Housing conditions survey
|
Survey Background
To support its effort to develop a vision
plan for the Orchard Hill Neighborhood, Association leaders
contracted with the UNO School of Public Administration to
provide planning support. Housing rehabilitation and
development was seen early on as a likely high priority area.
As a result, a survey of housing conditions was conducted
to support the planning effort. It was felt the survey
would provide baseline data about housing conditions, and be an
important element in the development of a neighborhood vision
statement and priority work areas. In addition, the
survey would assist in follow-up work to be undertaken by the
City of Omaha.
Method
The housing condition survey was conducted
during June 17-28, 2002. The survey was carried out by
three two-person teams. Each team contained a member of
the Orchard Hill Neighborhood Association who worked with two
faculty members and one graduate student from the School of
Public Administration, University of Nebraska at Omaha.
The survey teams rated the exterior
condition of 395 residences and buildings located within the
area covered by the Orchard Hill Neighborhood Association.
In addition, the condition of 73 vacant lots was rated by
the three survey teams. Because of access limitations,
approximately 35 to 40 additional vacant lots were not rated by
the teams. These lots are located in Census Block 2004,
and include the vacant lots west of 40th Street along Decatur
and Parker streets.
The housing survey was detailed and
included an evaluation of:
The condition of the primary structural
components of the unit (roof structure, wall structure and
foundation structure
Construction materials used for the
primary structural components of the unit (roof materials, wall
materials, foundation materials)
The condition of the secondary components
of the unit (roof covering, chimney, gutters/downspouts,
surface paint, doors/windows/screens, and porch/steps/fire
escape
Overall condition of the site, drive and
auxiliary areas
In addition, the street address, census
block, type of unit (e.g., single family, duplex, etc.),
whether or not construction or rehabilitation activities were
underway, and each unit’s occupancy or vacancy were
recorded. For vacant lots, teams reported whether the lot
was vacant, with no activity; under development; or maintained
by a neighboring home.
To compile the survey information, the
teams used Pocket PCs (PPC). Each PPC contained an
easy-to-use form with drop down boxes for capturing the data.
Upon completion of the work, data from the three PPCs were
synchronized with a laptop PC and combined to produce a single
data base. Using the PPCs, the entire survey process
required a total of approximately 30 hours. Data were
available each day as the survey was being conducted.
Findings
Residential, Commercial and Mixed Use
Buildings
Among 395 units evaluated in the survey:
340 were single-family
33 were duplexes
4 were mixed use (residential and
commercial)
19 were commercial
4 were used for non-profit purposes
12 residences/buildings had some level of
construction taking place
1 residential unit was for sale
18 units (4.6 percent) were vacant but
habitable[5]
4 units (1.0 percent) were vacant, with
violations posted.
Vacant Lots
As noted earlier, a total of 73 of more
than 100 vacant lots were evaluated as a part of the housing
condition survey. Among this group:
57 appeared to be vacant, with no activity
15 appeared to be maintained by a
neighboring resident/owner
1 was under development
Primary Structural Components
Roof, Wall and Foundation Materials
Asphalt shingles for their roof covering
(93.4 percent)
Frame and siding for their wall covering
(90.8 percent)
Approximately 2 out of 3 units (66.0
percent) had a concrete block foundation
23.1 percent of the units had a brick
covered/other foundation. Most of these homes are in the
southern portion of the neighborhood where homes are somewhat
older than those found to the north
Roof, Wall and Foundation Structure
Condition
Just less than two-thirds (64.2 percent)
of the units’ were rated as having no problems with their
roof structure
Almost 1 in 4 units (24.1 percent) had a
minor roof structure problem (e.g., a slight bulging or
deflection resulting from the movement of a structural part,
some rotted or broken eaves)
Just over 1 in 10 units (11.7 percent) had
either a substantial (e.g., significant structural
deterioration or deflection over 30-50 percent of the roof) or
major (e.g., structural failure or failure imminent, removal of
roof structure needed) roof structure problem
Just over three-fourths (75.4 percent) of
the units were found to have no problems with their wall
structure
18.7 percent were rated as having minor
wall structure conditions, including slight bulging (up to
2”) or cracking of the basic wall plane
Approximately 2 out of 3 (68.7 percent)
units were rated as having no problems with their foundation
structure
Almost 1 in 4 (23.0 percent) units were
found to have minor (e.g., slight settlement and/or cracks)
foundation problems
Secondary Structural Components
Findings for secondary components of
Orchard Hill’s units included the following:
|
Condition
|
None/No problem
|
Minor
|
Substantial
|
Major
|
|
Roof covering
|
63.3%
|
22.1%
|
12.4%
|
2.2%
|
|
Chimney
|
68.9%
|
21.5%
|
8.90%
|
0.6%
|
|
Guttering
|
51.7%
|
28.9%
|
12.3%
|
7.1%
|
|
Wall paint
|
52.1%
|
35.1%
|
11.5%
|
1.3%
|
|
Door/window/screen
|
59.7%
|
27.9%
|
12.1%
|
0.5%
|
|
Porch/steps
|
50.5%
|
35.5%
|
13.5%
|
0.5%
|
|
Site
|
49.5%
|
36.5%
|
12.0%
|
2.0%
|
Priorities Based on Comparative Conditions
Initial Priority—Focus on Repairing
Roof Coverings and Structures, As Well as Guttering
Looking at the three primary
structural components rated in the survey (roof, walls and
foundation), it appears that the leading candidate for work is
the roof covering and structure of homes. Just over 1 out
of 10 units have a primary roof structure rating showing either
“substantial” or “major” problems.
Homes rated as having “substantial” roof
structural problems showed evidence of structural deterioration
or deflection over 30-50 percent of the roof. Units with
a “major” roof structural rating were judged to be
in danger of roof structural failure.
The poor condition rating
for the neighborhood’s roof structures—relative to
wall and foundation structures—makes sense in light of
the finding that Orchard Hill’s homes rate lowest on the
condition of roof covering. Deterioration of shingles
leads to rotting eaves, sheathing
and—eventually—rafters and ridges.
Eventually, problems with the roof structure can result
in wall and interior deterioration. As a result, it is
recommended that the Orchard Hill Neighborhood Association
focus on assisting residents and owners with repairs to their
roof covering and structure. The data file produced by
the rating study can be used to identify and prioritize units
needing follow-up.
In addition, it is
recommended that the neighborhood assist owners with repairs
and replacement of guttering. Guttering has the highest
percentage of units with either substantial or major
problems—19.4 percent. Examples of substantial or
major problems include: missing guttering sections; missing
connectors; improper slope; continued/extensive deterioration
of the guttering; and complete lack of gutters and downspouts.
Inadequate or missing guttering leads to degradation of
primary structural components such as the roof, wall, and
foundation.
Second Priority—Focus on Cleaning Up
Sites
Orchard Hill has many
well-kept homes and yards to be proud of. At the same
time, the housing condition survey found that a majority of the
neighborhood’s units had at least a minor (or greater)
site problem. Over one-third (36.5 percent) of the units
had minor problems and a full 14.0 percent of the units had
either substantial or major problems. Factors rated included
cluttered driveways and porches; cracked driveways; cluttered
garages; inoperable vehicles; and deteriorating, uncared for
trees, lawns and shrubs. It is recommended that the
Orchard Hill Neighborhood Association begin a more aggressive
and sustained process for cleaning up and beautifying the
neighborhood. In addition, there is a need to increase
the number of street trees, especially in the northern blocks
of the area. Street trees help green up and
“soften” the area, especially from the curb view.
Another clean-up action
which should be considered is cleaning (e.g., pressure washing)
the siding and exterior of many of the neighborhood’s
homes. As noted earlier in the report, a large proportion
of Orchard Hill homes are covered with asbestos siding.
Many of these homes need to have their siding pressure
washed.
Third Priority—Focus on Improving
and Stabilizing Porches and Steps
Fully 14.0 percent of the
units were rated as having substantial or major problems with
their porch and/or steps. Condition examples include
continued deterioration and sagging of the steps, porch floor
and/or porch foundation; porch roof and roof supports sagging
due to deterioration; and a lack of adequate support or
foundation for the porch.
Orchard Hill Neighborhood housing conditions
survey ~ Adobe Acrobat
File
Heather Bloom
Project Assistant
University of Nebraska at Omaha
Omaha, NE 68182
Phone: 402-554-2702
