About the Project

Introduction

Demographics

Resident Survey

Recommendations

Summary

Council Bluffs: Bluffs Street North

Bluffs Street North represents an ongoing effort by the City of Council Bluffs to explore the potential for creating neighborhood associations in Council Bluffs.

Students from the Fall 2004 course, Community Organizing and Neighborhood Change, gathered data about one potential neighborhood association -- Bluffs Street North.

About the Project

Assessing the Need for a Neighborhood Enhancement Program to Support Council Bluffs Neighborhoods

Background of the Project

The condition of Council Bluffs’s neighborhoods has been under review by Donald Gross, Director of Community Development for the City of Council Bluffs.

Concern is that the lack of neighborhood associations in Council Bluffs neighborhoods may contribute to neighborhood decline in the coming years.

UNO graduate urban studies class focusing on neighborhood organizing and development compiled detailed information to assist the review of Bluff Street’s situation.

About the Bluff Street Neighborhood

The neighborhood wants the elimination of multifamily residences, a historical district, funding for infrastructure improvements, and stronger code enforcement.

The City of Council Bluffs community development director felt there were many things missing in the community, such as possible inventory assessment, infrastructure, and a possible neighborhood organization.

Study Components

The Urban Studies class focused on three areas of research:

• Demographics (Census data)
• Survey of Residents
• Visioning

Instructors

Dr. Robert Blair

Student Team Members

Liz Birkel
Garry Clark
Beth Cunard
Jo Parker

Introduction

Our objectives for the projects were ambitious. These objectives included to understand the neighborhood dynamics, to create a greater sense of community within the neighborhood, and to accomplish a more inclusive neighborhood. After reading Peteman (2000) we knew we needed a clear organizational plan and timeline. Peterman did not utilize organizational strategies in community development. As a group, we felt this was not an efficient use of time. Therefore, the first task we accomplished as a group was developing a work contract. The work contract set up our project objectives, tasks, work needed to complete the tasks, products, and timeline. The goal was to utilize the contract to guide out group actions.

We needed more than just objectives and a timeline, we needed a framework that each group member could easily understand and follow. Therefore, we utilized Green and Haines (2002) model of the visioning process as a guide for efficient outcomes. How well we accomplished our goals and objectives is yet to be determined, however, our theoretical framework utilized was accomplished. We needed organization fast for the short time we had to prepare and accomplish our objectives. Green and Haines provided this fast linkage for an organizational style. Based on Green and Haines (2002), our goals as community developers were to improve the quality of life and enhance community assets. In order to meet these goals the visioning process was utilized for our organization (Green and Haines, 2002).

During our initial “getting started” period we knew in order to be effective we needed goals, objectives, and strategies. Our plan of action needed to be solid. During this time period we identified the exact boundaries of our project, who the neighborhood leaders were, and the number of people that would be both directly and indirectly involved with the project. As a group we knew that timing and momentum would be a challenge.

Right before our project began the neighborhood was beginning to split with the issues of historical preservation. We knew that the contacts that we had as a group were strong advocates for the preservation and this could be harmful for the development of an inclusive neighborhood. This timing affected the momentum of the group because each individual group member was consumed with the ethical consideration of working with this neighborhood. Even at the getting started period of the process our group knew this was going to be a challenging task.

The second step was developing a vision. This stage helped us organize what we wanted to see happen in the future for this neighborhood. Generally, the visioning process is completed with the neighborhood, but we wanted to develop a vision for the group. As a group, we felt it was important for us to be organized before we expected the neighborhood to be organized.

The neighborhood maturity was just beginning and neighborhood our future outlook for the neighborhood was the development of an inclusive n association. We brainstormed several ideas on how to accomplish this vision. These ideas included focus groups, parties, interviews, neighborhood inventories, date collection and analysis, and other tactics in raise community awareness and appreciation. Our goal was to use Amstein’s (1969) ladder of citizen participation to accomplish our vision.

Amstein (1969) states that there are eight levels of citizen participation, these levels are from community manipulation to complete citizen control. We envisioned, as a group, that it would be difficult to achieve complete citizen control. Moreover, citizen control may not be a desired result for both the City and the neighborhood. We also envisioned that manipulation (such as advisory boards, and citizen committees) may be the easiest way to allow citizens a feeling of power, but these strategies were also undesirable. Therefore, our goal as community developers was to inform, consult, and ultimately develop some sort of partnership within the City and the neighborhood.

The third stage was the identification of our mission and goals. It was important for us to develop a clear set of goals in order to be organized. In order to develop an accurate set of goals, we met with Don Gross, the Community Development Director for the City of Council Bluffs. He helped define our vision more clearly.

Our first goal was to develop a boundary for the neighborhood. We needed our boundary to be orientated around community image, social orientation, and housing characteristics. Therefore, the boundary for the Bluff Street n was Bluff Street on the west, Worth Street on the south, the Bluffs on the east, and where Bluff Street turns to Pierce Street on the north.

After establishing the boundaries for the project, we developed a basic set of goals. Our goals were:

1. To explain the resources available in the metro are to the neighborhood.
2. Provide an inventory of all the resources available.
3. Provide organization example of other neighborhood associations in the Metro.

We were unsure what outcomes these goals would produce, but based on our interview with Don Gross, we had some ideas on what the neighborhood needed. According to Don, the neighborhood wants the elimination of multifamily residences, a historical district, funding for infrastructure improvements, and stronger code enforcement. This knowledge enabled us to move to the next stage in our process.

During step four we developed a neighborhood profile utilizing Census data. Below are our findings. The group, however, did not use these findings, because the neighborhood is much smaller and Censes data tends For example of the city's low-income housing projects are located within this neighborhood. Therefore, median income housing values may not be accurate. However, this data is important and needs to be explored in the future.

Demographics: 1990 vs. 2000 Census

 

1990 Census Tract data	309	310
Total population	1632	2626
Population per household	1.74	2.43
Male	724	1212
Female	908	1414
% white	97.1	97.9
% Hispanic	3.0	2.0
% 14 years old or younger	17.1	24.8
% 65 years old or older	24.1	14.1
Median household income	$10,216	$26,092
% income below poverty level	38.1	10.7
Total housing units	1012	1159
% owner occupied	12.8	52.5
% renter occupied	76.1	40.6
% vacant	11.1	6.9
Median value: owner-occupied housing units	$39,500	$45,600
Median value: renter-occupied housing units	$238	$298

2000 Census Tract data	309	310
Total population	1714	2421
Population per household	1.89	2.44
Male	835	1180
Female	879	1241
% white	91.2	96.9
% Hispanic	9.4	2.8
% 14 years old or younger	18.2	20.5
% 65 years old or older	14.6	11.2
Median household income	$21,856	$33,476
% income below poverty level	20.1	11.3
Total housing units	938	1060
% owner occupied	13.1	57.1
% renter occupied	78.9	35.3
% vacant	8.0	7.6
Median value: owner-occupied housing units	$83,400	$79,000
Median value: renter-occupied housing units	$353	$439

Resident Survey

Of the 59 persons who responded to the survey, 46 people said they owned their home. This translates to 78%. And to the second question concerning the type of family dwelling 45 persons answered that thy live in single-family dwelling. The third factor, which was concerned with the condition of the dwelling, asked the respondent to rate the condition of the home, 27 persons responded that their homes wee in good condition which equal 45% and another 15 persons rated their homes as being in excellent condition equaling another 25.4%. In summary roughly 70% of their respondents rate their homes as being in good to excellent condition.

The fourth question addressed the question of longevity, how long have lived in your home or apartment? The highest number of respondents responded that they were in their homes for 1-5 years 15 of the 59 people responding. This is somewhat misleading, because the next highest category circled on the survey indicated persons were residents for over 15 years, there were 14 people who indicated this equaling 23.7% at very close second. This would indicate a very old steady neighborhood.

The next question asked, “What major repairs would you do, but you have not been able to afford. The responses varied, but here are some of the more popular responses:

1. Build a deck
2. Remodel the kitchen*
3. New windows*
4. New Furnace
5. Gutter repair
6. New siding
7. New insulation
8. Replace steps
9. Basement repair
10. Foundation repair

*indicates more popular response

The survey than asked, question #6 “if there were available, via grants, loans, tax breaks etc. would you make improvements to your home?” 30 of the 59=50.8% persons responded answered it was very likely they would made needed repairs if the resources were available, far out numbering any of the other responses. The 4 people who answered it were very unlikely they would make these repairs equally about 6.8% were very likely persons who lived in homes that did not require any improvements.

The next question addressed the approximate cost of the repairs. The responses here were interesting. 15 of the people responding = 25.4% indicated repair cost would equal less than $5, 000. 00. 11 persons equaling 18.6 of the people responded indicated it would take between $15,000 and $19,000 to make needed repairs. To very extreme differences I observed that the surveys indicating the greatest need of repair were in household with income of $35,000 or less. It may be fair to assume due to the income level, these homes were not kept in repair and as a result the general condition has somewhat deteriorated making the large repairs necessary. This is more of an accumulative effect.

Question number 8 addressed the issue of affordable housing in the area 23 of the surveys equal to 39% indicated housing was somewhat affordable. And 19 respondents stated they were not sure, which could simply mean they have not inquired about housing lately. I think this is more than likely that cause because on question number 9”Have you or a family member experienced afford ability problems in housing lately, 46 people equaling 78% percent answered no. For those 12% who answered yes the most frequent issues were as follows:

• Shortage of housing – 8.5%
• Limited numbers of affordable homes for sale – 11.90%
• Available, affordable homes are poor quality or too small – 10.2%
• Don’t have enough money for required down payment on a home – 11.90%
• Can’t qualify for a mortgage at today’s interest rate – 8.5%
• Trouble qualifying for home financing because of credit rating – 6.8
• Finding a house both accessible for my disability and affordable – 0
• Other – Dishonest realtors

Question ten, asked respondents to rate how they felt about their present housing situation. 24 of the 5 people surveyed -40. 7% indicated they were very satisfied with their current housing situation only 5.1% indicated they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with their current housing situation.

Overwhelming what was listed as the most positive aspect of the neighborhood was the Historic homes, 81.41% followed by Friendly Neighbor at 64%, Brick Streets – 49%, Good Friends and Neighbors at 35.6$% and a sense of Community last at 33.7%. I’m not sure what that means. A sense of community was lease valued as an asset in this community. It sounds like people talk, but do not really intend to communicate with each other and they like it that way.

Question 12 asks "What do you see as the most serious problem in your neighborhood." I expected to hear about all of the crime in the city but to my surprise it seems like a pretty quiet area. The most serious problems seem to be the parking, listed at 49% of the respondents. The second most serious problems seems to be the speeding cars, listed by 41% of the respondents. Thirty-six percent of the people surveyed indicated noise from neighbors was a problem, followed by crime at 19%, lack of code enforcement at 13% and adequate street signs at 11.9%. Other problems mentioned included dilapidated homes, unkempt homes, minimal street lighting, drug dealers, and poorly behaved renters.

Question 13 asks the big question, "Do you think a neigbhorhood association would benfit your neighborhood." The people surveyed answered 35% yes, 10% no, and 52% an indecisive maybe. If you add the yeses at 35% and the maybes at 52% to equal an encouraging 87% there is something definitely to build on. Question 14 asks, "Would you participate in a neighborhood association." Thirty-two said yes, only 14% indicated they would not participate in a neighborhood association and 47% said maybe they would participate.

Questions 16 through 18 dealt with the demographics of the respondents. The largest percentage, over 60%, of the respondents were over the age of 43, married, and making over $50,000 per year.

So what do all of these numbers mean? Does the Council Bluffs area have problems? Yes, but not on the magnitude of other large cities and there is no great need to band together to bring about a common goal or to pull together to stop some event or disaster from taking place. These are the types of things that usually draw a community together and as far as I can see there is no overwhelming burning need, no cause. Could the community be improved? Of course, this is not the land of perfection. There are areas of very poor housing and the lack of code enforcement is evident. Also there seems to be some distrust between the community and the city government. Would a neighborhood association help? Of course, it would if it was allowed to develop and function as an association truly representing the concerns of the community. Is that likely to happen? Not unless there are some changes in attitudes within the community. The community does not seem to work together. They do not seem to even want to talk to each other. In such an environment could a neighborhood association be successful? Maybe. This seems like a small affluent community, for the most part. They take pride in their community but a true sense of community is not present and for the most part seems unimportant to the residents. They do not seem to miss not being part of a community. It could be that these needs are being met elsewhere, perhaps through other organizations or through work but certainly not in the neighborhoods.

Recommendations

The recommendations presented here are based both on the results of the resident survey and on the techniques and approaches we learned in this course. It is our intention to submit these recommendations along with the survey result to the Council Bluffs Department of Community Development so they can be on file for future community leaders and activists to utilize and hopefully enable them to chart a course of action for the Bluff Street North Neighborhood.

Identify community leaders and begin the process of developing a neighborhood association.

The foremost question in our minds when creating the survey was whether or not there was support for the creation of a neighborhood association. From the point of view of one neighborhood leader, Debra Danielson, most of the residents of the area were professional with access to the Internet and they found that with their busy schedules it was simply easier to communicate via email rather than through a formal neighborhood association. In other words, there would be no support for a Bluff Street neighborhood association. A quick tour of the neighborhood indicated that the community was not, in fact comprised almost entirely of upper-middle-class professionals but rather it was a mixed-income community with the entire range of incomes represented. Our survey result confirmed our assumption of a mixed-income community.

The results of the income question on our survey indicated an even spread among the income levels in the Bluffs Street North Neighborhood. About 27 percent of the residents make $24,999 or less, 45 percent make between $35,999 and $74,999 and 27 percent of residents earn $75,000 or more. Clearly this is not a neighborhood comprised entirely of upper-class professionals, although our entire group was surprised at the number of households who earned more than $75,000.

Now that it wad been determined that Bluffs Street North is a mixed- income neighborhood, the next step is to explore the possibility of creating a neighborhood association. Question 13 on our survey was explicitly directed at the option, we asked residents if they felt a neighborhood association would benefit their neighborhood. The response to that question was pretty positive. Our results found that only 12 percent of residents outright oppose the formation of a neighborhood association while 36 percent are definitely in favor and 51 percent might be in favor of a neighborhood association.

Coupling the results from Question 13 (over 80 percent of residents feel a neighborhood association may benefit the neighborhood) with Question 18 (a variety of income levels are represented in the community) leads us to recommend that a neighborhood association should in the very least be more fully explored for Bluff Street and that the creation of a neighborhood association would be extremely beneficial to them community.

How can a successful neighborhood association be created?

It was not only our purpose to recommend a neighborhood association for the Bluffs Street North Neighborhood, but also to give residents of the community a clear idea of what exactly a neighborhood association is and how best to proceed in creating one. Using the four criteria for successful neighborhood development set forth by Peteman (2000), I will discuss each criterion and how it is currently being met or how it can be met in the future.

Adequate and ongoing monetary resources as well as human technical resources must be available and accessible not only to carry out individual development projects but also to sustain a comprehensive program of neighborhood development or redevelopment.

Currently the Bluffs Street North Neighborhood has one non-profit organization operating in the area whose focus is strictly Bluffs Street North and it is funded and run solely by Debra Danielson to further the creation of a historic district. Obviously this non-profit fails most of the above needs. While Danielson does have monetary resources and technical resources, they are only available for the furtherance of an historic district and are not intended for use by other residents of the neighborhood to develop individual projects. For this criterion to be met a neighborhood association need to be formed and dues must be paid into the association. Another possibility for meeting this criterion would be to partner with other non-profits in the area, such as the Girl Scouts of America, and use their resources to develop individual projects.

Community development must be demand driven, arising from grassroots community organization. It cannot be legislated into existence by public officials, no matter how well intentioned.

A visioning process needs to be undertaken to determine just how strongly residents feel about forming a neighborhood association. While it seems there would be support for the association, leaders need to be identified and a cohesive vision for the future needs to be drawn up. Especially important in this case would be the emphasis on including a range of opinions. Certain people in the neighborhood have strong ideas as to where the neighborhood should be headed but it is clear that they do not represent all the community members.

Community leaders must build and maintain strong and direct ties with public officials; technical, legal and financial experts; and other community organizations and umbrella coalitions of organizations.

This goal can be accomplished by allying with the Council Bluffs Department of Community Development (CBDCD). The CBDCD provides services in a varitety of areas including: housing rehabilitation and development, historic preservation, redevelopment, economic development and community planning and development. CBDCD has already expressed interest in developing the neighborhood and is currently rehabilitating several homes along Bluff Street. Another resource at their disposal would be the Neighborhood Resource Center for Greater Omaha. The Neighborhood Center would provide an ideal place for the neighborhood association to meet and could also offer tips on how to proceed.

The relationship between the community and those governmental agencies that have interest in and responsibilities with respect to the community must be neither too friendly nor confrontational. An atmosphere of "creative tension" appears most appropriate.

Our survey did not ask residents any questions concerning their relationship with the city and it would be beyond our ability to speculate on what the relationship might currently be. We recommend that this relationship be further explored through a visioning process. It is clear, however, that Debra Danielson and the city have a tenuous relationship that would not be characterized as creative but more confrontational. This is unfortunate. Danielson brings many positive traits to the table, intricate knowledge of both the neighborhood's history and its present, a myriad of technical and monetary resources and a nearly inexhaustible passion for seeing the neighborhood succeed. It would be a boon for both Danielson and the CBDCD to work cooperatively rather than against each other.

Local historical disignation should not be sought.

In a community that has very few weaknesses or threats, perhaps the one issue that has the potential to engage the community's residents is the possibility of creating a national and/or local historic district within the neighborhood. This has been a highly controversial subject in the area with some residents strongly in favor of the designation and others behemently opposed to the idea. In fairness to both sides, our group examined the implication of both national and local historic designations, and which, if either, would be the best designation for the neighborhood.

First, it is important to state that we feel there is a slim to none chance of a historic district forming on Bluff Street. Certainly there are historic homes in the area that should be preserved, but there are also many homes that have no intrinsic historic value and would look very out of place in an historic district. With that said, if it were indeed possible to create an historic district, we would recommend it only become a national and not a local historic district. There are distinct and extremly important differences between the two designations and those will be discussed below.

Two national and local historical districts already exist in Coulc Bluffs, the Downtown Haymarket District and the 100 North block of Broadway. Both districts are in close proximity to Bluff Street. Debra Danielson feels strongly that a national and local historic district would benefit the neighborhood. In theory the historic district would be a boon for the community, attracting both retail and residential developers as well as forcing landowners to properly maintain their property. However, what must be carefully weighed when discussing the historic district are its implications for gentrification.

National and Local Historical Districts

For a district to be placed on the National Register of Historic Places, it must meet one of these four criteria (from http://www.cr.nps.gov/nr/listing.htm, 2000):

• That are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history;
• That are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past;
• That embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that present the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or
• That have yielded or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

Bluff Street North would attempt to qualify under provision C because the homes are representative of a type and period of construction. There is a fairly flexible requirement. It allows for the interior of buildings to be modified, while the exteriors must tremain in their original state. Also, residents within a national historic district are not required to have any façade improvements approved by a committee, which is not true of a local historic district.

The City of Council Bluffs first adopted a historic preservation oridnance in 1980 and at that time created a seven member advisory commission. The Historic Preservation Commission serves four main roles (http://communitydev.councilbluffs-ia.gov/hisotrical.asp, 2004):

• Recommending designation of locally significant landmarks, landmark sites and/or historic districts;
• Recommending and reviewing nominations for listing on the National Register of Historic Places;
• Reviewing requests for exterior modifications of locally designated properties and issue either a "Certificate of Appropriatenss" or a "Certificate of Economic Hardship"; and
• Preparing preservation plans for improvements within the city.

Obviously the requirements for being locally designated are much more difficult than are the requirements for being nationally designated. This is why we would recommend that only a national historic district should be sought after. One study done in Covington, Kentucky, compared the differing impacts of these two districts. It concluded that while property values may be increased because of strict local ordinances, "resident dissatisfication, and even contempt, is common" (Brozek, 2004).

This study also found that there may be a correlation between high income districts and the willingness of the district's residents to abide by design review mandated by local districts. Since the Bluff Street North Neighborhood would not be considered a high-income district, it is more likely that most of the residents would be negatively impacted by the local historic designation.

While some residents seem to favor preservation in general, they are unwilling to pay the extra money needed to rehabilitate their own structure in accordance with local design review. Some investors and building rehabilitators feel that they are entitled to make a quick return on their investment, and performing necessary historic rehabilitation would impede them in their success (Brozek, 2004).

Summary

Our neighborhood is reminiscent of Chicago's West DePaul neighborhood, where gentrification threatened the neighborhood but because there was no strong neighborhood association nor was there agreement that gentrification would have either a negative or positive effect on the future of the neighborhood. Ultimately, because of this indecision the neighborhood succumbed to gentrification and within 2-3 years was fully gentirified.

Bluff Street North is similar to West DePaul because on one hand we have a group of owners who moved to the neighobrhood specifically for the historic homes and who would not only welcome gentrificaion but are actively pursuing it. On the other hand are low-to middle-income renters and owners who have no interest in creating a historic district, but who are inteested in the maintenance of affordable housing.

The survey results coupled with a polarized neighborhood strongly indicate to us that a neighborhood association is needed in the Bluff Street neighborhood. While it is unlikely that Bluff Street would gentrify, it is importnat that all of the residents have a say in the future of their neighborhood rather than allowing a certain segment to declare their future for them. Additionally, while we doubt that the Bluff Street North Neighborhood would ever achieve historic status we recommend that only national recognition be sought. Local historic designation is must too restrictive on residents and has the effect of creating tensions among neighbors, and contempt for the city government who imposes the rules.