4.3 21.1 7.1 14.1 5.5 12.6 5.4

0.5 0.6 1.3 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.9 0.5

0.3 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.8 0.2 0.9 0.2

44.5 29.9 25.2 25.3 38.5 31.9 48 34.1

76.2 63.6 67.9 54 27.2 38.3 31.3 37.8

7.5 7.2 25.9 17.9 33 23.3 32 20.1

0.9 0.6 1.3 0.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/A N/A N/A N/A 16.5 9.6 15 8.9

N/A N/A N/A N/A 3.6 2.1 6.8 1.6

N/A N/A N/A N/A 12.4 6.8 11.3 6.6

N/A N/A N/A N/A 1307.4 929.3 1301.5 889.4

Source: City of Phoenix Police Department

T A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessment P Sublic afetyP Sublic afetyP Sublic afetyP Sublic afety

43

G PO

OALS AND ERFORMANCE

BJECTIVES

What goals and performanceobjectives did the Plan includeregarding community facilities?

Plan Goals:




1. Fully develop parks and expand recreationalfacilities.

2. Expand library services.


4. Provide 24-hour access or service tomedical facilities.

1. Expand Hayden Park by approximatelyseven acres through land acquisition.

2. Improve Momo Mini Park by installingplayground apparatus, a basketball court,fencing, sprinklers, and landscaping.

3. Improve Hermoso Park with activerecreational activities; construction ofbasketball, volleyball, and handball courts.

4. Improve Nueve Park by installing picnictables and active recreational activities, suchas construction of basketball, volleyball, andlighted tennis courts.

5. Develop a Job Clearing Center (number ofreferrals not defined).

6. Remodel and expand the Human ResourceCenter No. 1. Acquired land to rehabilitateand construct new building improvements.

7. Purchase the South Phoenix Youth Center.

8. Develop a hospital in South MountainVillage.

1. Most of the performance goals forcommunity facilities have been met in TargetArea B. A new Human Resource Center isscheduled to start construction during thefall of 1997.

2. Improvements have been made to all parkswithin TAB. Additional improvements areneeded to provide furniture, lighting,restrooms, drinking fountains, playgroundapparatus, and sidewalks and more parking


lots. Hayden Park was expanded in 1979and 1980 by seven acres. Aya Mini Park,located at 1925 East Carver Drive, willundergo improvements the summer of 1997.These improvements will include a picnicramada, drinking fountain, fencing andplayground equipment.

3. The South Phoenix Youth Center waspurchased and began operation in 1980.

4. Jesse Owens Memorial Medical Center hasreduced its operation from providingovernight care to emergency outpatientservice. However, the South Central FamilyHealth Center, serving the South MountainVillage since 1974, constructed new facilitiesin 1992. This health center is part of theMaricopa Health System, which is anintegrated health care and delivery networkmade up of 11 Primary Care Centers. Themain campus for these Centers is located atthe Maricopa Medical Center, a full servicehospital.

5. A Job Clearing Center (JCC) was fundedwith Community Development Block Grantfrom 1978 until June 30, 1981. Thisprogram made employment referrals to arearesidents. Approximately 439 job referralswere made to TAB residents.

6. Additional social services are needed toprovide programs for elderly and disabledresidents. The Senior Center at SouthMountain Community Center, located at 212East Alta Vista Road, offers programs at thecenter to meet the needs of elderly andphysically challenged population.

T A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessment

44

C Fommunity acilitiesC Fommunity acilitiesC Fommunity acilitiesC Fommunity acilities

T A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessment C Fommunity acilitiesC Fommunity acilitiesC Fommunity acilitiesC Fommunity acilities

45

What recreation programs areprovided at the parks? How has thelevel of Park services changed sincethe establishment of the area?

What recreational programs areoperated by PRLD at other locationsnear the Target Area?

There are numerous recreational programsprovided by PRLD at each of the park facilities(see ). Many of the needs identified inthe original 1978 Community Facility Reporthave been implemented. However, since thenadditional needs have been identified. HaydenPark was expanded by seven acres. Activerecreational activities were install at Neuve andMomo Parks.

El Reposo Park is the closest community parkoutside the Target Area serving TAB withrecreational programs and activities. It islocated at 502 East Alta Vista Road, south ofTAB directly west of the Roosevelt SchoolDistrict Office. This park is approximately 24acres and the site of the South MountainCommunity Center. El Reposo Park providesmany active recreational activities: tennis,soccer, football, softball, basketball, swimmingand playground apparatus. The South MountainCommunity Center offers special interestclasses, adult, elderly and disabled citizenprograms.

Figure 45

What community facilities needs hasthe community identified in the areain 1997?

ARKS, ECREATION AND

IBRARY

What city parks serve the TargetArea?

P RL

1. Construct a swimming pool at Hayden Park.

2. Construct a mini bus terminal similar to theone in Sunnyslope at Central Avenue andBroadway Road on one of the city’sproperties.

3. Extend the proposed light rail transportationsystem within TAB, along Central Avenuesouth to Southern Avenue.

4. Improve the bus route timing intervals.

5. Extend the library hours.

There are two community parks, oneneighborhood park, and two mini parks in TargetArea B: Hayden, Hermoso, Nueve, Momo, andAya, respectively. These parks are operatedand maintained by the City of Phoenix Parks,Recreation and Library Department (PRLD).

on thefollowing page shows their location.

Themap of Public Facilities, Figure 44,

What community center serves theTarget Area? What services does itprovide?

South Phoenix Youth Center

South Mountain Village CommunityCenter

The South Phoenix Youth Center (SPYC) islocated at 5245 South 7th Street, adjacent toSouth Mountain High School. It was establishedand has been operated by the City of PhoenixParks, Recreation and Library Department since1980. The purpose of the youth center is topromote the positive development of teens inSouth Mountain Village. The South PhoenixYouth Center collaborates with South MountainHigh School and other community andgovernmental agencies to provide educational,recreational, employment, counseling andprevention services. Most of the programs arefunded by COMCARE Services, Inc., throughthe Arizona Department of Health Services, andby the City of Phoenix. The center has a total ofthree full-time and seven part-time staff. Anaverage of 300 teens between the ages of 13and 21 participate in youth center programs on adaily basis. The center also provides a juniormodel and dance program that serves youthbetween the ages of six and twelve.

The South Mountain Community Center is theclosest community center to TAB. Located at ElReposo Park, it is a multi-use center for youth,adults, and elderly residents. The center hasexercise classes, basketball courts, karoteeclasses, and bingo night; it is also the site of themonthly South Mountain Village PlanningCommittee meetings.

46

T A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentC Fommunity acilitiesC Fommunity acilitiesC Fommunity acilitiesC Fommunity acilities



NORTH


0 1/41/8

LEGEND

SunlandSchool

FireStation

D.E.S.

South MountainHigh School

YouthCenter

SouthMountainFamilyServiceCenter

SouthCentralFamilyHealthCenter

Martin LutherKing, Jr.School

JulianSchool

AyaMiniPark

MomoMiniPark

RoseLinda

School

OcotilloLibraryPolice

Station

Salvation ArmyYouth & Family

Center

CarlHayden

Park

Nueve

Park

Hermoso

Park

Fire Station

Library

Park

PUBLIC FACILITIESFigure 44

24T

HS

T.

7T

HA

VE

.

CE

NT

RA

LA

VE

.

7T

HS

T.

12T

HS

T.

BROADWAYRD.

ROESERRD.

SOUTHERNAVE.

20T

HS

T.

16T

HS

T.

WIER AVE.

SUNLANDAVE.

Police Station

School

Social Services


47

PARK SERVICES AND FACILITIESFigure 45

Organized Recreation Replace Recreation Building Recreation Building ImprovementsPicnic Purchase of (5) Additional Acres Lighted Picnic

RamadasBaseball Parking Lot Parking LotSoftball Sidewalks Sidewalks

Basketball Lighted Tennis Courts Add Second Lighted Basketball CourtVolleyball Additional Apparatus Upgrade Lighted Volleyball CourtsFootball Spray Pad

Playground Apparatus Restroom BuildingAdditional Light for New Park Furniture

Sprinkling System

Organized Recreation Development of Five (5) acres RestroomsPicnic Sprinkling System Lighted Picnic Ramadas

Baseball General Area Lighting ParkingSoftball Additonal Sidewalks Softball field lighting

Basketball Lighted Basketball Courts Upgrade Basketball Court LightingVolleyball Lighted Volleyball Courts Lighted Sand Volleyball Courts

Playground Apparatus Brick in Picnic Areas with Barbeque GrillsSoccer Lighted Soccer Field

Swimming Lighted Tennis Courts

Playground Apparatus Additional Apparatus for Tot-Lot RestroomsPicnic Eighteen (18) Picnic Tables & Benches Picnic Ramada w/lighting

Softball Sprinkler System Lighted Softball FieldBasketball Lighted Basketball Courts Playground

Soccer Lighted Volleyball Courts Lighted Sand Volleyball CourtsFour (4) Lighted Tennis Courts Parking Lot

Two (2) Bicycle Racks Additional ApparatusSpray Pad Funishings

Playground Apparatus Additional Playground Apparatus PlaygroundPicnic Sprinkler System Picnic Ramada w/lighting

Unofficial Basketball Court Unofficial Basketball Court w/lightsFence on Two Sides Electrical Service Entry Section

Trees Drinking FountainPark Benches Furnishings

Playground Apparatus Not Applicable Upgrade Playground ApparatusHalf Basketball Court Not Applicable New Ramada

Estimated Cost $515,000 $345,000




Estimated Cost Not Applicable $52,000

Hayden Park Activities 1978 Needs 1996 Needs

Hermoso Park Activities 1978 Needs 1996 Needs

Nueve Park Activities 1978 Needs 1996 Needs

Momo Mini Park Activities 1978 Needs 1996 Needs

Aya Mini Park Activities 1978 Needs 1996 Needs

Source: City of Phoenix Planning Commission, Park & Recreation Board, Parks & Recreation Plan, Phoenix, AZ., 1976. City of Phoenix Parks, Recreation & Library Department, 1996.

Internet, the computerized catalog system, andother databases. As one of the 41 librariesacross the country chosen to receive the grantfrom Microsoft, Ocotillo received an estimatedgrant of $112,500 to equip the library branchwith computers, software, and staff training.The purpose of the Microsoft program is toprovide electronic technology to poor and low-income neighborhoods that lack the means to doso on their own.

There have been few changes andimprovements to the library since 1978. Thelibrary no longer provides regularly scheduledvisits to Boyd’s Nursing Home, South MountainManor, Tanner Garden Apartments and ChapelManor. However, the library has extended itshours, hired additional staff, and started atutoring program. These improvements areconsistent with the needs identified in the 1978TAB Preliminary Community Facilities NeedsReport. The library continues to identify threeareas of need: extending hours to includeFriday, provide additional Spanish-speaking staffand materials, and provide tutoring service forilliterate adults. lists usage, hours,and needs.

How has use of the library changedsince establishment of the TargetArea? How has the level of Libraryservices changed since theestablishment of the area?

Figure 46

48


Which library serves the Target Area?

What are the library resources?

Ocotillo Library, located within TAB at 102 WestSouthern Avenue, is the only public libraryserving South Mountain Village and the targetarea. Built in 1967, it is a small librarycontaining approximately 60,000 volumes ofbooks. The library specializes in materialswhich serve a diverse, multi-ethnic, multi-lingual,multi-socioeconomic community.

Ocotillo Library has five full-time and seven part-time staff persons, including one branchmanager, one librarian providing services andmaterials to adults, and one children’s librarian.The library conducts a “Summer ReadingProgram” designed to encourage children toread during the summer. Staff also visitselementary schools and conducts orientationtours for preschool, elementary, and secondaryclasses and publicizes what resources areavailable at the library.

Ocotillo provides space for literacy tutors and“English as a Second Language” (ESL)teachers. It has an active fund raising chapter of“Friends of the Phoenix Public Library” thatprovide programs and buys books for the library.As a unique service to the library in 1997,Ocotillo will serve as a site for Microsoft grant-based computer services in both English andSpanish which will allow residents to access the

LIBRARY USAGE AND NEEDSFigure 46

Octillo Library Usage: 1978 1996

Library Hours:

Library Service Needs:

Attendance 61,447 123,731

Items Borrowed 105,418 126,642

Reference Questions Answered 31,569 24,000

Orientation Tours for School Classes 34 55

Group Service Programs for Children 180 174

Children in Summer Reading Program 141 1,260

Monday-Thursday 10 am-9 pm 9 am-8 pm

Saturday 10 am-6 pm 9 am-6 pm

Extend Service Hours to Include Friday

Community Library Needs Assessment

Increase Spanish Language Material

and Spanish-Speaking Staff.

Tutoring Service in Reading for illiterate Adults.

Source: City of Phoenix Parks, Recreation and Library Department, 1996

Families Can-Jobs Program to provideinformation and referral services; client-directedcasework assistance service and counseling;emergency financial assistance services; andbus transportation assistance for residents.

Of the 11 outside agencies that were located atthe Human Resource Center in 1978, only twostill operate out of the center: the Salvation Armyand Head Start program. Some of the priorprograms have either relocated to new facilities(NF) in TAB or other sites (OS) in TAB, or nolonger exist (NLE) in TAB. Several newagencies have replaced these programs at thecenter as shown in Figure 47.

What other facilities service theTarget Area?

Senior Center at South MountainCommunity Center

The Senior Center at South MountainCommunity Center, located at 212 East AltaVista Road, is the nearest senior center site toTAB. It is one of 17 senior centers operated bythe Senior Services Division of the City ofPhoenix Human Services Department. Theprograms offered at the center are developed tomeet the needs of elderly and physicallychallenged population. Applicants are eligible toparticipate if they are age 55 or older and comefrom low income households.

There is also a program, Reserve-A-Ride, thattransports elderly and handicapped individualsto senior centers, medical appointments,shopping, and social service agencies. Anotherprogram, called Senior Companion, works withprivate agencies and non-profit organizations toprovide assistance to low-income persons, age60 and older, who choose to live independently.There are three Senior Companion ProgramWork Stations in TAB:

Work Station AddressSuncrest Healthcare 2211 East Southern Avenue

Tanner Chapel Manor 2150 East Broadway Road

Tanner Gardens Apartments 4420 South 18th Place


49

S SOCIAL ERVICES

Is there a human services center inthe Target Area?

What types of services are availableat the center?

The South Mountain Family Services Center(SMFSC), formerly known as Human ResourceCenter No. 1, is located at 4732 South CentralAvenue. In operation since 1966, the centerprovides services to all residents living in SouthMountain Village, including TAB residents. Thecenter is operated by the Community ServicesDivision of the City of Phoenix Human ServicesDepartment.

The 1978 TAB Preliminary Community FacilitiesNeeds Report indicated that Human ServiceCenter No. 1 was in need of expansion andremodeling at a cost of $390,000.

Approximately $98,000 worth of renovationshave been made to the building over the past 18years. However, because of the inadequatecondition of the existing building, designs for anew service center are underway. The centerwill be rebuilt on the existing SMFSC site andcompleted by June 1999. The cost of thisproject is estimated at $2.8 million and is fundedfrom the 1988 Capital Improvement BondsProgram.

A wide range of services which focuses onsolving the social, physical, and economicproblems of area residents are provided at theSMFSC. In addition, the center provides aClient Casework Unit Service and Young

SOUTH MOUNTAIN FAMILYSERVICES CENTER PROGRAMS

Figure 47

1978 ProgramsHead Start

Salvation ArmyDES-Employment Services (NF)DES-Food Stamp Program (NF)

Maricopa Primary Health Care Center (NF)People United for Self Help (OS)

Phoenix Urban League (NLE)Phoenix South Community Mental Health (OS)

South Central Neighborhood Council (NLE)Clothing Bank (NLE)

Back to School Clothing Drive (NLE)Special Projects Office (NLE)

Contract for Senator/Congress person (NLE)Community Legal Services (NLE)

Head StartSalvation Army

Arizona Book BankSt. Mary’s Food Bank Food Boxes

Phoenix Opportunities Industrialization CenterRio Salado Community College ESL ClassesEmployment & Training Case Management

Unlimited Potential Inc.

1996 Programs

50


Arizona Department of EconomicSecurity (DES)

The Arizona Department of Economic Security(DES) provides economic and social assistanceto eligible residents of the Target Area. The goalof DES is to offer programs that provideopportunities and services to residents who areexperiencing social and economic difficulties.Some of these programs include:

The DES South Central Multi-Service Center iscurrently reorganizing their delivery of programsto a one-stop service center. It will combineFamily Assistance Administration, Child CareAssistance, Child Protection Services, andUnemployment Insurance.

There are other DES sites that have programsavailable to TAB residents and citizens livingthroughout the City. Some of those programsinclude:

Job Opportunity and Basic Skills (JOB)Training Program;

Aging and Adult Program;

Industries for the Blind;

1) food stamps;

2) cash benefits, such as aid to familiesand dependent children (AFDC) andtransitional medical assistance (TMA);

3) emergency assistance (EA);

4) medical assistance through ArizonaHealth Care Cost Containment System(AHCCCS); and

5) general assistance.

Job Training Partnership Act Program(JTPA);

Utility Assistance Programs; and

Developmental Disabilities.

The following resources are also available toTAB residents as shown in

Other Human Resource Services

Figure 48.

What post office serves the TargetArea? When was it constructed?

Target Area B is served by the new SouthMountain Post Office Station located at 6825South 7th Street. This station opened April 21,1997, and responds to zip code areas 85040and 85041, located south of the Salt River toSouth Mountain Park, from 43rd Avenue to 48thStreet.

OTHER HUMAN RESOURCE SERVICESFigure 48

ARC of Arizona, Inc. 5610 S. Central Avenue Provides service to persons withdevelopmental disabilities.

AZ Black United Fund, Inc. 5602 S. 20th Street Provides programs that address critical needsof the Black community.

Behavioral Health Systems 31 W. Carson Road Provides service to children

Guide Post Rehabilitation Center 5850 S. 7th Avenue Alcohol housing for sober males.

Keys Community Center 2454 E. Broadway Road Pre-career planning & job developmentworkshops.

Maricopa County Health System 33 W. Tamarisk Street General outpatient care, home health care,

Planned Parenthood Central & 4615 S. Central Avenue Health and family life education, communityclinic, extended counseling services.

Southminister Social Services Agency 1923 E. Broadway Road Services to low income families.

South Mountain Extend School Operation 5401 S. 7th Street Continuing Education.

Teen Choice Center - 1522 E. Southern Avenue Counseling, parenting skills and training.Black Family & Child ServiceYMCA Valley of the Sun 449 E. Southern Avenue Child care program

Organization Address Program Description

Outpatient Services counseling services, adult and child health,and dental clinic.

Northern AZ.

Source: 1995 Directory of Human Resources, Maricopa County, 18th Edition


51

M SEDICAL ERVICES

What hospital(s) and medical clinic(s)serve the Target Area?

The South Central Family Health Center hasbeen serving the South Mountain Village since1974. The health center is part of the MaricopaHealth System, which is an integrated healthcare and delivery network made up of 11Primary Care Centers. These centers specializein children health care, family planning, prenatalcare for women, and preventive health careprograms. The main campus for these Centersis located at the Maricopa Medical Center, a fullservice hospital. The South Central FamilyHealth Center was initially located in the HumanResource Center. When a new facility was builtin 1992, the health center moved into two trailerunits directly west of the Human ResourceCenter.

The nearest hospitals to the target area arePhoenix Memorial Hospital and Good SamaritanHospital. Both hospitals are located outsideSouth Mountain Village and TAB. However,there are three medical clinics located south ofBaseline Road that provide services to TAB:Jesse Owens Memorial Medical Center, JesseOwens Health Care Center, and South ValleyMedical Center. The Jesse Owens MemorialMedical Center specializes in pediatrics andobstetrics. The Jesse Owens Health CareCenter is a private outpatient urgent care facility.The center is staffed with one full-time physician,one registered nurse, one X-Ray technician, anda clerk. The center which provides ambulatory

outpatient care is equipped with ten beds.Service is provided on a walk-in basis. TheSouth Valley Medical Center is a medical officebuilding that contains office space for individualphysicians.

The level of social services has increased sinceTAB was established. A number of new facilitieswere constructed since 1978, such as theArizona Department of Economic Security, theSouth Central Family Health Center, and thesoon to be constructed South Mountain FamilyService Center (SMFSC). Many of socialservices related to these facilities were initiallyhoused in the Human Resource Center No. 1,since renamed SMFSC. In addition, moresenior service programs have been developedand operate out of the South Mountain SeniorCenter. Health care services have increasednear TAB with the development of the JesseOwens Memorial Medical Center and campus,as well, and transportation service hasincreased with additional bus routes on all majorand collector streets.

Has the level of social and medicalservices changed since theestablishment of the area?

52


P TUBLIC RANSPORTATION

What transit routes serve the TargetArea?

How has the level of transit servicechanged since the establishment ofthe Target Area?

According to the 1990 U.S. Census, 5% of thearea’s employees relied on public transportationor bus service to get to and from work. The ninetransit routes serving TAB are routes 8, 0, BlueLine, 7, 16, 24, 45, 52, and 61, as shown on

on the following page.

There are more bus routes serving TAB todaythan there were in 1978. The Regional PublicTransportation Authority (Valley Metro) has

Figure 50

added four additional bus routes in SouthMountain Village since 1978. These bus routesserve specific transportation needs. Over theyears the route section and route numbers havechanged.

In 1978, bus service was operated along fourmajor streets and a collector street: 7th Avenue,Central Avenue, Broadway Road, SouthernAvenue, and Roeser Road. Weekday hourswere terminated before 7 p.m., and weekdayroute frequency was offered every 30 minutes.Most of the 1996-1997 bus service routes offerweekday hours until 8 p.m., with three routes(Blue Line, 0, and 24) extending hours from 10p.m. to as late as 11 p.m. Most of the routesoffer 30 minute service with three of the busierroutes ( 0, 45, and 61) providing 15-30 minuteservice. shows the transit servicelevels in TAB.

Figure 49

TRANSIT SERVICE LEVELSFigure 49

Roeser Rd. 7th Ave. - 24th St. 1 7th Ave. Broadway Rd. - Southern Ave. 8Central Ave. Southern Ave., Central - 7th Ave. 13 Central Ave. Broadway Rd. - Southern Ave. 0Central Ave. Broadway Rd. 14 Central Ave. Broadway Rd. - Southern Ave. Blue LineCentral Ave. Southern Ave. 15 7th St. Broadway Rd. - Southern Ave. 7Central Ave. Central Ave. 16 16th St. Broadway Rd. - Southern Ave. 16

24th St. Broadway Rd. - Southern Ave. 24Broadway Rd. 7th Ave. - 24th St. 45Roeser Rd. 7th Ave. - 24th St. 52Southern Ave. 7th Ave. - 24th St. 61

Source: City of Phoenix Public Transportation Department/Regional Public Transportation Authority

1978 1996Street Served Section Served Route Street Served Section Served Route

CarlHayden

Park

Nueve

Park

Hermoso

Park

0

24T

HS

T.

7T

HA

VE

.

CE

NT

RA

LA

VE

.

7T

HS

T.

12T

HS

T.

BROADWAYRD.

ROESER RD.

SOUTHERNAVE.

20T

HS

T.

16T

HS

T.

WIER AVE.

SUNLAND AVE.

LEGEND



NORTH


0 1/41/8

TRANSIT ROUTES

Figure 50

Routes Existing in 1978

1,13, 14, 15, and 16

Routes Existing in 1996

0, 7, 8, 16, 24, 45, 52, 61,and Blue Lines

7

BlueLine

0

45

16 24

52

61

8

1

14

15


53

16

13

G PO

OALS AND ERFORMANCE

BJECTIVES

What goals and performance objectives did thePlan include regarding TAB Programs andFunding Sources?

The Target Area B Redevelopment Planidentified programs that would benefit low andmoderate income persons and special groups inTAB related to housing, community facilities,transportation, open space, and redevelopmentneeds. Many of these urban developmentprograms were linked to CommunityDevelopment Block Grant (CDBG) funds.

There were a number of conditionscharacterizing TAB as a redevelopment area,thereby qualifying it for CDBG funds. All three ofthe census tracts (1158, 1159, 1160) within thearea qualified as low and moderate incometracts. Tract 1158 was in need of housingrehabilitation as many of the houses were notbuilt to city building codes. The area waseligible for rehabilitation loans for residential andcommercial properties. Street improvementsand park development were also needed. Theprimary emphasis in tract 1159 was on housingrehabilitation where CDBG funds were usedthrough the Repo-Rehab Program, UrbanHomesteading Program and Section 312 RehabLoan Program. Street improvements were alsoneeded. Tract 1160 had persistent highunemployment, many abandoned housing units,and a need for housing rehab.

54

T A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentN R P F Seighborhood evitalization rograms and unding ourcesN R P F Seighborhood evitalization rograms and unding ourcesN R P F Seighborhood evitalization rograms and unding ourcesN R P F Seighborhood evitalization rograms and unding ources

Housing programs were identified as the highestpriority need in Target Area B. In addition,streets, sewers, sidewalks, and public facilitieswere identified as high priorities forrecommended funding.

Most of the implementation programs applied toTarget Area B can be categorized under:

on the following page shows thePreliminary Community Facilities Needs forTarget Area B as identified by the CitizenSteering Committee in 1978.indicates the total program needs by TABsubareas. Even at a cost estimate of $38.6million in 1978 dollars, not all needs werequantified. For example, the cost to eliminateillegal and nonconforming land uses, blightinginfluences and engineering and design costs forall projects; street lights and storm sewers costswere not included nor any costs for economicdevelopment and job training. Most of the $38.6million identified was for housing rehabilitationand public services and facilities.

1) housing rehabilitation,

2) blight elimination,

3) economic development,

4) capital improvements, and

5) public facilities.

;

Figure 51

Figure 52

P D

H P

ROGRAMS AND ESCRIPTION

OUSING ROGRAMS

There have been many funding sources used inTarget Area B including federal, state, local, andprivate sources. A majority of the long andshort-term objectives of the redevelopment areawere implemented through physicalimprovement programs and funded throughCommunity and Urban Development BlockGrant Program. The City of Phoenix HousingDepartment has also assisted low and moderateincome persons in finding affordable housingthrough direct client service, financial andtechnical assistance. The number of federallyand city assisted housing units vary from year toyear, based on the programs and fundingsources. The programs listed on the followingpage have been used.

The following housing programs were used inTAB.

Federally assisted rental housing isdesigned to assist low-income individualsand families as well as seniors and peoplewith disabilities. This category is comprisedof single-family dwelling units and multi-unitproperties that are owned and operated byprivate entities (for profit and nonprofit), Cityof Phoenix, and Maricopa County. Invarious complexes, only a portion of unitsare set aside for low-income families to

1. Federally Subsidized Units

T A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessment N R P F Seighborhood evitalization rograms and unding ourcesN R P F Seighborhood evitalization rograms and unding ourcesN R P F Seighborhood evitalization rograms and unding ourcesN R P F Seighborhood evitalization rograms and unding ources

55

TARGET AREA B PRELIMINARY COMMUNITY FACILITIES NEEDS

Figure 51

Parks Nueve Park 9th Street south of Broadway Picnic tables, tot-lot, spray pad, sprinkling system, tennis,and volleyball courts. 144,600

Hayden Park 3rd Avenue and Tamarisk Recreation building, sprinkling system, parkingtennis courts, spray pad, RR building, lighting, furniture. 515,000

Hermoso Park Southern at 20th Street Develop five acres, lighting, walkways, soccer field, handball,volleyball, basketball and tennis courts. 486,400

Momo Mini Park 5th Street at Sunland Avenue Play apparatus, basketball court, sprinkler system, fence,landscaping, benches. 16,500

Libraries Ocotillo Branch 102 West Southern Avenue Extended hours, additional staff, survey users, Spanishmaterials, tutoring. Undetermined

Fire Home hazard education campaign. Undetermined

Mass Transit Shelters and benches, increased bus service, redesignsigns with additional route information Undetermined

Human Resources Community 4732 South Central Expansion and remodeling 390,000Service CenterNo. 1

Engineering StreetsCollector (see map) Paving 2.9 miles @ $340,000/mile 996,000Local (see map) Paving 10.4 miles @ $250,000/mile 2,600,000Major (see map) Paving 3.0 miles @ 1,000,000/mile 3,000,000NID (see map) Undetermined UndeterminedSidewalk (see map) Sidewalks 43.2 miles @ $90,000/mile both sides of street 1,950,000Tiling (see map) Irrigation tiling 9.2 miles @ $127,000 1,171,200

Water and SewerStorm Sewer (see map) Design construction, inspection contingencies sewer

lines 5.8 miles 2,670,000Sanitary Sewer (see map) Design construction, inspection contingencies

sewer lines 2 miles 236,000Water lines (see map) Design construction, inspection contingencies

water lines 7 miles 761,000

Police Police Briefing 400 West Southern Avenue Construction completion 7/79 --Station

basketballlot,

bus stop

1,162,500

390,000

9,717,200

3,667,000

TOTAL 14,936,700

Department Facility Location Improvements Costs Sub-Total

Source: Recommended Community Development Program, Community Development Steering Committee, March 8, 1978.

56

a All estimates are construction in current dollars and estimates and do not include engineering and design which adds an additional 25%.b 7 miles of Neighborhood Improvement District (NID) have been subtracted from local and collector street needs.c The NID will include storm sewer drains - the location and number are not yet determined.d The NID may include some water line replacements as yet determined.e Only those cases recorded in Zoning Inspection files.

1/2

Source: Recommended Community Development Program, Community Development Steering Committee, March 8, 1978.

1978 TOTAL PROGRAM NEED FOR TARGET AREA B BY SUBAREAS

Figure 52

CATEGORY AREAS I & II AREAS III AREAS IV AREA TOTAL UNIT OF TOTAL(SEE MAP) & VI & V VII (ESTIMATE) MEASURE COST

Housing &Neighborhood

Economic Development& Jobs

Public Services &Facilities

TOTAL $38,651,000

Minor Housing Rehab. 902 + 304 = 1,242 309 + 289 = 598 408 + 137 = 545 405 2,791 Dwelling units $13,955,000Major Housing Rehab. 25 + 7 = 32 10 + 20 = 30 74 + 90 = 164 85 311 Dwelling units $2,488,000Infeasible to Rehab. 15 + 0 = 15 1 + 7 = 8 27 + 30 = 57 19 99 Dwelling units ---

Occupied + Infeasible to Rehab. 2 + 0 = 2 1 + 7 = 8 15 + 24 = 39 15 64 Dwelling units $2,240,000Vacant + Infeasible to Rehab. 6 + 0 = 6 0 + 0 = 0 12 + 5 = 17 2 25 Dwelling units $40,000

Minor Yard Maintenance 338 + 121 = 459 306 + 431 = 737 337 + 153 = 490 395 2,081 Dwelling unitsMajor Yard Maintenance 3 + 17 = 20 29 + 12 = 41 93 + 21 = 114 26 201 Dwelling units

Illegal Land Uses 6 + 3 = 9 0 + 5 = 5 13 + 5 = 18 4 36 UsesNonconforming Land Uses 1 + 2 = 3 1 + 9 = 10 18 + 5 = 23 11 47 Uses

Blighting Influences 11 + 2 = 13 4 + 5 = 9 17 + 5 = 22 12 56 CasesVacant Acreage 82 + 145 = 227 54 + 28 = 82 168 + 22 = 190 76 575 Acres

Vacant SF Dwelling 79 + 29 = 108 31 + 6 = 37 20 + 14 = 34 14 193 Dwelling unitsVacant MF Dwelling 2 + 0 = 2 0 + 0 = 0 0 + 1 = 1 0 3 Complexes

Park Improvements Hermoso - $486,000 Momo - $17,000 Nueve - $145,000 Hayden - $515,000 $1,163,000 Not applicable $1,163,000Major Streets Southern & 16th St. Southern & 16th St. Southern & 16th St. Southern & 7th Ave. 5 Miles $8,000,000

Local and Collectors 1 1/2 - 0 = 1 1/2 2 1/2 - 2 1/2 = 0 7 - 7 = 0 3 - 2 = 1 10 - 7 1/2 = 2 1/2 Miles $3,000,000Irrigation Ditches 2 1 5 1 9 Miles $2,610,000

Sidewalks 13 - 0 = 13 11 - 1 = 10 14 - 2 = 12 8 - 0 = 8 43 Miles $3,655,000Street Lights 9 10 5 7 31 Light posts City’s costs

Storm Sewers 2 1 1/2 2 1/2 1 1/2 6 Miles UndeterminedSewer Lines 0 1/2 - 1/2 = 0 1 1/2 - 1 = 1/2 1/2 - 1/2 = 0 1/2 Miles Already fundedWater Lines 3 1 2 1/2 7 1/2 Miles $1,500,000

e

b

c

d

a


57

receive rental assistance. Units range insize from studio apartments to five-bedroomapartments to single-family detachedhomes. Housing assistance includes eitherutilities or a utility allowance. Rents arebased on 30 percent of an applicant’sadjusted annual income. Federallysubsidized units also include the Section 8program. As of January 1997, there were343 Section 8 housing units in TAB.

Section 8 New Construction

Section 8 Housing ModerateRehabilitation Program

There was one Section 8 NewConstruction housing complex, SunlandTerrace, built in TAB. All 80 units are forelderly residents.

As of January 1997, there were 149Section 8 housing units in TAB. This isa citywide program for eligible low andmoderate income families and elderlyindividuals. Residents are assisted inrenting apartments, townhouses,condominiums, or houses owned andmanaged by private landlords.Participants enter into a private contractwith landlords. Owners are responsiblefor structural maintenance of theproperty. South Mountain TerraceApartments, which has 56 all familyhousing units, is the only Section 8Housing Rehabilitation Project in TAB.

As of March 1995, the Section 236Housing Program provided 142 seniorhousing units in TAB, and 65 assistedunits for low income families. Theproperties funded through this programincluded the Broadway House andTanner Gardens.

Based on 1997 records there were 5Scattered Housing Sites in TAB. Thiscitywide program is targeted for lowincome families and funded by HUD.Rent is based on 30 percent of theresident’s adjusted annual income.Utilities are provided on an approvedHousing and Urban Development (HUD)based allowance. Refrigerator andstove are provided. Yard maintenanceis the responsibility of the family.

Target Area B has two properties,Brighton Place on Cody Drive and TierraDel Sol on Sunland Avenue that werefinanced with low income housing taxcredits. These properties have 79 of the189 assisted housing units set aside forvery low income families. This programprovides financing for multifamily andsingle family apartments for families ofall sizes.

Section 8/236 Housing Program

Scattered Site Housing Program

2. Tax Credit Properties

NS P

EIGHBORHOOD

TABILIZATION ROGRAMS

The following neighborhood stabilizationprograms were used in TAB. Housing locationsreceiving assistance under these programs areshown on on the followingpages.

. Since1985, there have been 20 reconstructedhouses built in TAB using CDBG fundstotaling approximately $756,421. Thisprogram replaces an existing home that isnot feasible for rehabilitation with a newhome. The homeowner is assisted withtemporary housing while the new home isbeing built on the same site. The programfunding is a combination of a grant andconventional loan/deferred payment loan.

Since 1979, there have been approximately478 Deferred Payment Loans issued to TABresidents to rehabilitate single-familyhouses totaling approximately $7,004,025 ofCDBG funds. These are no-interest and no-monthly-payment loans of up to $15,000 forhome improvements. The loan is not paidback unless the house is sold or vacated. Aportion of the loan is forgiven each year overa set period of time. For the purposes ofthis report, Below Market Interest RateLoans (BMIR), Housing and UrbanDevelopment (HUD) Section 312 Loans, andthe Section 810/Urban HomesteadingProgram are listed under this category onthe funding spreadsheet.

1. Reconstruction Program (REC)

2. Deferred Payment Loan Program (DPL).

Figures 53 and 54


58

CarlHayden

Park

Nueve

Park

Hermoso

Park



NORTH


0 1/41/8

HOUSINGREHABILITATION

PROGRAMS -MAJOR

Figure 53

LEGEND

Deferred Payment LoanProgram

LEGEND

24T

HS

T.

7T

HA

VE

.

CE

NT

RA

LA

VE

.

7T

HS

T.

12T

HS

T.

20T

HS

T.

16T

HS

T.

BROADWAYRD.

ROESER RD.

SOUTHERNAVE.

WIER AVE.

SUNLANDAVE.

24T

HS

T.

7T

HA

VE

.

CE

NT

RA

LA

VE

.

7T

HS

T.

12T

HS

T.

20T

HS

T.

16T

HS

T.

BROADWAYRD.

ROESER RD.

SOUTHERNAVE.

WIER AVE.

SUNLANDAVE.

CarlHayden

Park

Nueve

Park

Hermoso

Park

Hardship Assistance Program

Reconstruction Program

Rental Rehabilitation Program


59

24T

HS

T.

7T

HA

VE

.

CE

NT

RA

LA

VE

.

7T

HS

T.

12T

HS

T.

20T

HS

T.

16T

HS

T.

BROADWAYRD.

ROESER RD.

SOUTHERNAVE.

WIER AVE.

SUNLANDAVE.

HOUSINGREHABILITATION

PROGRAMS -MINOR

Figure 54

LEGEND

Emergency Home Repair

Hardship Home Repair

24T

HS

T.

7T

HA

VE

.

CE

NT

RA

LA

VE

.

7T

HS

T.

12T

HS

T.

BROADWAYRD.

ROESER RD.

SOUTHERNAVE.

20T

HS

T.

16T

HS

T.

WIER AVE.

SUNLANDAVE.

CarlHayden

Park

Nueve

Park

Hermoso

Park

LEGEND

Operation Paintbrush

Operation Landscape

Weatherization AssistanceProgram

Reroofing Program

CarlHayden

Park

Nueve

Park

Hermoso

Park




NORTH


0 1/41/8

3. FHA Repo/Urban HomesteadingProgram.

4. Emergency Home Repair (EME).

5. Hardship Assistance Program (HAP).

6. Major/Hardship Home Repair (HHR).

Since 1979, approximately 38properties have been rehabilitated in TABthrough the Urban Homesteading Program.Many of these properties were acquired withCDBG and Section 810 monies atapproximately $272,000. Through thisprogram the city received title to FHArepossessed housing units for one dollar($1), rehabilitated them and leased themwith option to purchase after a year ofsuccessful tenancy.

Since1993, there have been 22 Emergency HomeRepair projects in TAB totalingapproximately $40,477 of CDBG funds.This program provides up to $2,500 inemergency repairs for life threatening safetyrelated work for lower income homeowners.

This program assist homeowners who aresited for property maintenance ordinanceviolations. It provides one time grantassistance of up to $5,000 for roofing,painting, fencing, and dust proofingdriveways.

Thisprogram provides a one time grant of up to$5,000 used in combination with theDeferred Loan Program to bring homes upto full standards or to stabilize a house thatcannot be brought to full standards.

7. Since 1993there were 546 completed OPB cases inTAB totaling $2,340. This program is fundedusing CDBG monies and allows up to $250each for painting the exterior of residentshomes. With prior application approval, thecost of materials is reimbursed.

In 1993,there were 89 completed OLS cases in TABtotaling $748. This program is fundedthrough CDBG monies and allows up to$250 each for landscaping the front yard.With prior application approval, the cost ofmaterials are reimbursed.

This grant program provides up to$1,700 of improvements to homes to helpreduce utility costs. It includes: caulking,weather-stripping, and replacementwindows.

. This programsends crews and donates paint toneighborhoods to eradicate graffiti, tocombat criminal activity, and improve theappearance of neighborhoods.

Operation Paintbrush (OPB).

8. Operation Landscape (OLS).

9. Weatherization Assistance Program(WAP).

10 Graffiti Busters Program.

S B PMALL USINESS ROGRAMS

1. Storefront Improvement Program.

2. Small Business Adminstration (SBA).

Thisprogram is funded through CDBG moniesand provides interest free matching loans bythe City. Qualified businesses and propertyowners are eligible for approvedconstruction costs up to $12,000 torehabilitate the exterior storefronts ofcommercial properties. Loan payments aredeferred and loans are forgiven if theproperty owner maintains the improvementsand costs are not passed to the tenantduring a five year period.

There was one storefront improvementproject funded in TAB. This projectrehabilitated a neighborhood shoppingcenter located on the northeast corner ofCentral Avenue and Sunland Avenue andwas completed during the 1994-95 fiscalyear. Tenants of the shopping centerincluded Del Rey’s, the Pet Shoppe, andCentral Mart. The total cost of theimprovements was $44,158, with the City’sshare of the cost at $22,079.

This program provides a wide-range ofservices to assist small businesses withfinancial management, marketing,operational counseling. It also provides aLoan Guaranty Program that offers long-and short-term loans to assist new orgrowing small businesses.

60


F SUNDING OURCES

The following funding sources were used forprograms in TAB.

Home Investment Partnership (HOME)Program

Community Development Block Grant(CDBG)

Industrial Development Authority (IDA)Bond Program

General Obligation Bonds (GO)

Mortgage Revenue Bond Program(MRB)

Mortgage Credit Certificates (MCC)

Revenue Bonds.

Arizona Highway User Revenue(AHUR).

Heritage Conservation ResourcesServices.

lists all of the programs funded forTAB, the amounts, and sources. A total of $25.9million, not counting administrative costs, hasbeen spent over 17 years in TAB, or an averageof $1.5 million per year. Expenditures wereactually heavier in the earlier years. The moneyis summarized by major categories as shownbelow. Approximately $9.9 million has been

Federal and City Funds

State-Funded

Figure 55

61


NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION PROGRAMS & FUNDING LIST

Figure 55

(SOURCE)

Housing Rehabilitation

Housing

Blight Elimination

Administration

PROGRAMS FUNDINGAMOUNT FUNDING

Reconstruction Program (REC) 756,421 CDBGDeferred Payment Loan

Program (DPL) 7,004,026 CDBGEmergency Home Repair (EME) 40,477 CDBGReroof (RER) 10,049 CDBGHardship Assistance Program (HAP) 5,000 CDBGOperation Landscape (OLS) 3,149 CDBGHardship Home Repair (HHR) 202,627 CDBGOperation Paintbrush (OPB) 8,408 CDBGRental Rehab (REN) 0 N/AWeatherization Assistance (WAP) 16,257 CDBGSpecial 192,660 State-FundedOther 956,991 OTHER (not defined)Operation Shipshape 0 N/ASite Office 152,000 CDBGImplementation 171,000 CDBG

Homeownership Demonstration Project 125,611 CDBGUrban Homesteading 272,219 CDBGScattered Site Housing 5,754 HUD Development

Property Acquisition 5,490,000 CDBGDemolition 76,734 CDBGBoard ups 12,489 CDBGLot Clean Up 11,036 CDBGPools/Excavation/Fencing 1,039 CDBG

(Not Quantified) 0 N/A

Subtotal $9,519,065

Subtotal $403,584

Subtotal $5,591,298

PROGRAMS FUNDINGAMOUNT FUNDING(SOURCE)

Infrastructure

Public Facilities

Economic Development

Non-Profit Organization

Total $25,907,152

Street Paving 5,705,982 CDBG/Bond Funds/AHURSidewalks 470,315 CDBG/Bond Funds/AHURWater Lines 531,000 CDBGStorm Sewer 277,000 CDBG/Bond Funds/AHURIrrigation 20,000 CDBGOff-Site Improvements 75,000 CDBG

Parks 1,547,506 CDBGHuman Service Center 98,000 CDBGYouth Center 265,000 CDBGCommunity Center 25,000 CDBGGraffiti Free 45,000 CDBG

Commercial Rehab Loans 20,000 CDBGSmall Business Technical Assist 109,000 CDBGJob Clearing Center 91,000 CDBGStorefront Improvement 22,079 CDBG

Chicano Por La Causa 178,196 CDBGUrban League 311,307 CDBGTanner Chapel Nursing 86,500 CDBGTanner Gardens Apt. 177,400 CDBGTanner Medical Center 31,000 CDBGTanner Garden’s Transportation 105,000 CDBGAldeben-Lan One Comm 20,000 CDBGSelf-Help, Arizona 181,920

Subtotal $7,079,297

Subtotal $1,980,506

Subtotal $242,079

Subtotal $1,091,323

spent on housing rehabilitation, $403,584 onother housing programs, $5.6 million on blightelimination, $7.1 million on infrastructure, $2.0million on public facilities, $242,079 oneconomic development and $1,091,323 incontributions to non-profit organizations forservice delivery.

What are staff’s recommendations forland use and zoning in the TargetArea?

The following land use recommendations havebeen identified by staff. The Citizen AdvisoryCommittee’s recommendations are identifiedwithin each chapter. on the followingpage shows staff’s recommended strategies.

Develop a new name and identity for the area.

Expand the Target Area B Citizens AdvisoryCommittee to include representation fromeach neighborhood in the area and developan annual work program, meeting schedule,and set of objectives.

Conduct an assessment every five yearscorresponding to the most recent census yearto determine changes in demographics and tomake recommendations for programs.

Focus future funding on job linkage andtraining.

Develop city owned land for the followinguses:

Southeast corner of Central Avenue andBroadway Road : market study of potentialcommercial uses.

Figure 56

General

Economic Development, Land Useand Zoning

Southwest corner and west side of 16thStreet, south of Broadway Road: marketstudy of potential employment uses andimpact of blight on these sites.

Relocate the auto repair facility at thenortheast corner of Southern Avenue andCentral Avenue and redevelop the shoppingcenter after Safeway relocates if necessary.

Expand the redevelopment area to include thenorth side of Broadway Road from 7th Avenueto 24th Street as far north as the alley or thefirst street. West of 13th Street theredevelopment area may have to extendfurther north. An alternative would be toestablish a new redevelopment area fromBroadway Road up to the river from 7thAvenue to 24th Street. The latter wouldrequire significant funding sources.

Create attractive gateways at South CentralAvenue and Broadway Road and at 24thStreet and Broadway Road.

Install landscaping and screening along 24thStreet from the river to Southern Avenue toimprove the north/south eastern gatewayimage.

Rezone city-owned properties to theappropriate zones after market studies havebeen conducted for them. Give first priority toC-3 zoned sites on South Central Avenue.

Explore the feasibility of rezoning vacant multi-family zoned parcels along Roeser to single-family or R-2 zoning.

Pursue establishment of a South CentralAvenue property owners association toimprove the image and profitability ofbusinesses as well as expansion and newdevelopment opportunities.

Place a zoning overlay over Broadway Roadand South Central Avenue to eliminateexpansion of outside storage and uses exceptwith a use permit. This may warrant a city-wide text amendment.

Work with property owners to address theillegal uses the southwest corner of 12thStreet and Broadway Road, the parking on thewest side of 24th Street south of SunlandAvenue, and the storage warehouse on FifthStreet south of Roeser Road, and other uses.

Major streets and entry corridors: provide thehighest visibility areas for residents andregional traffic.

Target blight elimination and codeenforcement efforts along South CentralAvenue from Broadway Road to RoeserAvenue which is the village core, 24th Street,Broadway and Southern which serve as majorgateways. Identify specific properties ingreatest need and work with ZoningEnforcement and property owners to achievecompliance with city standards. Identifyfunding sources or market opportunities forscreening of outside uses or conversion toother commercial uses.

Blight Elimination - Priority Areas forBlight Elimination:

62

T A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentRecommendationsRecommendationsRecommendationsRecommendations

LEGEND



NORTH


0 1/41/8

Single Family

Multi Family

24T

HS

T.

7T

HA

VE

.

CE

NT

RA

LA

VE

.

7T

HS

T.

12T

HS

T.

BROADWAYRD.

ROESERRD.

SOUTHERNAVE.

20T

HS

T.

16T

HS

T.

WIER AVE.

SUNLANDAVE.

Rehab

DevelopGatewayProject

Rehab/Demo

Rehab/Demo

CleanupDemo

Move auto repair.Redevelop centerif necessary afterSafeway moves.

IllegalIndustrial

Use

PotentialBrownfieldProgram

School

NFL YETSchool

H.S.

Screen

Sto

rag

e

Screenjunkyard

Rezone s-f

Rezones-f

Rehab

Code E

RehabCode E

Code E

CodeE

DevelopGateway

Code E Code C

Encourage s-f

Street Improvements, landscape,

screening on 24th St.

Target

new

s-f

Illegal

Parking

RedoExpansion

Encinas

Jones

RECOMMENDED STRATEGIES

Figure 56

63

T A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessment RecommendationsRecommendationsRecommendationsRecommendations

C o m m e r c i a l

Indust r ia l Park

Plan strategy for the comprehensiverevitalization of TAB and explore what can bedone to stimulate the development orrehabilitation of quality housing.

Assist first-time homebuyers to acquire and/orrehabilitate single-family homes for homeownership.

Develop public-private partnerships toconstruct new single-family and multi-familyproperties.

Help to stabilize neighborhoods in the TAB byencouraging the acquisition and renovation ofexisting multi-family properties.

Encourage the participation of private lendersin developing programs that address thespecific needs of TAB.

What was the Priority Ranking of StaffRecommendations by TAB Committee?

1. Expand the redevelopment area to includethe north side of Broadway Road from 7thAvenue to 24th Street as far north as thealley or the first street. West of 13th Streetthe redevelopment area may have to extendfurther north. An additional option would beto establish a new redevelopment area fromthe boundary north of Broadway Road up tothe river from 7th Avenue to 24th Street.The latter would require significant fundingsources and would address Rio Saladoconcerns. Another alternative would beexpand TAB based on neighborhood areas.

2. Create attractive gateways at South CentralAvenue and Broadway Road and at 24thStreet and Broadway Road.

3. Encourage the participation of privatelenders in developing programs that addressthe specific needs of TAB.

4. Upgrade commercial uses along SouthCentral Avenue and address housing nearHayden Park.

5. Target blight elimination and codeenforcement efforts along South CentralAvenue from Broadway Road to RoeserAvenue which is the village core, 24thStreet, Broadway Road and SouthernAvenue which serve as major gateways.Identify specific properties in greatest needand work with Zoning Enforcement andproperty owners to achieve compliance withcity standards. Identify funding sources ormarket opportunities for screening of outsideuses or conversion to other commercialuses.

6. Develop city owned land on the southeastcorner of Central Avenue and BroadwayRoad: market study of potential commercialuses.

7. Assist first-time homebuyers to acquireand/or rehabilitate single-family homes forhome ownership.

8. Rezone city-owned properties to theappropriate zones after market studies havebeen conducted for them. Give first priorityto C-3 zoned sites on South Central Avenue.

64

T A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentRecommendationsRecommendationsRecommendationsRecommendations

Lands adjacent to or near schools: theseareas must be safe and secure for childrenand are often used as community centersattracting visitors in the evenings andweekends as well as during the school day.

Focus on residential areas around SouthMountain High School, the proposed NFL,Y.E.T. Academy on Second Street, south ofBroadway Road, and the area east of RoseLinda School on 12th Street.

Lands adjacent to large, vacant parcelsdesired to be developed as infill parcels.

Rehabilitate homes in the area south ofHayden Park, near the large vacant site at thesoutheast corner of Wier and Fourth Avenue.

Focus on the north side of Roeser betweenNinth Street and 12th Street . There is vacantland at all four corners of 12th Street andRoeser Roads.

Lands adjacent to heavily used public facilitiessuch as those in the village core or majorparks.

Address housing near Hayden Park andcommercial uses along South Central.

Encourage new market rate single-familyhousing south of Roeser east of 21st Streetover to 24th Street.

Housing

65

T A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessment RecommendationsRecommendationsRecommendationsRecommendations

9. Plan strategy for the comprehensiverevitalization of TAB and explore what canbe done to stimulate the development orrehabilitation of quality housing.

10. Install landscaping and screening along 24thStreet from the river to Southern Avenue toimprove the north/south eastern gatewayimage.

11. Develop city-owned land on the southwestcorner and west side of 16th Street, south ofBroadway Road: market study of potentialemployment uses and impact of blight onthese sites.

12. Expand the Target Area B Citizens AdvisoryCommittee to include representation fromeach neighborhood in the area and developan annual work program, meeting schedule,and set of objectives.

13. Place a zoning overlay over Broadway Roadand South Central Avenue to eliminateexpansion of outside storage and usesexcept with a use permit. This may warranta city-wide text amendment.

14. Encourage new market rate single-familyhousing south of Roeser Road east of 21stStreet over to 24th Street.

15. Address Rio Salado development in a futureredevelopment area.

16. Conduct an assessment every five yearscorresponding to the most recent censusyear to determine changes in demographicsand to make recommendations forprograms.

17. Conduct Systematic Code Enforcement inTAB.

18. Screen commercial uses next to HaydenPark.

19. Pursue the elimination of illegal uses at thesouthwest corner of 12th Street andBroadway Road, the parking on the westside of 24th Street south of Sunland Avenue,and the storage warehouse on South FifthStreet.

20. Focus on improving residential areas aroundSouth Mountain High School, the proposedNFL Y.E.T. Academy on Second Street,south of Broadway Road, and the area eastof Rose Linda School on 12th Street.

21. Explore the feasibility of rezoning vacantmultifamily zoned parcels along RoeserRoad to single-family or R-2 zoning.

22. Focus future funding on job linkage andtraining.

23. Cleanup vacant lot and promote economicdevelopment on the northeast corner ofRoeser Road and Central Avenue.

24. Help to stabilize neighborhoods in the TABby encouraging the acquisition andrenovation of existing multifamily properties.

25. Rehabilitate homes in the area south ofHayden Park, near the large vacant site atthe southeast corner of Wier and FourthAvenue.

26. Develop public-private partnerships toconstruct new single-family and multifamilyproperties.

27. Relocate the auto repair facility at thenortheast corner of Southern Avenue andCentral Avenue and redevelop the shoppingcenter after Safeway relocates if necessary.

28. Pursue establishment of a South CentralAvenue property owners association toimprove the image and profitability ofbusinesses as well as expansion and newdevelopment opportunities.

29. Focus on the north side of Roeser Roadbetween Ninth Street and 12th Street.There is vacant land at all four corners of12th Street and Roeser Roads.

30. Construct half street improvements adjacentto Sunland Elementary School on ChambersStreet and 5th Avenue.

31. Develop a new name and identity for thearea.

A MSSESSMENT ETHODOLOGY

The methodology and work plan for theassessment were reviewed by the Target Area BCitizens Advisory Committee, other interestedcitizens, City of Phoenix departmental staff. Thework plan was carried out in the followingmanner:

1. During February and March of 1996,members of the South Team for the City ofPhoenix Planning Department and ArizonaState University planning studentsconducted an existing land use survey forTarget Area B. This survey updated theoriginal survey done in 1978. The purposeof the 1996 survey was to determine if theproposed and designated land uses in thearea were consistent with theRedevelopment Plan and Phoenix GeneralPlan.

2. Home and yard maintenance condition datawas collected and analyzed using the 1972,1980 and 1994

.Statistics were also gathered specifying thehousing supply and/or demand by type andprice categories.

3. Data pertaining to capital improvements,such as streets, waterlines, sewers andsidewalks was gathered from theappropriate City departments to determine ifadequate public services and facilitiesdemands had been met.

ASU/City of PhoenixHousing Condition Evaluation Reports

4. Information identifying past and presentprograms and funding sources was obtainedfrom the Neighborhood ServicesDepartment.

5. A list of 1978 Community Facilities Needs,housing rehabilitation activity, blightelimination goals, and capital improvementneeds was generated to determine if initialplan goals had been accomplished.

6. After analyzing data from the 1978redevelopment plan and comparing it withthe 1996 updated data, specific elementsfrom the original plan such as blightelimination, housing rehabilitation andcapital improvements were identified aspriorities. Each priority was then evaluated,based on the redevelopment planobjectives, on whether they met theperformance goals indicated in the 1978Action Plan.

7. Thewas prepared by Behavior

Research Center, Inc., a member of theNational Council on Public Polls, for the Cityof Phoenix Planning Department todetermine the attitudes and opinions ofresidents and businesses located in TargetArea B regarding their neighborhood. Thesurvey addressed:

Progress made in achieving Target AreaB Redevelopment Plan goals;

Public improvements made sincedesignation as a redevelopment area,and satisfaction with city services andfacilities;

Target Area B Resident and BusinessStudy Survey

Evaluation of socio-economicdevelopment efforts made in the area;

Resident and business demographics.

8. Planning Department staff attended monthlyTarget Area B Citizens Advisory Committeemeetings to present data, obtain comments,and work with residents to determine whatthe public felt had been accomplished sincethe redevelopment plan was adopted, aswell as determine future needs that still hadto be accomplished.

In addition to the, there are three other existing plans which

include recommendations and strategies for thearea.

, was adopted by Council in 1985. Thewas

developed in 1985, and is used as a guide forthe village though it was never formally adoptedby Council; and the

, adopted in 1993. Each of theseplans serves as a general guide to City Council,Planning Commission, City staff, and residentswhen regarding the direction and developmentof the City, the Village, and TAB.

Target Area B RedevelopmentPlan

The General Plan for Phoenix: 1985-2000South Mountain Village Draft Plan

South Central AvenueCorridor Study

The General Plan for Phoenix: 1985-2000

The Phoenix General Plan is based on theurban village model. The village concept,adopted in 1979, is a principle element of theGeneral Plan. The primary goal of the villagemodel is to provide residents with a sense of

66

T A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentA Tppendix opicsA Tppendix opicsA Tppendix opicsA Tppendix opics

R E PELATIONSHIP TO XISTING LANS

identity, as well as satisfy their need to belong tothe overall community. It includes 11 GeneralPlan Elements that promote a mix of jobs, arange of housing types and prices, publicservices, recreational opportunities, as well asprovide a safe and liveable communityenvironment. The general plan document andthe corresponding land use map contain goals,policies, a summary of the 11 Elements, andrecommendations to implement the villageconcept. The Conservation, Rehabilitation andRedevelopment Element of the General Planconsists of goals and policies that support theelimination of slums and blight, consistent withthe goals and objectives of the Target Area BRedevelopment Plan.

There have been four amendments to theGeneral Plan Land Use Map in South MountainVillage which relate to TAB since 1985. Thosechanges include the relocation of the villagecore to an area one block north of BroadwayRoad to Roeser Road, 3rd Avenue to 3rd Street.Within the urban village model, the village corecomponents are a central focus of the village.These core components recommend a mix ofuses including office, retail, public, governmentaland residential uses. The primary objective ofthe South Mountain Village Core is to serve as agovernmental services core, based on variouspublic facilities and services located in this area.Other land use changes to the General Plan inTAB include:

1) an increase in multifamily residentialland use of 5-15 dwelling units per acre(du/ac) to 15+ du/ac, located just souththe commercial designation alongBroadway Road between 12th Streetand 16th Street;

2) the multifamily residential land use of 5-15 du/ac changed to an industrialclassification on the west side of 16thStreet between Roeser Road andSunland Avenue; and

3) the northwest corner of 24th Street andSouthern Avenue was changed fromsingle-family residential at 2-5 du/ac tocommercial and multifamily residential at15+ du/ac.

Except for the four changes mentioned above,theremained unchanged. The General Plan asshown in on the following pagerecommends commercial land use along CentralAvenue between Broadway Road and SouthernAvenue.

Commercial land use is proposed alongBroadway Road from 7th Avenue to 22nd Street,with multifamily residential at a density of 5-15du/ac from 22nd Street to 24th Street. The planrecommends multifamily residential at 15+ du/acon Southern Avenue between 7th Avenue andCentral Avenue, with commercial uses betweenCentral Avenue and 7th Street. There is also amajor commercial site at the northwest corner of24th Street and Southern which is vacant. Mostof the interior parcels in TAB are designated forsingle-family or high-density multifamily units,with the exception of the industrial uses along16th Street, the public/quasi-public uses locatedthroughout the target area; and the parks/openspace uses.

General Plan Land Use map for TAB

Figure 57

The 1985 Proposed Land Use Map

In 1985, thewas amended by Resolution 16510 to

include a proposed land use map. Theproposed map indicated some substantialchanges from the Phoenix General Plan LandUse Map. These changes included a reductionof commercial uses along Broadway Roadbetween 7th Avenue and 22nd Street; areduction of high-density multifamily residentialuses along Southern Avenue between 7thAvenue and Central Avenue; a decrease inindustrial uses in the area; and an increase inpublic/quasi-public uses throughout the area.The northwest corner of 24th Street andSouthern Avenue was designated for single-family on the amended

. In addition, a new land use designation,mixed-use, was added to the proposed land usemap.

The as shown inwas amended and approved by City

Council in January 1985, and provided morerefinement of the 1979 Land Use Map. Thoseamendments, however, did not get incorporatedintoMap, which was simultaneously beingdeveloped and approved by City Council inOctober 1985.

Target Area B RedevelopmentPlan

The General Plan for Phoenix: 1985-2000

1985 TAB Land UseMap

1985 TAB Land Use MapFigure 58

67

T A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessmentT A B Aarget rea ssessment A Tppendix opicsA Tppendix opicsA Tppendix opicsA Tppendix opics

NuevePark

RoseLinda

School

South Mountain

High School

Carl Hayden

Park

Sunland

School

Ocotillo

Library

Police

Station

Fire Station

24T

HS

T.

7T

HA

VE

.

CE

NT

RA

LA

VE

.

7T

HS

T.

12T

HS

T.

BROADWAYRD.

ROESER RD.

SOUTHERNAVE.

20T

HS

T.

16T

HS

T.

WIER AVE.

SUNLAND AVE.Hermoso

Park

Julian

School

Martin Luther

King, Jr.

School

PostOffice

2 - 5 Dwelling Units /Acre

5 - 15 Dwelling Units /Acre

15+ Dwelling Units /Acre

Commercial

Industrial Core

Parks/Open Space

Public/Quasi-Public

GENERAL PLAN LAND USE

Figure 57

LEGEND



NORTH


0 1/41/8

68


SF Single Family

MF-1 Multi Family Low Density(2-4 Dwelling Units)

MF-2 Multi Family High Density(5 or More Dwelling Units)

NC NeighborhoodCommercial

CC CommunityCommercial

MU Mixed Use

IP Industrial Park

PQ Public/Quasi-Public

P/OS Parks/Open Space

24T

HS

T.

7T

HA

VE

.

CE

NT

RA

LA

VE

.

7T

HS

T.

12T

HS

T.

BROADWAYRD.

ROESERRD.

SOUTHERNAVE.

20T

HS

T.

16T

HS

T.

WIER AVE.

SUNLANDAVE.

1985 AMENDED LAND USE

Figure 58

LEGEND



NORTH


0 1/41/8

69


The South Mountain Village DraftPlan

The South Central Avenue CorridorStudy

Theappears to be a compromise between thePhoenix General Plan and the

as shown in . The Village DraftPlan indicates a concentration of multifamilyhousing on Southern Avenue between 7thAvenue and Central Avenue; commercial alongBroadway Road from 7th Avenue to 24th Street;and a couple of industrial pockets on 16th Streetnear Broadway Road and Southern Avenuewhich are consistent with the Phoenix GeneralPlan. It also shows single-family residential onthe northwest corner of 24th Street andSouthern Avenue, which is consistent with the1985 amended TAB land use map.

The purpose of thewas to analyze the commercial

area along Central Avenue, south of the SaltRiver. When City Council approved therelocation of South Mountain Village Core, amarket analysis was requested to determinesome of the issues and needs regardingcommercial development along Central Avenue.The core for South Mountain Village wasoriginally designated as a governmental servicescore due to the concentration of public/quasi-public type facilities in the area. As a means ofincreasing activity in the core, the

proposed anincrease in commercial development alongCentral Avenue, from the River to the HighlineCanal between 3rd Avenue and 3rd Street.

South Mountain Village Draft Plan

South Central AvenueCorridor Study

SouthCentral Avenue Corridor Study

1985 TABAmended (Resolution No. 16510) Land UseMap Figure 55

The Baseline Area Master Plan

This plan concentrates on the area bounded byCentral Avenue and 40th Street, SouthernAvenue to the Mountain Preserve. A land useplan was developed for the area to help guidethe development of large vacant parcels andagricultural lands. The effects of this plan couldbe instrumental in influencing the quality ofhousing development in TAB as major landdevelopers invest in the area and subsequentlyprovide economic development.

The City of Phoenix Planning Departmentcommissioned the Behavior Research Center, aprivate research firm, to conduct a resident andbusiness survey. The primary objective of thesurvey was to determine the attitudes andopinions of residents and businesses located inTAB regarding their neighborhood. The surveyaddressed the following issues:

Progress made in meeting Target Area BRedevelopment Plan goals;

Public improvements made in Target Area Bover the past 17 years;

Primary problems facing neighborhoods;

Satisfaction with city services and facilities;

Evaluation of the area in selected areas;

R RB S

ESULTS OF THE ESIDENT

AND USINESS URVEY

Evaluation of economic development efforts inarea;

Resident and business demographics.

Information for the survey was conductedthrough in-depth telephone interviews by theBehavior Research Center between August 19,and September 6, 1996. Results of the surveyare as follows:

1. Awareness of Target Area B Designation39% of TAB residents and 46% of areabusinesses are aware that they are locatedin TAB.

2. Areas Where City has Made Most Progress62% of residents and 63% of businesses inthe area believe that the city made eithersubstantial or some progress in providingadequate public services.

64% of area businesses felt that the cityhas made either substantial or someprogress in stabilizing existing viableneighborhoods.

61% of businesses felt that the city hasmade either substantial or someprogress in encouraging bettertransportation routes to promote the safeflow of traffic.

61% of area businesses felt that the cityhas made either substantial or someprogress in stabilizing decliningresidential neighborhoods.

70


71


3. Areas Where City has Made Least Progress

Assembling vacant land into useable sizedand shaped parcels for resale anddevelopment.

Stabilizing declining residentialneighborhoods by removing structurallysubstandard buildings.

Eliminating unsuitable land uses.

4. Current Appropriateness of Plan’s Goal

95% of residents and 100% of businessesin TAB believe the goals and objectivesidentified in the Target Area BRedevelopment Plan are still appropriate.

5. Awareness of Public Improvement/BlightElimination Efforts

46% of residents and 37% of businessesare aware of public improvements in thearea.

19% of residents and 27% of businessesare aware of blight elimination efforts inthe area.

6. Severity of Area Problems

Both residents and businesses agree thatcrime and gangs are problems in TAB.

Residents believe the lack of adequatejobs in the area is a major problem.

Businesses also believe that vandalism,graffiti, vacant and blighted structures,lack of residential maintenance, anddeclining neighborhoods are majorproblems.

7. Evaluation of TAB - Highest Ratings

Residents gave highest ratings on streetquality and public transportation.

Businesses gave highest ratings on trafficflow and public transit.

8. Evaluation of TAB - Lowest Ratings

Both residents and businesses gavelowest ratings on safety, cleanliness andattractiveness.

9. Evaluation of Target Area B Maintenance

Four out of ten residents believe thatyards and houses in their neighborhoodare beginning to show signs of neglect;and one-third (1/3) of residents believeyards and houses in their neighborhoodare well maintained.

59% of businesses describe the physicalcondition of the area as beginning to showsigns of neglect; 24% of businessesdescribe the area as well maintained; and17% of businesses describe the area aspoorly maintained.

10. Attitudes About Neighborhood Stability

Three out of four residents classify theirneighborhood as stable; and one out offive residents classify their neighborhoodas unstable.

11. Attitudes About Affordable Housing

One-half (½) of residents say there is asufficient number of affordable housing;3% of residents say there are too manyaffordable housing units; and 35% ofresidents say there is not enough.

12. Evaluation of City Services in Target Area B- Highest Rated

Both residents and businesses (at least50%) said the following services areexcellent or good: fire services, policeservice, sewers, water lines and stormsewers.

13. Evaluation of City Services in Target Area B- Lowest Rated

Residents gave public transportation andsidewalk maintenance the lowest ratings.

Businesses gave public transportation thelowest rating.

14. Business Programs Utilized

12% of businesses have participated ineither the City’s Storefront Program orSmall Business Assistance Program.

72


10% of businesses have participated in theCity of Phoenix Enterprise Zone (COPEZ)Program.

2% of businesses have participated in theExpansion Assistance and Development(EXPAND) Program.

14% of businesses have participated in aSmall Business Administration (SBA)Program.

15. Value of Selected Business Resources

One-third (1/3) of businesses indicated thefollowing information would be veryhelpful:

16. Most Effective Economic Development Steps

Attract more businesses to the area.

Reduce crime.

Clean up the area.

17. Availability of Qualified Workers

58% of businesses believe there is asignificant number of qualified workers inTAB; and 37% of businesses do notbelieve there is significant number ofqualified workers in the area.

18. Reasons for Locating in TAB

Clients are located in TAB.

Corporate decision.

19. Business Growth

41% of businesses say their volume ofbusiness has increased over the past twoyears;

26% of businesses say their volume ofbusiness has decreased over the past twoyears; and

22% of businesses say their volume ofbusiness has remained the same over thepast two years.

taba arget rea ssessmentarget rea ssessment tc able of

Documents