Page 1

Roscommon County  Place-­‐based  Targeting   Strategy                                                 Roscommon  County  -­‐-­‐  Grant  #  MSC-­‐2011-­‐0335-­‐HOA     The  Place-­‐based  Targeting  Strategy  represents  MSHDA’s  Community  Development  Division   approved  process  and  the  County’s  determinations  to  address  the  following  Special   Condition:     To receive the second year funding (the remaining 50% of the grant award) the grantee must engage in community planning for a Targeted Strategy that will forward the goal of Place Making, resulting in a plan approved by MSHDA, Community Development Division.

 

Authorized Signatory  for  Grantee     Printed  Name         Date       Data  collection  and  final  report  prepared  by  MSHDA  approved  Technical  Assistance  provider,     Kuntzsch  Business  Services,  Inc.  


2012/2013 CDBG  Grant  

INTRODUCTION

On September  2,  2011  the  Michigan  State  Housing  Development  Authority  (MSHDA)  sent  a   memo  to  its  County  Allocation  Housing  Resource  Fund  Grantees  to  notify  them  of  changes   to  the  County  Allocation  Program.    Due  to  recent  cuts  in  the  Community  Development   Block  Grant  (CDBG)  program,  which  funds  MSHDA’s  County  Allocation  Program,  and  the   difficult  housing  market,  MSHDA  determined  it  was  necessary  to  redefine  its  investment   priorities.    The  memo  states,     “…we  must  provide  solutions  by  redefining  our  investment  priorities  within  our   [Housing  Resource  Fund].    We  will  do  this  by  targeting  our  resources  collectively   between  state  and  local  governments  by  creating  ‘Sense  of  Place’  investment   priorities.”     In  order  to  access  50%  of  their  County  Allocation  funding,  the  memo  requires  counties  to,   “…engage  in  community  planning  for  a  ‘Targeted  Strategy’  that  will  forward  the  goal  of   Place  Making,  resulting  in  a  plan  approved  by  [MSHDA’s  Community  Development   Division].”         The  purpose  of  this  Place-­‐Based  Targeting  Strategy  is  two-­‐fold;  it  addresses  the   requirement  for  a  “Targeted  Strategy”  set  forth  by  MSHDA  in  the  Program  for  Creating  a   Place-­‐based  Targeting  Strategy  (see  Appendix  1)  while  also  identifying  needs  for  improving   the  quality  of  place  in  targeted  areas,  which  extend  beyond  the  current  scope  of  the  County   Allocation  Program.      

1


2012/2013 CDBG  Grant  

IDENTIFICATION OF  TARGET  AREAS  

Roscommon County  has  identified  two  target  areas,  Houghton  Lake  CDP  and  Denton   Township,  which  overlap  one  another  (see  Map  5).    The  result  is  one,  relatively  large  target   area  that  encompasses  the  south  shore  of  Houghton  Lake  (see  map  1).    Map  2  displays  a   detailed  view  of  the  target  areas.    

Rationale for  target  areas   The  southern  shore  of  Houghton  Lake  is  an  unincorporated  area  that  draws  large  numbers   of  tourists  during  the  summer  months.    Roscommon  and  Denton  Townships,  which   encompass  the  entire  south  shore  of  the  lake,  account  for  over  40%  of  the  county’s   population.    The  Houghton  Lake  CDP  contains  the  vast  majority  of  population,  housing   units  and  nearly  all  of  the  commercial  space  within  Roscommon  Township.         Roscommon  and  Denton  Townships  have  a  history  of  cooperation  in  community  planning   activities.    In  2001,  the  townships  completed  a  joint  master  plan  that  identifies  a  variety  of   objectives  and  future  activities  for  each  township.    Additionally,  the  townships  are   Map  1:  Target  Areas  

Village of Roscommon Lyon Township

Au Sable Township

Gerrish Township

Higgins Township

Lake Township

Markey Township St. Helen CDP

Richfield Township

Houghton Lake CDP

Prudenville CDP Denton Township

Legend

Ü

Political Boundaries

Roscommon Township

Water Body

Nester Township

Target Areas State Roads Local Roads

Backus Township

2


2012/2013 CDBG  Grant   currently  pursing  development  of  a  joint  recreation  plan.    This  history  of  cooperation   improves  the  townships’  ability  to  implement  placemaking  activities  that  benefit  the  target   areas.    The  county  has  a  strong  working  relationship  with  both  townships  and  will  work   with  them  implementing  this  strategy.     Appendix  2  contains  a  table  that  applies  the  requirements  to  all  potential  target  areas  in   Roscommon  County  and  Appendix  3  contains  a  map  identifying  the  location  of  previous   home  rehabs  funded  through  the  County  Allocation  Program  in  Roscommon  County.   Map  2:  Detailed  view  of  Target  Area  

tt

Ba ck

Oak

Sp rin

Misty gw

ood

Bond

Old

Pin

Gate

e

Emery

Owens

Do lla

r

Murphy

su m

Van Sickle

Sanilac

Pete

Everett

Unknown

wn

Cornell

o

Unkno

ayg New

g Wa

Highlan d

Wig

Mecosta

g

Waco Po s

18

Target Areas

Za

M

Water Body

Everett

Wooded

Greenleaf

tel

Lak e

ke

Zig

Reilly

Wooded

Nes

Atwood

Jam

d

Oa k Old il Whiteta

lan

Driftw

Deer Run

Gladwin

rth No

Pine

oo d

Roscommon

Main

Stephens

e D Kelly ixie

Hi lls id 1st

7th

Burrill

Nestel

Whisper Cove

Windsor

M 55 Houghton Lake

La

Yucca

West Branch

k uc

n

d

D

ar ti

a

Dogwoo

Owens

arr

Country

M

Tower Hill

Deadstream

Ü

Local Roads na c

kM Oa

Emery

State Roads Ar e

Rhodes

Townline

Old Orc hard

Goldenrod

Reilly

Valley

Teaberry

Redwine

Pepperell

Jim Kent

is

Cedar

Nestel

ghto

uo

Toepher

Hou

ce

Reserve

ll

Joliet

Russe

Sibley

Terr a

q iew Iro nV

Glendale

Old US 27

t 1s

Federal

Tawas Ottaw

e

mon

Be ll

School Perry Huron Robinson Beech

Legend

ak dL Mu

Sioux Algonquian Silve r

Lake

Riedel

Snowbowl

ay

Roscom

Loxley

w ie tv

Detroit

er w

es

il Tra

Cloverleaf

Old

s ue

Knapp

W at

Meyer

Norris

Byron

ree k

Carter Lake

M 55 State Welch

us C

M 18

Eve re

e enridg Breck Doyle

On ei d a

Q

N US 127 S US 127

on Harris

Center

Consistency with  existing  plans  

The target  area  is  identified  for  regional  commercial,  lake  residential  and  forest   recreational/residential  land  uses  according  to  the  county’s  future  land  use  plan  (see  Map   3).    The  master  plans  of  both  Roscommon  and  Denton  Townships  permit  a  variety  of  uses   in  the  target  areas  in  their  respective  future  land  use  plans  (see  Map  4).        

3


2012/2013 CDBG  Grant  

TARGET AREA  REQUIREMENTS  

This section  responds  to  the  requirements  for  target  areas  identified  by  MSHDA  in  the   Program  for  Creating  a  Place-­‐Based  Targeting  Strategy,  as  outlined  in  Appendix  1.  

Housing Density  

Roscommon County:  .07  housing  units/acre   Denton  Township:  .31  housing  units/acre   Houghton  Lake  CDP:  .83  housing  units/acre  

Zoning The  Houghton  Lake  CDP  includes  residential,  commercial  and  commercial  mixed-­‐use   zoning  districts  in  Roscommon  Township  and  residential  zoning  districts  in  Denton   Township.    Denton  Township  includes  residential,  commercial,  industrial,  mixed-­‐use  and   forest/rural  zoning  districts.      

Map 3 :  Roscommon  County  Future  Land  Use  Plan  (source:  Roscommon  County  Master  Plan)  

Future Land Use Plan of Roscommon County, Michigan.

4


2012/2013 CDBG  Grant    

Map 4:  Composite  Future  Land  Use  Plan  (Source:  Roscommon  Master  Plan)  

Composite Land Use Plan of Roscommon County, Michigan.

5


2012/2013 CDBG  Grant  

Affordability Table  1:  Rent  as  a  percent  of  household  income  (source:  American  Community  Survey)  

Area

Median Rent  

Roscommon County   Denton  Township   Houghton  Lake  CDP   *County  Median  Income:  $33,542    

$398 $378   $412  

% of  County  Median   Income*   14%   14%   15%  

Table 2:  Median  home  value  (source:  American  Community  Survey)  

Area Roscommon  County   Denton  Township   Houghton  Lake  CDP    

Median Home   Value   $107,400   $108,200   $89,900  

% of  County  Median   Home  Value   100.00%   100.01%   83.70  

Assessed Value   Table  3:  Assessed  Value  (source:  Roscommon  County  Equalization     Department)  

Area Roscommon  County   Denton  Township   Houghton  Lake  CDP   Combined  Target  Areas    

2011 State  Equalized   Value   $1,505,837,559   $277,277,300   $140,823,700   $373,773,800    

6


2012/2013 CDBG  Grant  

TARGET AREA  RECOMMENDATIONS  

This section  responds  to  recommendations  for  placemaking  from  MSHDA  in  the  Program   for  Creating  a  Place-­‐based  Targeting  Strategy  (see  Appendix  1)  and  also  identifies  needs  for   enhancing  the  quality  of  place  within  target  areas  beyond  the  scope  of  the  County   Allocation  Program.    These  needs  have  been  identified  with  the  understanding  that  the   State  of  Michigan  may  be  targeting  other  state  resources  to  create  and  enhance  high-­‐quality   places  in  the  future.  

Access to  Transportation   The  Roscommon  County  Transportation  Authority  provides  demand-­‐response  public   transportation  service  countywide.    There  is  no  fixed-­‐route  public  transportation  in  the   county.    Fixed  route  services  are  unlikely  to  be  created  in  the  near  future  due  to  relatively   low  population  density.    Indian  Trails  provides  inter-­‐city  bus  service  through  Houghton   Lake  that  connects  to  Mackinaw  City  and  Lansing.     Interstate  75  and  US  127,  travel  through  Roscommon  County.    Both  highways  provide   direct  access  to  population  centers  in  the  southern  portion  of  the  state.  

Pedestrian Infrastructure   Sidewalks  exist  along  M-­‐55  between  the  intersections  with  M-­‐18  and  US  127.    M-­‐55  is  the   major  thoroughfare  through  the  target  areas.    In  the  Houghton  Lake  CDP,  substantial   streetscape  improvements  are  necessary  to  enhance  the  area’s  aesthetic  appeal  and   pedestrian  orientation.    Specifically,  benches,  streetlights,  trash  receptacles  and  signage  are   needed  in  the  Houghton  Heights  area.     In  Denton  Township,  development  of  a  non-­‐motorized  trail  system  is  desired  to  connect   the  township’s  parks  with  other  outdoor  resources.    Such  a  trail  system  would  improve   pedestrian  access  to  the  community’s  most  significant  and  unique  assets.  

Proximity to  necessities  and  community  assets   The  following  necessities  and  community  assets  exist  in  the  target  area.    Map  5  displays   their  location  in  the  target  areas  based  on  the  number  assigned  to  each  below.     Major  Employers   1. Wal-­‐Mart   2. Home  Depot     Parks   Both  target  areas  have  well-­‐developed  or  developing  parks  facilities,  but  improvements  are   needed  in  order  to  provide  additional  amenities.   3. Denton  Township  Park  and  Beach   4. Trestle  Park  (under  construction)   5. Roscommon  Township  Park  and  Beach   6. Roscommon  Township  Lakeview  Park   7. Skinner  Park    

7


2012/2013 CDBG  Grant   Healthcare  Facilities   8. Mid  Michigan   9. Mercy  Clinic   10. East  Bay  Medical  Clinic   11. Primary  Care,  Inc.     Grocery  Stores   12. Glen’s  Market   1. Wal-­‐Mart  Supercenter   13. Save-­‐a-­‐lot   14. Markiewicz  Meat  Market   15. Best  Choice  Meat  Market   16. Bart’s  Fruit  Market     Community  Centers   17. Houghton  Lake  Community  Center  

8


2012/2013 CDBG  Grant   Map  5:  Community  assets  locations  

8

15

5 13 7

6 3 12

17

Legend

Ü

Community Assets Target Areas

9

9

2

1

4

16 10 14

11


APPENDIX 1


2/8/2012

PROGRAM FOR  CREATING  A  PLACE-­‐BASED  TARGETING  STRATEGY  

The  following  process  has  been  developed  to  target  the  County  Allocation  Program  for   placemaking  in  each  county  participating  in  the  current  grant  cycle.  

Identification of  Target  Areas     1. Target  area(s)  must  be  identified  based  on  one  or  more  of  the  following:   1.1. County  and/or  regional  planning  documents   1.2. Analysis  of  existing  conditions   2. Consistency  with  existing  plans   2.1. Target  area(s)  should  be  identified  on  relevant  plans  (regional,  county  and/or   local)  as  an  area  suitable  for  investment  in  housing,  infrastructure  enhancements,   and  economic  development.  

Target Area  Requirements   All  target  areas  must  meet  the  following  criteria.       1. Housing  Density   1.1. The  target  area  must  have  50%  more  housing  units  per  acre  than  the  county  as  a   whole.   2. Zoning   2.1. Zoning  in  the  target  area  must  be  flexible  enough  to  permit  the  creation  of  high-­‐ quality  places.   2.1.1. Ideally,  the  target  area  should  be  primarily  zoned  with  a  mixed-­‐use   classification.    But  at  a  minimum,  residential,  commercial  and  office  uses  must   be  permitted  within  the  target  area.   3. Affordability   3.1. Median  rent  in  the  target  area  must  be  30%  or  less  of  county  median  household   income.   3.2. Median  home  value  in  the  target  area  must  be  equal  to  or  less  than  110%  of  median   home  value  for  the  county  as  a  whole.   4. Assessed  value  of  targeted  area  and  county.   Submit  assessed  value  of  target  area  and  the  county  as  a  whole  for  the  current  year.  

Target Area  Recommendations   The  following  items  indicate  recommended  characteristics  of  target  areas.    Grantees  must   respond  to  the  following  questions  for  each  target  area.    If  the  answer  to  any  question  is  “No,”   the  grantee  must  identify  how  the  county  will  pursue  improvements  that  move  the  target  area   toward  meeting  that  recommendation  in  the  future.     1. Access  to  transportation   1.1. Does  the  target  area  have  access  to  public  transportation?  

1


2/8/2012 1.2. Does  pedestrian  infrastructure  exist  in  the  target  area  that  effectively  connects  key   destinations?   1.2.1. Sidewalks,  bike  lanes  and/or  multi-­‐use  pathways  should  provide  access  to   destinations  within  and  outside  of  the  target  area.   2. Proximity  to  necessities  and  community  assets   2.1. Is  the  target  area  within  walking  distance  (1/2  mile)  of  major  employment  centers?   2.2. Is  the  target  area  within  walking  distance  (1/2  mile)  of  parks  and  green   infrastructure  assets?   2.3. Distance  to  essential  services   2.3.1. Is  the  target  area  within  walking  distance  (1/2  mile)  of  healthcare  facilities?   2.3.2. Is  the  target  area  within  walking  distance  (1/2  mile)  of  schools?   2.3.3. Is  the  target  area  within  walking  distance  (1/2  mile)  of  grocery  stores?   2.4. Is  the  target  area  within  walking  distance  (1/2  mile)  of  community  facilities  e.g.   community  centers,  local  government  offices,  etc.?  

2


APPENDIX 2  

Table 4:  Roscommon  County  target  area  requirements  (source:  2010  Census  and  2010  ACS  5-­‐year  estimates)  

Area Roscommon  County  

Population

Housing Units  

HU/LA %   Above   County  

Housing Units/   Land  Area  

Median Home  Value  

Median Contract   Rent  

MHV %  of   County  

MCR %  of  County   Median  Income**  

24,449

24,459

0.0735

0.00%

$107,400

100.00%

$398

14.24%

Au Sable  township  

255

236

0.0103

-­‐85.94%

$104,200

97.02%

$357

12.77%

Backus township  

330

287

0.0131

-­‐82.25%

$155,200

144.51%

$575

20.57%

Denton township*  

5,557

5,158

0.3072

317.65%

$108,200

100.74%

$378

13.52%

Gerrish township  

2,993

3,587

0.2031

176.09%

$141,800

132.03%

$599

21.43%

Higgins township  

1,932

1,250

0.0278

-­‐62.26%

$86,800

80.82%

$390

13.95%

Lake township  

1,215

1,675

0.1135

54.29%

$203,300

189.29%

$470

16.81%

Lyon township  

1,370

2,343

0.1221

66.05%

$128,500

119.65%

$441

15.78%

Markey township  

2,360

2,680

0.1458

98.20%

$119,100

110.89%

$504

18.03%

295

469

0.0103

-­‐86.04%

$95,000

88.45% -­‐  

3,731

3,769

0.0854

16.08%

$80,100

74.58%

$396

Nester township   Richfield  township  

-­‐ 14.17%  

Roscommon township  

4,411

3,005

0.0454

-­‐38.21%

$106,700

99.35%

$403

14.42%

Houghton Lake  CDP  

3,427

3,119

0.8300

1028.54%

$89,900

83.71%

$412

14.74%

Prudenville CDP  

1,682

1,474

0.8366

1037.49%

$119,400

111.17%

$537

19.21%

Roscommon village  

1,075

507

0.5307

621.55%

$83,500

77.75%

$378

13.52%

St. Helen  CDP   2,668   2,589   *Bold  Text=  Eligible  area   **Roscommon  County  Median  Income:  $33,542  

0.8040

993.17%

$70,200

65.36%

$387

13.85%

 

 

 

 

 

 


APPENDIX 3   Map  6 :  Previous  County  Allocation  Grant  home  rehabs,  as  of  December  2011  

Roscommon County CDBG County Allocation Expenditures Legend

# *

# *

Political Boundary Roscommon

Lyon Township

Home Rehab

State Road

Gerrish Township

Au Sable Township

Local Road Water Body

Ü

Higgins Township

Lake Township

* # *# # * # * # * # *# * *#

Markey Township

Richfield Township

# * # *

# * Denton Township # * # *

Backus Township

Roscommon Township

Nester Township

2012-03-20-roscommon-strategy-final  
Read more
Read more
Similar to
Popular now
Just for you