HomeMy WebLinkAboutAG RPTS 1994 1102 RDA REG �a��ppMEpr4o�
O y
Next Res. 94-30
ESTABLISHED
HATCH � REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
* * OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK
AGENDA
0 � /F0 WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 2, 1994
�• 7:00 P.M.
'.• Community Center 799 Moorpark Avenue
1. CALL TO ORDER:
2 . ROLL CALL:
3. PROCLAMATIONS, COMMENDATIONS, AND SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS:
4. PUBLIC COMMENT:
5. CONSENT CALENDAR:
A. Consider Approval of the Warrant Register.
Warrants 187 & 187 $ 946. 03
Staff Recommendation: Approve the Warrant Register.
B. Consider Request for Public Hearing on the Adoption of
the Redevelopment Implementation Plan for December 7 ,
1994 and Authorization to Notice Said Hearing. Staff
Recommendation: That the Agency set a Noticed Public
Hearing on December 7 , 1994 for the Housing
Implementation Plan and authorize notification of said
hearing.
Any member of the public may address the Agency during the Public
Comments portion of the Agenda, unless it is a Public Hearing or
Discussion/Action item. Speakers who wish to address the Agency
concerning a Public Hearing or Discussion/Action item must do so
during the Public Hearing or Discussion/Action portion of the
Agenda for that item. Speaker card must be received by the Agency
Secretary for Public Comment prior to the beginning of the Public
Comments portion of the meeting and for Discussion/Action items
prior to the beginning of the first item of the Discussion/Action
portion of the Agenda. Speaker Cards for a Public Hearing must be
received prior to the beginning of the Public Hearing. A
limitation of three minutes shall be imposed upon each Public
Comment and Discussion/Action item speaker. Copies of each item of
business on the agenda are on file in the office of the City Clerk
and are available for public review. Any questions concerning any
agenda item may be directed to the City Clerk/529-6864 .
Moorpark Redevelopment Agency Agenda
November 2, 1994
Page 2
6. ACTION/DISCUSSION:
A. Consider Staff Presentaton on Needs Assessment for
Proposed Housing Rehabilitation Loan and Grant Program.
Staff Recommendation: Direct staff and the Economic
Development/Affordable Housing Committee to address the
issues and other identified by the Agency and/or the
Committee and report back to the Board no later than
January 18, 1995.
7. CLOSED SESSION:
A. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (pursuant to
Government Code Section 54956.8)
Property: APN 511-0-080-19, 511-0-080-20, 511-0-080-21,
511-0-080-31, and portions of 511-0-080-25 and 511-0-080-
26 (North Side of Los Angeles Avenue and South Side of
Poindexter Avenue contiguous to Mission Bell Plaza)
Negotiating Parties: City of Moorpark and Ventura
Pacific Capital Group
Under Negotiation: Terms
B. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (pursuant to
Government Code Section 54956. 8)
Property: 18 High Street
Negotiating Parties: City of Moorpark and Charles Abbott
& Associates
Under Negotiation: Price and Terms
8. ADJOURNMENT:
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need
special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact
the City Clerk, (805) 529-6864 . Notification 48 hours prior to the
meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to
ensure accessibility to this meeting. (28 CFR 35. 102-35. 104 ADA
Title II)
CITY OF MOORPARK )
COUNTY OF VENTURA ) ss
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
I, Lillian E. Hare, duly appointed Secretary of the
Redevelopment Agency of the City of Moorpark, County of
Ventura, State of California, do hereby certify under
penalty of perjury, that I posted a copy of the Moorpark
Redevelopment Agency agenda on October 28, 1994 for the
meeting of November 2 , 1994 at the following location:
Moorpark Community Center
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, California 93021
Said notice shall remain in place until after the meeting so
that it is available for public review for at least 72 hours
pursuant to Section 54954 et. seq. of the California
Government Code.
, /11.L.,,i,ti,,7,1 z 4_i,,,
Lillian are, Secretary i,,,/Pc OPMEA/r
'40
to Fti
Dated: November 16, 1994 4 ESTABLISHED CI'
* MARCH I8.tlt7 *
CITY or
1
A
ITC��I *
WARRANT REGISTER
FOR THE 1994 -95 FISCAL YEAR
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 02, 1994
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
WARRANTS 186 & 187 $ 946.03
�E'e—J-4f."
DEVELOPMENT AGOW
IEeETM �,/
OF ' 2 NN
$ 946.03
1
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CITY OF MOORPARK
10/26/94 13:59:54 Disbursements Journal GL050S- V02.03 COVERPAGE
GL540R
************************************************ * * * * * * * * * * * ** ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
* * ** S U S A N
* * ** S U S A N
* * ** S U S A N
* * ** S U S A N
************************************************ * * * * * * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
Report Selection:
RUN GROUP... 941102 COMMENT... MRA WARRANTS 11/02/94MTG
DATA -JE -ID DATA COMMENT
-------- - - - - -- ------------------ - -- - --
H- 11021994 -820 MRA WARRANTS 11/02/94MTG
Run Instructions:
Jobq Banner Copies Form Printer Hold Space LPI Lines CPI
J SUSAN 03 P'. N S 6 066 1(�
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CITY OF MOORPARK
10/26/94 14:00:02 Disbursements Journal GL540R- V02.03 PAGE 1
WARRANT DATE VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CLAIM INVOICE P0# F 9 S ACCOUNT
BANK OF A. LEVY
186 11/02/94 MOORPARK MOSQUITO AB
187 11/02/94 VENTURA CO COMM COLL
BANK OF A. LEVY
1812 TAX INCREMENT REVENUE 630.35 013900 FY90/91 -93/94
2122 93 /94PASS THRU TX INC 315.68 013931 93/94TAX INCRE
TOTAL 946.03
P N H 071.4.170.672
P N H 071.4.170.672
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CITY OF MOORPARK
10/26/94 14:00:02 Disbursements Journal GL540R- V02.03 PAGE 2
WARRANT DATE VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CLAIM INVOICE P0# F 9 S ACCOUNT
REPORT TOTALS: 946.03
RECORDS PRINTED - 000002
CITY OF MOORPARK
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE GL060S- V02.03 RECAPPAGE
10/26/94 14:00:09 Disbursements Journal GL540R
FUND RECAP:
FUND DESCRIPTION
- - -- ----------------- ----- - - - - --
071 RDA AREA 1 CAPITAL PROJECTS
TOTAL ALL FUNDS
BANK RECAP:
BANK NAME
- - -- ---------------------- - - - - --
BANK BANK OF A. LEVY
TOTAL ALL BANKS
DISBURSEMENTS
946.03
946.03
DISBURSEMENTS
946.03
946.03
IT E •
MOORPARK REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Chairman and Members of the Moorpark Redevelopment Agency
FROM: Steven Hayes, Economic Development Ma
DATE: October 24, 1994 (Mtg 11/02/94)
SUBJECT: Request for Public Hearing on the Adoption of the
Redevelopment Implementation Plan for December 7, 1994
and Authorization to Notice Said Hearing
DISCUSSION:
The Moorpark Redevelopment Agency is preparing a Housing
Implementation Plan in accordance with the California Redevelopment
Law Reform Act (A.B. 1290). The California Community Redevelopment
Law requires that the Agency hold a Noticed Public Hearing on the
Implementation Plan to receive comments regarding the Plan from the
Public.
• i,W •_ •
Staff recommends that the Agency set a Noticed Public Hearing on
December 7, 1994 for the Housing Implementation Plan and authorize
notification of Said Meeting.
MoofpARK, CALIFORNIA
I= j ROPIENT AGENCY
SEE nW
ACTION:
BY
SGH141- 10/24/94
MOORPARK REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
AGENDA REPORT
OF.- 19Y
RedevelopMOR '
Manager-
TO: Chairman and Members of the Moorpark
FROM: Steven Hayes, Economic Development
DATE: October 24, 1994 (Mtg 11/02/94)
ITEM & A •
7/2 .(c �7lo)
MOORPARK. CAUFORN{A
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
MEETING
SUBJECT: Receive Staff Presentation on Needs Assessment for
Proposed Housing Rehabilitation Loan and Grant Program
DISCUSSION:
The Moorpark Redevelopment Agency recently received a draft copy of
the Guidelines for the Moorpark Redevelopment Agency's Housing
Rehabilitation Loan and Grant Program.
Agency staff will present an overview of the findings resulting
from the field survey for the housing units observed in the
Redevelopment Project Area. The survey was conducted using a
modified version of the rating scale used by Urban Futures when
they prepared the Redevelopment Plan. The major difference is that
the rating scale used in this survey took into consideration the
cost to repair deficiencies. The following is the scale used:
Sound
The structure has no noticeable deficiencies in the structural
condition of roof, walls, or foundation. It appears to have
adequate plumbing and electrical service but may need minor
maintenance. Exterior walls and surfaces are well painted and
clean. Windows and doors are intact. Any deficiencies can be
fixed with minimal cost (less than $1,500).
Def icient
The structure has been maintained adequately to eliminate any
major structural defects. It may show signs of deferred
maintenance such as pealing paint, broken windows, or cracked
plaster. The roof, garage doors, and exterior walls may show
signs of need to repair or replace. The structure is safe for
occupancy.
If a housing unit had a deficiency that was estimated to cost
over $1,500 it was placed into the deficient category, i.e.,
if it appeared to need new roof material costing over the
$1,500 the unit would be considered in need of repair and
classified as deficient. There are 46 housing units
identified that appeared to need new roofing only.
0
Deteriorated
The structure shows signs of structural deterioration such as
sagging roof, damaged walls or crumbling foundation. It may
appear to have leaky plumbing or hazardous electrical service
evidenced by exposed wiring or type or age of wiring, holes
may be apparent in the roof or walls. Paint may be largely
peeled or faded or even nonexistent. Broken and cracked
windows are often apparent. Structure shows signs of possible
unsafe conditions.
Dilapidated
The building is structurally unsound and maintenance is
nonexistent. Its fitness for human occupation is highly
questionable and the state of deterioration and neglect is
such that it is a candidate for demolition.
Staff is requesting additional direction regarding several issues
of the proposed Program as follows:
1. Due to the findings that most of the severe housing problems
are renter occupied units (14 of the 16 units that are
considered dilapidated and 39 of the 64 units that are
considered deteriorated) it is suggested that a code
enforcement program be implemented to actively seek to remedy
the conditions found for these renter occupied units. There
are several problems that are inherent in enforcement programs
of this nature which are: (a) the possible displacement of
persons and families, (b) possible funding (temporary rent
subsidies) for displaced persons and families, and (c)
assisting with finding housinq for any displaced persons and
families.
While these issues are not issues that technically are the
responsibility of the City /Agency, they are issues that staff
feels need to be considered.
2. The City Council /Agency has in the past, indicated that the
maximum amount and type of funding for owner occupied
rehabilitation projects for low and very low income families
should be as follows: (a) $5,000 grant, (b) $10,000 low
interest loans, and (c) a combination of a, and b. The City
Council /Agency may also want to consider the use of deferred
loans. Deferred loans are loans with no payments due until
the property is sold. This requires that a second mortgage be
placed on the deed.
Agency staff has completed four inspections of homes that are
considered as deficient. The average cost (bids provided for
by contractors) for the necessary improvement is about $9,000.
% 0< it 1
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chairman and Members of the Moorpark Redevelopment
Agency
FROM: Steven Hayes, Redevelopment Manage
DATE: October 19, 1994
SUBJECT: Redraft of Guidelines for Moorpark Redevelopment
Agency's Housing Rehabilitation Loan and Grant
program
Attached is a redraft of the Guidelines for Moorpark Redevelopment
Agency Housing Rehabilitation Loan and Grant Program. On August 3,
1994, the Agency received the original document containing the
outline of the proposed program. Since that time, staff has
completed the needs assessment field survey that was conducted to
gather data, in order to determine if Neighborhood Strategy Areas
should be adopted for the implementation of the program. The
survey documents includes the number and condition of units in the
Project area.
Staff has recently redrafted Section III, Needs Assessment and has
inserted new sections and modified other sections to the document.
The status of each section is depicted in the Executive Summary,
contained in the Guidelines.
This program will be discussed at the Agency's Meeting of November
2, 1994 and at the Economic Development /Affordable Housing
Committee's Meeting on November 3, 1994.
If you have any questions regarding the program or the information
contained in the Guidelines, please call me at extension 225.
cc: Steven Kueny, City Manager
Richard Hare, Deputy City Manager
SGH149- 10/26/94
GU =DEL = N E S F OR
MOORPARK R E D EV E LO PM ENT AG E N C Y
HOUSING R E HA B = L =TAT = ON
LOAN AN D GRANT PROGRAM
DRAFT
PRE PARE D 13'Y
MOORPARK R E D EVE LO PME NT AG EN C Y
OCTOBER 1 9 9 4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION _ PAGE
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................... 1
II. PROGRAM GOALS ........................................ 3
III. NEEDS ASSESSMENT ..................................... 4
IV. DEVELOPMENT OF PROGRAM TYPES ........................ 11
V. FUNDING SOURCES ..................................... 12
VI. ESTABLISHMENT OF PROGRAM AREAS ...................... 14
VII. DEVELOP PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION GUIDELINES ........... 15
EXHIBIT "A"
EXHIBIT "B"
EXHIBIT "C"
EXHIBIT "D"
EXHIBIT "E"
EXHIBIT "F"
EXHIBIT "G"
SGH079R7- 07/22/94
EXHIBITS
ELIGIBLE REHABILITATION WORK
CONSTRUCTION NEEDS FORM
LETTER OF INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE OF PROGRAM
CONTRACTORS INFORMATION FORM
PROCESSING SUMMARY
COST FOR IMPROVEMENTS
INCOME LIMITS
(l)
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE
PAGE
_. _
Table
I
FINDING
OF
CONDITIONS
- PROJECT AREA ............
7
Table
II
FINDING
OF
CONDITIONS
- WALNUT CANYON AREA ......
8
Table
III
FINDING
OF
CONDITIONS
- MIRA SOL AREA ...........
8
Table
IV
FINDING
OF
CONDITIONS
- CHARLES STREET AREA .....
9
Table
V
FINDING
OF
CONDITIONS
- MAUREEN AREA ............
9
Table
VI
FINDING
OF
CONDITIONS
- MOORPARK ESTATES ........
9
Table
VII
FINDING
OF
CONDITIONS
- AVENIDA COLONIA AREA ...
10
Table
VIII
FINDING
OF
CONDITIONS
- FREMONT AREA ...........
10
Table
IX
FINDING
OF
CONDITIONS
- CORNETT MC FADDEN AREA .
10
Table
X
FINDING
OF
CONDITIONS
- VISTA VERDE ESTATES ....
11
Table
XI
20% HOUSING SET ASIDE
FUNDS ....................
13
(ii)
SECTION 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On August 3, 1994, the Moorpark Redevelopment Agency received an
outline of the Moorpark Redevelopment Agency's Housing
Rehabilitation Loan and Grant Program. The Moorpark Redevelopment
Agency reviewed the document and made recommendations regarding
certain elements of the Program. Also, the Agency appointed the
Economic Development /Affordable Housing Committee (Councilmember
Patrick Hunter and Councilmember Bernardo Perez) to monitor the
progress of the development of the Program.
The outline of the Housing Rehabilitation Loan and Grant Program
was prepared by Agency staff and when in final form is intended to
be a single document containing sufficient information to be the
Guidelines for Implementation for the Moorpark Redevelopment
Agency's Housing Rehabilitation Loan and Grant Program. The
original outline was drafted in a manner that allows staff to
receive input form the City Council, Redevelopment Agency, and the
public then redraft the document to conform with the directions
received.
The original outline contained the following:
Sections
I. Program Goals ................................... 1
II. Needs Assessment . ............................... 2
III. Development of Program Types .................... 2
IV. Funding Sources .. ............................... 3
V. Establishment of Neighborhood
StrategyAreas .................................. 3
VI. Develop Program Administration Guidelines ....... 4
There were several attachments shown as Exhibit A through D.
1
This re -draft of the Guidelines for the Housing Rehabilitation Loan
and Grant Program has the following additions and modifications
and /or Section Considered complete:
A.
Section
I
Executive Summary - added.
B.
Section
II
Program Goals - considered completed.
C.
Section
III
Needs Assessment - drafted and inserted.
D.
Section
IV
Development of Program Types - minor
modification at this time.
E.
Section
V.
Funding Sources - Considered completed.
Table of revenue projections inserted.
F.
Section
VI.
Establishment of Program Areas - drafted
and inserted.
G.
Section
VII.
Develop Program Administration Guidelines
- no modification or addition at this
time.
Most of the above Section to this document will be re- drafted or
modified as the Needs Assessment Section is reviewed and direction
is received form the Economic Development /Affordable Housing
Committee.
2
SECTION II
PROGRAM GOALS
The City of Moorpark acknowledges that there is a need for a
community wide strategy to assist low and very low income
homeowners to live in decent, safe and sanitary housing.
Similarly, there is a necessity to maintain and enhance the
viability and character of the community by eliminating
deteriorating influences through preservation and rehabilitation.
This recognizes the important fact that a well maintained housing
stock is among the City's most valuable resources.
Obviously, people of very low income (50% of median income or
$28,950 for a family of 4) and low income (80% of median income or
$39,900 for a family of 4) are the least able financially to afford
needed home repairs and improvements. As a normal result of
deferred maintenance, deterioration has the opportunity to set -in
and, not only can a building become a health and safety hazard to
occupants and nearby residents, but it can also detract from the
overall appearance of the neighborhood, thus negatively affecting
property values. Once a neighborhood starts to decline, a host of
social problems usually begins to develop which require added
expenses for such services as police, health, fire, code
enforcement, etc.
For these reasons, it is in the best interest of the general public
that the following goals be achieved:
1. To improve the quality of life for low and very low
income home owners in Moorpark, by assisting them with
necessary and desirable repairs and general property
improvements to make their homes decent, safe and
sanitary, and to ease overcrowding; and
2. To preserve and increase the supply of the City's low and
very low income housing stock by the implementation of
various housing programs including loan and grant housing
rehabilitation programs
91
SECTION III
NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A. METHODOLOGY
The Moorpark Redevelopment Agency staff has conducted a parcel
by parcel survey of all single family residential units in the
Project Area. The survey was conducted to determine the
structural condition of the homes. The conditions of yards,
driveways, and garden fences were also evaluated. The Agency
used a modified rating scale from that which was presented in
the Redevelopment Report to Council prepared by Urban Futures,
Inc. at the time of the adoption of the Redevelopment Plan.
The basic difference in the rating scale used by the Agency is
that the first rating category, while taking into
consideration the condition of the unit, also fixes a price to
repair any deficiencies found. If the unit surveyed had minor
deficiencies that could be remedied at a cost of $1,000 to
$1,500, the unit was considered Sound. The deficiencies
include; landscape, fencing, paint, trim and other minor work
that could be fixed with minimal cost. The basic structural
conditions are the same for both the scale used by Urban
Futures and the scale used by the Agency.
The housing unit rating scale used for this report is as
follows:
Sound
The structure has no noticeable deficiencies in the structural
condition of roof, walls, or foundation. It appears to have
adequate plumbing and electrical service but might need minor
maintenance. Exterior walls and other surfaces are well
painted and clean, and windows and doors are in tact. Any
Deficiencies can be fixed with minimal cost.
Deficient
The structure has been maintained adequately to eliminate any
major structural defects. It may show signs of deferred
maintenance such as pealing paint, broken windows, or cracked
4
plaster. The roof, garage doors, and exterior walls may show
signs of need to repair or replace. The structure is safe for
occupancy.
Deteriorated
The structure shows signs of structural deterioration such as
sagging roof, damaged walls or crumbling foundation. It may
appear to have leaky plumbing or hazardous electrical service
evidenced by exposed wiring or type or age of wiring, holes
may be apparent in the roof or walls. Paint may be largely
peeled or faded or even nonexistent, broken and cracked
windows are often apparent. Structure shows signs of unsafe
conditions.
Dilapidated
The building is structurally unsound and maintenance is
nonexistent. Its fitness for human occupation is highly
questionable and the state of deterioration and neglect is
such that it is a candidate for demolition.
As stated above, each parcel was surveyed. The conditions of
the structures and site for the parcels were recorded on a
Construction Needs Form (see Exhibit "B" attached) . Each
parcel was then identified on the County Assessors Maps and
the appropriate rating as depicted above was recorded on the
map. The APN, property owner, and address of each parcel was
entered on the Construction Needs Form, including whether the
housing unit was owner or renter occupied.
In an attempt to place cost for repair for the deficiencies
found, Agency staff has contacted various contractors and has
received cost estimates for various improvements including
roof electrical, and structural improvements. To verify the
cost estimates provided by the various contractors, Agency
staff acquired a computer program that is specifically
designed to provide cost estimates for housing improvements.
This program was compared to the estimates provided by the
contractors and adjustments made to the computer program as
needed.
Agency staff has, in order to further document deficient
conditions that may be found, requested entry into several
homes on a voluntary basis. While this is not as accurate as
the field survey (small survey sample for accurate prediction
Of costs), it does give an indication of what can be expected
for improvements when considering funding for the program.
5
Four residential housing units were inspected and the average
costs for improvements is $8,596. The range for the three
units was from a high of $12,698 to a low of $4,360. The
items needing repair and costs are shown in Exhibit "F" Cost
for Improvements, Construction Needs Form for Units A through
D. It should be noted that these units were considered as
deficient and that no dilapidated units were inspected.
B. FINDINGS OF CONDITIONS
The residential areas of the Redevelopment Project Area was
divide into nine ( 9 ) sub areas or Neighborhood Strategy Areas.
The Neighborhood Strategy Areas are as follows.
1. Walnut Canyon Area - This area is located north of
the Civic Center and west of Moorpark Ave.
2. Cornett - Mc Fadden Area - This area is located
south of Poindexter Ave and east of Chaparral
Middle School.
3. Vista Verde Estates - This area is located south of
High Street, north of L.A. Avenue, and between
Moorpark Avenue to the west and Spring Road to the
east.
4. Moorpark Estates - This area is located south of
Poindexter Avenue, north of L.A. Avenue and west of
the Gisler Field site.
5. Avenida Colonia Area - This area is located south
of East L.A. Avenue and east of Nogales.
6. Fremont Area - This area is located south of L.A.
Avenue on Fremont Street.
7. Mira Sol Area - This area is located South of L.A.
Avenue on Mira Sol
8. Charles Street Area - This area is located north of
High Street between Moorpark Avenue and Spring
Road.
10
9. Maureen Area - This area is located south of L.A.
Avenue on Maureen Lane.
The findings of the survey are depicted in the following table:
TABLE I
NEEDS ASSESSMENT
FINDING OF CONDITIONS
TOTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
CONDITION OF
UNITS
NUMBER OF
UNITS
OWNER OCCUPIED
UNITS
RENTER OCCUPIED
UNITS
SOUND
631
549
82
DEFICIENT
230
136
94
DETERIORATED
64
25
39
DILAPIDATED
16
2
14
TOTALS:
941
112
229
There are 941 housing units in the Redevelopment Project Area. Of
that number only 631 or 67.06% are considered Sound. The remaining
310 housing units or 32.94% show signs of deficiencies, that repair
costs exceed $1,500. Of the 941 housing units identified 712 or
76.66% are owner occupied and 229 or 24.34% are renter occupied.
There are 16 housing units identified that are rated as Dilapidated
and are candidates for demolition. Of the 16 dilapidated units
87.5% are renter occupied.
As can be seen, the conditions of the housing units decreases as
the percent of renter occupied units increase i.e., Deficient shows
40.87% renter occupied, Deteriorated shows 60.94% renter occupied
and Dilapidated shows 87.5% renter occupied.
7
This is a strong indication that the Housing Rehabilitation Program
will need to be augmented in its attempt to eliminate blighted
housing conditions in the Project Area with other programs
including an active code enforcement neighborhood preservation
program. A code enforcement program is needed to assist in
bringing conformance to the building and safety codes and standards
for those housing unit that are renter occupied and are in need of
repair. In order to help reduce possible displacement in such a
program other housing projects such as the Gisler Field Project
need to be implemented.
It is suggested that displaced persons have the first opportunity
at qualifying for home ownership to be offered by the Gisler Field
and other new housing project.
The following are the Needs Assessment Finding of Conditions Tables
for all Neighborhood Strategy Areas:
TABLE II - WALNUT CANYON AREA
CONDITION OF
UNITS
NUMBER OF
UNITS
OWNER OCCUPIED
UNITS
RENTER OCCUPIED
UNITS
SOUND
37
33
4
DEFICIENT
20
11
9
DETERIORATED
10
5
5
DILAPIDATED
3
0
3
TOTALS: ]=70
22
49
21
TABLE III - MIRA SOL AREA
CONDITION OF
UNITS
NUMBER OF
UNITS
OWNER OCCUPIED
UNITS
RENTER OCCUPIED
UNITS
SOUND
10
10
0
DEFICIENT
12
12
0
DETERIORATED
0
0
0
DILAPIDATED
0
0
0
TOTALS: IL
22
22
0
0
TABLE IV - CHARLES STREET AREA
CONDITION OF
UNITS
NUMBER OF
UNITS
OWNER OCCUPIED
UNITS
RENTER OCCUPIED
UNITS
SOUND
91
83
8
DEFICIENT
44
5
39
DETERIORATED
41
13
28
DILAPIDATED
8
0
8
FTOTALS:
184
101
83
TABLE V - MAUREEN AREA
CONDITION OF
UNITS
NUMBER OF
UNITS
OWNER OCCUPIED
UNITS
RENTER OCCUPIED
UNITS
SOUND
29
27
2
DEFICIENT
6
6
0
DETERIORATED
0
0
0
IDILAPIDATED
0
0
0
TOTALS:
35
33
2
TABLE VI - MOORPARK ESTATES
CONDITION OF
UNITS
NUMBER OF
UNITS
OWNER OCCUPIED
UNITS
RENTER OCCUPIED
UNITS
SOUND
68
62
6
DEFICIENT
36
31
5
DETERIORATED
0
0
0
IDILAPIDATED
0
0
0
11TOTALS:
104
93
11
TABLE VII - AVENIDA COLONIA AREA
CONDITION OF
UNITS
NUMBER OF
UNITS
OWNER OCCUPIED
UNITS
RENTER OCCUPIED
UNITS
SOUND
37
37
0
DEFICIENT
14
11
3
DETERIORATED
7
5
2
DILAPIDATED
2
0
2
TOTALS:
60
53
7
TABLE VIII - FREMONT AREA
CONDITION OF
UNITS
NUMBER OF
UNITS
OWNER OCCUPIED
UNITS
RENTER OCCUPIED
UNITS
SOUND
10
10
0
DEFICIENT
5
2
3
DETERIORATED
0
0
0
DILAPIDATED
0
0
0
TOTALS:
-T-
15
12
3
TABLE IX - CORNETT - MC FADDEN AREA
CONDITION OF
UNITS
NUMBER OF
UNITS
OWNER OCCUPIED
UNITS
RENTER OCCUPIED
UNITS
SOUND
49
45
4
DEFICIENT
2
2
0
DETERIORATED
0
0
0
DILAPIDATED
0
0
0
TOTALS:
51
47
4
10
TABLE X - VISTA VERDE ESTATES
CONDITION OF
UNITS
NUMBER OF
UNITS
OWNER OCCUPIED
UNITS
RENTER OCCUPIED
UNITS
242
58
IENT
91
56
35
r300
IORATED
6
2
4
IDATED
3
2
1
ITOTALS:
400
302
98
SECTION IV
DEVELOPMENT OF PROGRAM TYPES
1. After the needs assessment has been reviewed, staff will match
the needs with various program types established by the
Agency. The types of programs that have been discussed are
grants, loans and a combination of grants and low interest and
deferred loans. The amounts and rates are to be determined.
There may be other funding sources available which staff will
present as an overall assistance program.
2. Other sources of funding and possible categories of assistance
may be through various lending institutions. Agency staff has
contacted several banks that are interested in participating
in some form of housing program with the City /Agency in order
to receive credit in the Community Reinvestment Act. The
lending institutions are able to assist in the processing of
loan applications and administer the loan programs. Staff
will evaluate the effectiveness of programs that involve the
processing by the various banks.
3. As part of this program, the Agency will need to establish
lending criteria for this program and who would be eligible
for the various programs and at what level of funding should
be made available.
4. There may be extenuating circumstances where there is a need
for participation in this program outside the Project Area.
11
It is suggested that if such extenuating circumstances is
found that possibly HCDB Funds be utilized to assist with this
program.
5. Attached as Exhibit "A" is a list of improvements that are
eligible for funding by this Program.
SECTION V
FUNDING SOURCES
In accordance with Section 33334.2 of the California Community
Redevelopment Law (CCRL), "Not less than 20 percent of all taxes
which are allocated to the agency pursuant to Section 33670 shall
be used by the agency for the purpose of increasing, improving, and
preserving the community's supply of low and moderate income
housing available at affordable housing costs ". The Moorpark
Redevelopment Agency has set aside the required 20 percent of tax
increment revenues for housing purposes. In addition, 20 percent
of the 1993 $10,000,000 bond issue has been transferred to the
Agency's Housing Fund.
To assist in the financing of this program, Agency staff will be
exploring all other possible funding sources including federal,
state and local funding sources and programs.
The amount of funds that are or will be available from tax
increment revenues and bond proceeds are shown in Table XI. The
tax increment revenues from the 20% set aside funds are projected
out to Fiscal Year 1999/2000.
The Agency recently purchased a portion of the Gisler Field
property for a proposed 50 to 55 new construction of single family
first time home buyer program. The cost of the purchase was
$1,5000,000 and was paid by Housing Funds. The proceeds from the
sell of this property to a developer is to be transferred to this
Housing Rehabilitation Program.
12
TABLE XI
20 PERCENT HOUSING SET ASIDE FUNDS
BASE YEAR 1988/1989 TO 1999/2000
INCREASE IN
INCREASE ASSESSED TAX INCREMENT TAX INCREMENT TAX INCREMENT 20 PERCENT HOUSING
FISCAL IN ASSESSED VALUATION REVENUE REVENUE LESS .25% INTEREST REVENUE HOUSING SET ASIDE
YEAR YEAR VALUATION OVER BASE YR. AT 1% COLLECTION FEES PAYMENT PLUS INTEREST SET ASIDE CUMULATIVE
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0 1988
1 1989
2 1990
3 1991
4 1992
5 1993 '
6 1994 '
7 1995 '
8 1996
9 1997
10 1998
:: 1999
1989
$260,645,252
$0
$0
$0
$0.00
$0
$0
$0
1990 ( *)
$295,844,170
$0
$0
$0
$0.00
$0
$0
$0
1991
$325,020,649
$64,375,397
$157,805
$157,410
$0.00
$157,410
$31,482
$31,482
1992
$365,839,369
$105,194,117
$256,431
$255,889
$0.00
$255,889
$51,178
$82,660
1993
$386,703,674
$126,058,422
$1,311,826
$1,276,681
$19,258.12
$1,295,939
$255,336
$337,996
1994
$379,419,965
$118,774,713
$1,237,523
$1,214,230
$6,867.32
$1,221,097
$242,846
$580,842
1995
$407,080,412
$146,435,160
$1,464,352
$1,460,691
$0.00
$1,460,691
$292,138
$872,980
19%
$427,434,433
$166,789,181
$1,667,892
$1,663,722
$0.00
$1,663,722
$332,744
$1,205,724
1997
$448,806,154
$188,160,902
$1,881,609
$1,876,905
$0.00
$1,876,905
$375,381
$1,581,105
1998
$471,246,462
$210,601,210
$2,106,012
$2,100,747
$0.00
$2,100,747
$420,149
$2,001,255
1999
$494,808,785
$234,163,533
52,341,635
$2,335,781
$0.00
$2,335,781
$467,156
$2,468,411
2000
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5519,549,224
$258,903,972
$2,589,040
$2,582,567
$0.00
$2,582,567
$516,513
$2,984,925
- - - - --
PLAN ADOPTION FY 1989/1990 BASED ON 21.88196525% RATIO OF MOORPARK TOTAL ASSESSED VALUE OF 51,352,000,000
1990/1991 TO 1993 /1994 SHOWS ACTUAL FUNDS RECEIVED FROM COUNTY
3. 1994/1995 TO 1999/2000 ARE PROJECTED FUNDS TO BE RECEIVED AT 5.00% GROWTH
TAX ALLOWCATION BOND HOUSING FUNDS: - - --
TAX INCREMENT HOUSING FUNDS RECEIVED: --
SUB TOTAL FY 1993/1994: --------------- -
PROJECTED TAX INCREMENT HOUSING FUNDS: -
-------------- - - - - -- $1,784,860
-------------- - - - - -- $580,842
-------------- - - - - -- $2,365,702
-------------- - - - - -- $2,404,083
--------- - - - - --
---------------
TOTAL HOUSING FUNDS TO BE RECEIVED BY AGENCY FY 1999/2000: - -- $4,769,785
(13)
SECTION VI
ESTABLISHMENT OF NEIGHBORHOOD STRATEGY AREAS
For the purposes of data collection and study, the Redevelopment
Project Area was divided into nine Neighborhood Strategy Areas as
described in Section III, Needs Assessment, Page 6. Prior to the
completion of the Needs Assessment and review of the data
collected, it was considered that the implementation of the Housing
Rehabilitation Program may best be implemented by appropriating
funds in a particular Neighborhood Strategy Area.
The data collected indicated the following:
1. The Areas of most need for rehabilitation are; Walnut
Canyon, Charles Street Area, Avenida Colonia Area, and
due to the high number or residential units (400 units)
Vista Verde Estates.
2. There is a large percentage of renter occupied
residential unit in these areas listed in 1. above, which
are considered to be deficient, deteriorated or
dilapidated. Since the loans and grants will be
allocated to owner occupied residents at this time, a
code enforcement program will need to be implemented to
assist in the elimination of blight.
3. The Areas of Moorpark Estates, Cornett - Mc Fadden, Mira
Sol, Fremont, and Maureen while have deficiencies does
not have deteriorated or dilapidated units.
4. If renter occupied units are eliminated for consideration
as suggested all areas would almost be equal in need with
27 owner occupied deteriorated or dilapidated units found
in the Walnut Canyon, Avenida Colonia, Charles Street and
Vista Verde Estates areas.
Staff suggest that the Agency take a proactive approach first on
the 25 units that are owner occupied and considered deteriorated.
These unit would require the most dollar per unit. If and when
money is available, that funding be allocated on a proactive
approach for those units (136 units) in the deficient category.
Further that no funds be allocated for any renter occupied units,
units considered sound, or units considered dilapidated.
14
SECTION VII
DEVELOP PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION GUIDELINES
There are several ways for the administration of the proposed
housing rehabilitation program to be conducted. The Agency can
administer the programs with existing staff or there are County and
private agencies that for a fee will administer these programs.
The Agency can have a bank or lender process the various loans and
grants, or staff can also be responsible for this process, or the
Agency upon reviewing the report may select a combination of
outside and staff administration. The administration
responsibilities will also include inspection and approval of the
repair work to be performed. Staff will prepare and present a
report on the various methods of administering the program which
will include the pros and cons for the Agency's review.
The program will require that permits be issued and monitored,
especially for tracking the progress of construction for payments.
The various methods of permit processing and monitoring will also
be a part of this administration report. Part of the
administration of the permit process will be the development of a
contractors list. Attached as Exhibit "C" is the type of
information that will be on file for contractors who will be
recommended to perform work for this program. The program may be
designed to allow the applicants to solicit bids from contractors
and submit the bids for approval by the Agency. A sample of the
type of processing for this program is shown in Exhibit "D"
attached.
CONCLUSION
The above outline is just the start in the preparation of an
overall Housing Assistance Program and is presented for discussion
purposes only. Agency staff in the near future will request input
from the City Council /Redevelopment Agency, appropriate committees,
and the public. It is intended that the comprehensive program will
be contained in a single implementation manual that will be
available to the public.
The final product will be a comprehensive and realistic housing
program that will be intended to eliminate blight as defined by the
California Community Redevelopment Law and help maintain the
existing housing stock for the low and very low income families in
our community.
15
EXHTBT'T' ''A"
E L I G I B L E RE H Zs, B T L T TAT I O N WORK
EXHIBIT "A"
ELIGIBLE REHABILITATION WORK
A rehabilitation loan should provide for (1) correction of
identified health and safety violations for the protection and
safety of the household, (2) reestablish the property in a
generally good and maintainable condition with necessary
facilities (including plumbing, electrical, and heating
facilities) in good working order, and (3) facilities arranged
and equipped for suitable and desirable living conditions
(which may include room additions to ease overcrowding per HUD
standards) commensurate with the type and quality at the
property under consideration. In addition to those costs for
rehabilitation to make the property conform to the Uniform
Building Codes, water and energy conservation modifications
should be addressed.
Correction of Code violations may become eligible under the
rehabilitation loan program. If there is a health or safety
hazard on a unit, it is suggested that the property owner will
have priority over a first -come first -serve basis policy.
SPECIFIC WORK MAY INCLUDE:
- Roof repair or replacement.
Repair of or replacement of heating /cooling, plumbing and
electrical systems /components.
Insulation, weatherization, and installation of energy -
saving systems or components and water saving devices.
- Repair or replacement of structural components, damaged
walls, doors, windows, screens, hardware, cabinets,
bathroom fixtures, or kitchen fixtures and appliances.
Installation, repair or replacement of concrete
walk /patio slabs, and wood patio covers.
Additions and remodeling to ease overcrowding conditions
and clutter; adapt dwelling for use by handicap persons;
enlarge and /or re- arrangement of rooms and spaces for
proper access per minimum HUD standards.
(Page 1 of 4)
Exterior and interior painting.
Replacement of deteriorated floor coverings and counter
tops.
Rodent and termite extermination.
Correction of dry rot.
Hook up to sanitary sewers.
Installation, repair or replacement of fences, driveways,
and landscaping.
Additional items consistent with livability, etc., and
approved by the committee.
EXTERIOR APPEARANCE IMPROVEMENTS
- In recognition that a significant element of the program
is to improve the exterior appearance of the property,
and to support and encourage neighborhood upgrading, a
grant or loan or both may be applied for exterior
improvements and repairs. The Redevelopment Manager will
review application for eligibility for grant and loan
funds based on the following criteria:
EXTERIOR PAINTING /STUCCO REPAIR
Exterior painting and stucco repair (stucco is only
a percentage of grant) to replace weather damaged
or dry rotted, faded, scaling, exterior wood (trim
and facial wood siding) and deteriorated paint is
eligible, but repainting and restuccoing just for a
change in color is ineligible.
Repair /replacement of deteriorated, hazardous
driveway or walks with concrete or asphalt is
eligible. New hard - surface installation is
eligible to up grade the site or to eliminate an
unsightly or hazardous condition.
FENCES
Repair /replacement of unsightly or hazardous fences
is eligible.
(Page 2 of 4)
NDSCAPING
Installation repair or replacement of landscaping
components to eliminate an unsafe or unsightly
condition is eligible.
Soil imports to assure plant growth and for unsafe
or unsightly conditions.
Shade tress, shrubs, vines and perennial (annuals
or bulbs are ineligible).
- Sod, ground covers.
Irrigation systems.
- Shrub beds with rock /bark over black plastic and
redwood or rubberized material for borders
(concrete or masonry borders are ineligible, unless
to repair existing deteriorated materials).
OTHER ELIGIBLE COSTS
- In addition to the cost of eligible rehabilitation work,
the following cost relating to the rehabilitation may
also be included in the rehabilitation loan:
- Architectural and engineering services
- Geologic and soils reports
- Blueprints
- Appraisal fee
- Credit reports
- Title reports
- Loan processing
- Escrow fees
- Warehousing fees
- Recording fees
(Page 3 of 4)
- Building and other permit fees
- Termite inspection reports
Are inconsistent with the general intent behind the
eligible rehabilitation work which is designed to provide
for a safe and decent living environment.
Do not make a needed contribution to the basic livability
and habitability of the property and are for aesthetic
purposes only such as mahogany wood trim with brass
fittings.
Unnecessarily exceed existing standards of the
neighborhood.
EXAMPLES OF INELIGIBLE WORK
- Fireplaces, fire pits, barbecues.
- Swimming pools, spas, water fountains, saunas.
- Brick work /stonework, (unless to repair existing damaged
work).
- Concrete block walls, (unless to repair damaged work or
where retaining walls are necessary).
- Replacement of healthy plant material or similar up grade
work is ineligible, (unless to eliminate an unsightly or
unsafe - condition).
(Page 4 of 4)
E X H I B I T If B"
CONSTRUCT = ON N E E D S F ORM
C ON S TRU C T= ON N E E D S F ORM
APN
STREET NO.
STREET NAME
DESIGNATION
ROOF
NAME OF OWNER
MAILING ADDRESS
ADDRESS
STREET
CITY
...... .. ........... .... . ..
DOORS
MOORPARK
PHONE NUMBER
STATE
ZIP CODE
(805) -
FORM -001
CALIFORNIA
93021
DEFECTIVE COMPONENT
REPAIR
REPLACE
COST
ROOF
EXTERIOR: SIDING STUCCO
WINDOWS
DOORS
FOUNDATION
PORCH
SIDE WALK
STEPS
FLOOR COVERING L.R.
CEILING L.R.
WALLS L.R.
HEATING L.R.
ELECTRICAL L.R.
FLOOR COVERING B.R.
CEILING B.R.
WALLS B.R.
HEATING B.R.
ELECTRICAL B.R.
SUB TOTAL THIS PAGE
PAGE 1 OF 2
DEFECTIVE COMPONENTS
REPAIR
REPLACE
COST
FLOOR COVERING BATH
CEILING BATH
WALLS BATH
ELECTRICAL BATH
PLUMBING BATH
WATER CLOSET
TUB /SHOWER /LAVATORY
FLOOR COVERING KITCHEN
CEILING KITCHEN
WALLS KITCHEN
ELECTRICAL KITCHEN
PLUMBING KITCHEN
SINK /STOVE TOP /DISPOSAL /CABINET
GARAGE - DOOR
PREP /PAINT EXTERIOR TRIM
DRIVEWAY
TERMITE FUMAGATION
UPGRADE ELECTRIC SERVICE
LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION
FENCE WOOD
MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS
SUB TOTAL THIS PAGE:
SUB TOTAL PAGE ONE:
10 PERCENT CONTINGENCY:
TOTAL COST OF REPAIRS:
PAGE 2 OF 2
EXH =BIT ••C"
L E TT ER O F I NTRO DU C T Z ON AND
PUR PO S E O F PRO GRAM
CITY OF MOORPARK REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
HOUSING PROGRAM
INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE
The "Property Rehabilitation Standards" (PRS) as denoted in this
manual have been established to provide a minimum standard for
rehabilitation of residential properties within the service area of
the Moorpark Redevelopment Agency. These PRS, as established, will
be the basis for judgement by the Moorpark Redevelopment Agency to
determine which properties located in the service area may be
eligible for rehabilitation.
These PRS follow suggested standards as provided by the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) in its Minimum
Property Standards (MPS) and its Housing Quality Standards (HQS).
They are different from standards for new construction, giving
careful consideration to the income and debt - carrying capacities of
the applicants; but not to the expense of good planning, longevity
of the improvements, and prevention of recurrence of blight.
Additionally, these PRS serve to supplement HQS; Local building,
plumbing, and electrical codes and regulations; and other local and
federal regulation pertaining to such items as zoning, traffic,
drainage, or flood plains which will also be observed.
Redevelopment Manager
City of Moorpark
Redevelopment Agency
EXH =BIT '• D"
CONTRACTOR S I N F ORMAT = ON F ORM
EXHIBIT "D"
CONTRACTORS INFORMATION FORM
To: Contractors for Bid List
Re: Housing Rehabilitation Program
Attention:
I would like to take this opportunity to inform you of the Housing
Rehabilitation Program that is being administered by city staff for
the City of Moorpark and the Moorpark Redevelopment Agency. As the
Redevelopment Manager, all bids and contracts will be administered
through my office.
Copies of and the following credentials must be provided:
You must be licensed in the state of California;
bonded;
have a current business permit and /or license with the
City of Moorpark; and
covered by workmen's compensation insurance.
Please provide your complete and current address, including contact
people and other information on the enclosed information sheet, as
soon as possible to:
Redevelopment Manager
City of Moorpark
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark Ca 93021
If you have any questions, you may contact my office at (805) 529-
6864, extension 225.
(Page 1 of 3)
Contractor's Information
Company Name
Company Address
City and Zip Code _
Fed. ID Number
or SS Number
Contact Person(s)
Lic. Number
Classificati
(Page 2 of 3)
Date
Phone
Licensed Work Experience
Please describe any licensed contracting work you have done that
may be of interest or benefit to the Rehabilitation Program.
Provide location and for whom the work was performed, for future
reference.
Send the desired information as soon as possible.
Thank You.
Redevelopment Manager
City of Moorpark
Redevelopment Agency
(Page 3 of 3)
EXH I B I T 'w E'•
C I T Y COIF MOORPARK HOME
REHAB = L =TAT = ON PROGRAM
PROCESS = NG S UMMARY
EXHIBIT "E"
CITY OF MOORPARK HOME REHABILITATION PROGRAM
PROCESSING SUMMARY
I. Intake /Determination of Eligibility by Staff
A. Request for information
1. Pull out inquiry file and use Agency adopted income
criteria to determine initial eligibility.
2. Render general information and collect all
information needed to log inquiry and mail
application materials.
B. Application Processing
1. Review application and
information received.
assign a case number.
mail an "application r
together with list
interview.
recheck eligibility based on
Log the application and
Set up an applicant file and
'eceived" letter to applicant
of documents needed for
II. Initial InterviewfSite Inspection with Homeowner by staff
A. Client Interview
1. Explain program and loan eligibility to applicant
using interview checklist.
2. Collect all income information and determine
eligibility and loan type - Deferred or Amortized.
Fill out Deferred Loan paperwork with applicant or
if an Amortized Loan explain materials and leave
with homeowner to be filled out later.
B. Work Write Up
1. Inspect property with homeowner to determine code
deficiencies and repairs /improvements for inclusion
into work write up.
1
III. Bid Package Preparation By Staff
A. Work Write up
1. Prepare work write up outlining scope of work and
specifications based upon property inspection
notes. Identify all noted code deficiencies.
B. Cost /Loan Estimate
1. Prepare preliminary cost estimate for scope of
work.
C. Contractor List
1. Prepare a list of contractors applicable to work
outlined for homeowner.
D. Homeowner Approval
1. Obtain homeowner approval of work write up and
estimates prior to submitting Amortized loan
package and before ordering title reports for
Deferred Loan applicants.
IV. Financial Review and Loan Processing by Lending source
A. Amortized Loan Processing
1. Agency staff shall forward to Lending source a
complete loan package including letter of
introduction, completed and signed loan application
with appropriate supplemental information,
employment verification and credit release, fair
lending notice, information exchange release and
description of proposed rehabilitation work and
loan estimate.
2. Lending Source shall obtain credit reports and make
recommendation on acceptability of homeowner's
credit; obtain property title and appraisal
reports; process loan application based on Agency
eligibility requirements and lending criteria; and
provide applicant and Agency with written
notification of approval or disapproval of loan
(form letter to be prepared by Agency Staff).
2
V.
Lending source will prepare loan documents upon
Cities request following the "committee's" loan
approval.
B. Deferred Loan Processing
1. Agency staff shall forward to lending source a
request for title report together with Deed of
Trust for the referenced property.
2. Lending source shall obtain Title report and
forward to Agency staff. (Deferred Loans require a
City /Agency second trust deed position). Lending
source shall prepare loan documents upon Agency's
request following "committee's" approval.
Loan Signing/Preconstruction Conference
A. Loan Signing
1. Lending Source upon Agency's request, prepares Deed
of Trust, Promissory Note and Notice of Right of
Recision, and forwards these documents to the
Agency for application endorsement.
2. Agency staff meets
notarize documents.
to the Lending SoL
copies of "Right of
three day period in
contract.
with applicant to sign and
Signed documents are forwarded
xce. Homeowner retains two
Recision" documents and has a
which to cancel the loan and
B. Preconstruction Conference
1. Simultaneous with the loan signing, Agency staff
shall conduct a preconstruction conference with the
homeowner applicant wherein Home Rehabilitation
Agreements, Proceed Orders, Homeowner /Contractor
Contracts are issued, as well as work scheduling,
inspection, and payment procedures discussed.
VI. Construction Supervision
Agency staff shall conduct compliance inspections, to ensure
work is being performed according to codes, work write up
specifications and is proceeding in a timely and satisfactory
manner. Agency staff shall process contractor invoices for
progress and final payments. Staff shall obtain all necessary
lien releases from contractors and maintain complete
documentation in each project file as well as all accounting
information as required for Agency audit.
EXHTBT`17 :9 F••
C O S T S F OR T MPROV EM E NT S
C ON S TRUC T= ON N E E D S FORM
APN
STREET NO.
STREET NAME
DESIGNATION
- - -
XXXX
2
NAME OF OWNER
UNIT "A"
MAILING ADDRESS
ADDRESS
STREET
CITY
$ 350
DOORS
MOORPARK
PHONE NUMBER
STATE
ZIP CODE
(805) -
FORM -001
CALIFORNIA
93021
DEFECTIVE COMPONENT
REPAIR
REPLACE
COST
ROOF 1,500 SQ. FT.
XXXX
$3,500
EXTERIOR: SIDING STUCCO xx_
WINDOWS
XXXX
$ 350
DOORS
FOUNDATION
PORCH
SIDE WALK
STEPS
FLOOR COVERING L.R.
CEILING L.R.
WALLS L.R.
HEATING L.R.
ELECTRICAL L.R.
FLOOR COVERING B.R.
CEILING B.R.
WALLS B.R.
HEATING B.R.
ELECTRICAL B.R.
SUB TOTAL THIS PAGE
$ 3,850
PAGE 1 OF 2
DEFECTIVE COMPONENTS
REPAIR
REPLACE
COST
FLOOR COVERING BATH
XXXX
$1,350
CEILING BATH
XXXX
$1,800
WALLS BATH
ELECTRICAL BATH
XXXX
$ 825
PLUMBING BATH
XXXX
XXXX
$ ,750
WATER CLOSET
TUB /SHOWER /LAVATORY
XXXX
XXXX
$ 650
FLOOR COVERING KITCHEN
$ 25
OVERHEAD /PROFIT
CEILING KITCHEN
$ 1,924
WALLS KITCHEN
XXXX
SUB TOTAL THIS PAGE:
$ 55
ELECTRICAL KITCHEN
3,850
10 PERCENT CONTINGENCY:
$ 1,154
PLUMBING KITCHEN
XXXX
$ 175
SINK /STOVE TOP /DISPOSAL /CABINET
GARAGE - DOOR
XXXX
$ 140
PREP /PAINT EXTERIOR TRIM
XXXX
$1,350
DRIVEWAY
XXXX
$1,800
TERMITE FUMAGATION
UPGRADE ELECTRIC SERVICE
XXXX
$ 825
LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION
XXXX
XXXX
$ ,750
FENCE WOOD
MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS
STRAP WATER HEATER
$ 25
OVERHEAD /PROFIT
$ 1,924
SUB TOTAL THIS PAGE:
$ 7,694
SUB TOTAL PAGE ONE: -7-$
3,850
10 PERCENT CONTINGENCY:
$ 1,154
TOTAL COST OF REPAIRS:
$12,698
PAGE 2 OF 2
C ON S TRUCT = ON N E E D S FORM
APN
STREET NO.
STREET NAME
DESIGNATION
- - -
2
NAME OF OWNER
UNIT "B"
MAILING ADDRESS
ADDRESS
STREET
CITY
...............................
$ 350
DOORS (2)
MOORPARK
PHONE NUMBER
$$ 1,400
STATE
ZIP CODE
(805) -
FORM -002
CALIFORNIA
93021
DEFECTIVE COMPONENT
REPAIR
REPLACE
COST
ROOF
EXTERIOR: SIDING STUCCO xx_
XXXX
$ 3,460
WINDOWS (10)
XXXX
$ 350
DOORS (2)
XXXX
$$ 1,400
FOUNDATION
PORCH
SIDE WALK
STEPS
FLOOR COVERING L.R.
CEILING L.R.
WALLS L.R.
HEATING L.R.
ELECTRICAL L.R.
FLOOR COVERING B.R.
CEILING B.R.
WALLS B.R.
HEATING B.R.
ELECTRICAL B.R.
SUB TOTAL THIS PAGE
$ 5,210
PAGE 1 OF 2
DEFECTIVE COMPONENTS
REPAIR
REPLACE
COST
FLOOR COVERING BATH
CEILING BATH
WALLS BATH
ELECTRICAL BATH
PLUMBING BATH
WATER CLOSET
TUB /SHOWER /LAVATORY
FLOOR COVERING KITCHEN
CEILING KITCHEN
WALLS KITCHEN
ELECTRICAL KITCHEN
PLUMBING KITCHEN
SINK /STOVE TOP /DISPOSAL /CABINET
GARAGE
MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS
PREP /PAINT TRIM /FACIA
XXXX
ITEM 1
LANDSCAPE /IRRIGATION
$2,300
PROFIT AND OVERHEAD
$1,542
SUB TOTAL THIS PAGE:
$ 3,842
SUB TOTAL PAGE ONE:
$ 5,210
TEN PERCENT CONTINGENCY:
905
TOTAL COST OF REPAIRS:
$ 9,957
PAGE 2 OF 2
C ON S TRU C T= ON N E E D S F ORM
APN
STREET NO.
STREET NAME
DESIGNATION
000 -0- 000 -000
2
NAME OF OWNER
UNIT "C"
MAILING ADDRESS
ADDRESS
STREET
CITY
DOORS
MOORPARK
PHONE NUMBER
STATE
ZIP CODE
(805) -
FORM -003
CALIFORNIA
93021
DEFECTIVE COMPONENT
REPAIR
REPLACE
COST
ROOF
EXTERIOR: SIDING STUCCO
WINDOWS
DOORS
FOUNDATION
PORCH
SIDE WALK
STEPS
FLOOR COVERING L.R.
CEILING L.R.
WALLS L.R.
HEATING L.R.
ELECTRICAL L.R.
FLOOR COVERING B.R.
CEILING B.R.
WALLS B.R.
HEATING B.R.
ELECTRICAL B.R.
SUB TOTAL THIS PAGE
$ 0.00
PAGE 1 OF 2
DEFECTIVE COMPONENTS
REPAIR
REPLACE
COST
FLOOR COVERING BATH
CEILING BATH
WALLS BATH
ELECTRICAL BATH
PLUMBING BATH
WATER CLOSET
TUB /SHOWER /LAVATORY
FLOOR COVERING KITCHEN
CEILING KITCHEN
WALLS KITCHEN
ELECTRICAL KITCHEN
PLUMBING KITCHEN
SINK /STOVE TOP /DISPOSAL /CABINET
GARAGE
MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS
TERMITE FUMAGATON
XXXX
$ 1,170
WOOD FENCING
XXXXX
$ 2,600
MINOR PLUMBING
XXXX
$ 200
F-
T-
i
SUB TOTAL THIS PAGE:
$ 3,970
SUB TOTAL PAGE ONE:
TEN PERCENT CONTINGENCY:
$ 390
TOTAL COST OF REPAIRS:
$ 4,360
PAGE 2 OF 2
CONSTRUCT = ON N E E D S F ORM
APN
STREET NO.
STREET NAME
DESIGNATION
000 -0- 000 -000
UNIT "D"
2
NAME OF OWNER
MAILING ADDRESS
ADDRESS
STREET
CITY
DOORS
MOORPARK
PHONE NUMBER
STATE
ZIP CODE
(805) 529-
FORM -004
CALIFORNIA
93021
DEFECTIVE COMPONENT
REPAIR
REPLACE
COST
ROOF
XXXX
$4,500.00
EXTERIOR: SIDING STUCCO
WINDOWS
DOORS
FOUNDATION
PORCH
SIDE WALK
STEPS
FLOOR COVERING L.R.
CEILING L.R.
WALLS L.R.
HEATING L.R.
ELECTRICAL L.R.
FLOOR COVERING B.R.
CEILING B.R.
WALLS B.R.
HEATING B.R.
ELECTRICAL B.R.
SUB TOTAL THIS PAGE
$4,500.00
PAGE 1 OF 2
DEFECTIVE COMPONENTS
REPAIR
REPLACE
COST
FLOOR COVERING BATH
XXXXX
$ 250.00
CEILING BATH
XXXX
$ 200.00
WALLS BATH
XXXX
$ 500.00
ELECTRICAL BATH
PLUMBING BATH
WATER CLOSET
XXXX
$ 450.00
TUB
XXXXX
$ 800.00
FLOOR COVERING KITCHEN
CEILING KITCHEN
WALLS KITCHEN
ELECTRICAL KITCHEN
PLUMBING KITCHEN
SINK /STOVE TOP /DISPOSAL /CABINET
GARAGE
MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS
SUB TOTAL THIS PAGE:
1 $2,200.00
SUB TOTAL PAGE ONE:
$4,500.00
TEN PERCENT CONTINGENCY:
$ 675.00
TOTAL COST OF REPAIRS:
$7,370.00
PAGE 2 OF 2
E XH I B I T " G"
= N C OME L I M I T S
B Y
PERSON S T N FAM I L Y
EXM =BIT "G"
= NC OME L I M= T S
B Y
PERSON S = N FAM = L Y
COUNT ,y O F VENTURA
INCOME
PERCENT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
VERY LOW
50%
20250
23150
26050
28950
31250
33600
35900
38200
LOWER
80%
27950
31900
35900
39900
43100
46300
49500
52650
MEDIAN
100$
40550
46300
52100
57900
62550
67150
71800
76450
MODERATE
l20$
48650
55600
62550
69500
75050
80600
1 86200
91750
Table applicable for Fiscal Year 1994/1995
SGH- INCONLIR -1- /24/94