Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-16-2015 Planning Commission Meeting Packet - UPDATED WITH PUBLIC TESTIMONYPLANNING COMMISSION -AGENDA REGULAR MEETING I. CALL TO ORDER: II. ROLL CALL: III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: V. OLD BUSINESS: A. Special Permit VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Special Pe rmit B. Special Permit C. Rezone VII. WORKSHOP: VIII. OTHER BUSINESS: IX. ADJOURNMENT: 7:00P.M. July 16, 2015 Declaration of Quorum June 18, 2015 Location of a Community Solar System in a C-1 Zone (Franklin PUD) (MF# SP 2 015-006) Redevelopment of Stevens Middle School (Pasco School District) (MF# SP 20 1 5-002) Location of a Wire less Cellular Communications Tower in an RS-1 (Suburban) Zone (V erizon Wireless) (MF# SP 20 15-008) Rezone from R-1 (Low Density Residential) to R-3 (M edium Density Residential) (Env ision Homes) (MF# Z 20 15-002) This meeting is broadcast live on PSC-TV Channel 191 on Charter Cable and s treamed at www.pasco-wag.com /psctvlive . Audio equipment avail able for the h earing impa ired; contact staff for assistance. REGULAR MEETING PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 7:00pm by Chairman Cruz. POSITION No.1 No.2 No.3 No.4 No. 5 No.6 No.7 No .8 No .9 MEMBERS PRESENT Tanya Bowers Tony Bachart Paul Mendez Alecia Greenaway Joe Cruz Loren Polk Zahra Khan Gabriel Portugal APPEARANCE OF FAIRNESS: MEMBERS ABSENT VACANT June 18, 2015 Chairman Cruz read a statement about the appearance of fairness for hearings on land use matters. Chairman Cruz asked if any Commission member had anything to declare. There were no declarations. Chairman Cruz then asked the audience if there were any objections based on a conflict of interest or appearance of fairness question regarding the items to be discussed this evening. There were no objections. ADMINISTERING THE OATH: Chairman Cruz explained that state law requires testimony in quasi-judicial hearings such as held by the Planning Commission be given under oath or affi rmation. Chairman Cruz swore in all those desiring to speak. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Greenaway moved, seconded by Commissioner Bowers that the minutes dated May 21, 2015 be approved as amended. The motion passed unanimously. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A . Special Permit Location of a Community Solar System in a C-1 Zone (Franklin PUD) (MF# SP 2015-006) Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Dave McDonald, City Planner, discussed the special permit application for the location for a community solar system in a C-1 zone. The proposed site is on the eastern most parking lot of the PUD property at the corner of 14th Avenue and Clark Street. The PUD has been at this location for roughly 50 years so they are well established within the -1- neighborhood and well accepted. The PUD itself is classified as a service facility because of the public/governmental nature of the facility so anything they do requires a special permit. In addition to that the proposed sol ar array is similar to other utility facilities that also require special permit review. The array will be covering a row of parking stalls and will be angl ed slightly towards the south. In preparing the report, Staff inquired about a possible problem with glare from the solar panels, but due to the loca tion of the panels a bove the parking lot glare should not be much of a problem. The PUD building itse lf has a number of solar panels attached to the building and there haven't been any complaints regarding g l are from these existing panel s. Commissioner Khan asked if the solar panels would increase the temperature m the surrounding area. Mr . McDonald answer e d that it depends on how they are set up. They have had problems in California and Nevada where they have large facilities but, this will not be the same situation. There haven 't been any problems with the solar panels that are currently on the building itself. Commissioner Khan didn't know how it would handle the Tri-Cities summer sun. Mr. McDonald responded that it would actually provide some shade for the parked vehicles. Commissioner Bowers added that she thinks it would be an asset for those who have to park because of the added shade and could lower the temperature. Commissioner Khan s t ated that she was only concerned about the neighboring homes getting any additional heat. Chairman Cruz responded that he didn't think there would be an issue with the additional heat in terms of this design. Todd Blackman, 7428 Deseret Drive, spoke on this item, representing Franklin PUD. Commissioner Portugal asked if the residents in the City of Pasco would have an opportunity to invest on the solar panels. Mr. Blackman answered that the array would be owned by the utility but the output owned by citizens who buy into the system. Franklin PUD anticipates more demand than avail abl e with this first project so a "lottery" will be held and current customers will all get a chance to participate in the lottery. Commissioner Portugal asked if the shares would be advertised to the public. Mr. Blac kman responded that they have sent mail outs to all account holders and other forms of media. Commissioner Portugal asked if the PUD has anything to compare their program to. Mr. Blackman stated that their plans will hopefully be even better than prior solar projects -2- in other communities. Ty pically they are ground mounted systems taking up real estate, where this unit does not take up space and will provide shade and deflect heat. Commissioner Bowers asked for clarification on the "community investment". Mr. Blackman answered that they would be investing in this partic ular solar system. Commissioner Bachart asked if a person buys into a share if they are e ntitled to tax breaks. Mr. Blackman stated that is what mal<:es this program work -Washington State Production C r edits. The pay b ack for investing would be around four years. Commissioner Bachart asked how that would work, such as , would a c h eck b e sent or would the amount be taken off of the bill . Mr. Blackman responded that customers would get a check for their production and throughout the year they would also get a n e t-me ter benefit of whatever the size of their system is offsetting energy use in their home. Since the system and the m eter isn't actually on their house, they wouldn't see the energy actually run to the grid but the PUD can calculate it. Commissioner Khan asked if this is only a pplicable for p eople for Franklin PUD cu stom e rs . Mr. Blackman answered that to partic ipate you only need an account with Franklin PUD. Commissioner Polk asked if this is a pilot for future modules like this in the Tri-Cities. Mr. Blackman responded that he hopes so. Commissioner Mendez asked if there was an m1t1ative to reach out to s urrounding homeowners to let them know what is about to take place and give them a chance to voice concerns. Mr. Blackman stated that the PUD will b e holding a public hearing, the date is to be d etermine d since this is still early in the planning process. So far the only public p arti cip ation has been at board meetings. Commissioner Bowers stated that s h e would like to see those outreach meetings to take place in Spanish as well. Mr. Blackman responded that their department is bilingual and the first point of contact will be a bilingual staff person. The direct mailers that will be s e nt will b e in English and Spanish. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, added that the Planning Commission Public Hearing was also advertised to homeowners within 300 feet of the -3- PUD. Commissioner Mendez pointed out a correction that n eeded to be made to the staff report under one of the conditions (#6). Mr. Mc Donald stated that would be corrected. With no further comments the public hearing closed. Commissioner lilian moved, seconded by Commissioner Polk, to close the hearing on the proposed solar system and initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of findings of fact , conclusions and a recommendation to the City Council fo r the July 16, 2015 meeting. The motion passed unanimously. B. Code Amendment Emergency Aircraft Landing Code Amendment (City of Pasco) (MF # CA 2015-001) Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Communit y & Economic Development Director, discussed the proposed code amendment for emergency aircraft l anding. The Pasco Municipal Code currently has a prohibition on landing aircraft outside of an airport without a special permit. In cases of an emergency that is not an opti on so the proposed code amendment would allow it to occur in cases of an emergency as well as the landing of aircraft for training purposes for this type of operation. This h as been referred to the Pasco Airport as well as the FAA and neither had any comments. Commissioner Polk asked for clarifica tion on not receiving any comments from the Pasco Airport or the FAA-whether they feel if it is a good working model of they just didn 't h ave anything to say one way or another. Mr. White clarified that they did respond that they are comfortabl e with the language and they already have procedures in place. Roger Casey, 2 101 South Highlands Boulevard, West Richland, spoke on behalf of Northwest MedStar. He stated that they are a 24/7 critical care transport agency based out of Spokane. They have a medical helicopter located in the Tri-Cities fully staffed and currently in the C ity of Pasco they cannot l and without a permit without violating the code and p aying the consequences. They have worked with c ity staff and are satisfied with the proposed l anguage to the code and he would like to see the Planning Commi ssi on approve the code amendment to allow this service to Pasco. In terms of training, they don't' land just anywhere -there is always landing zone training courses and work closely with EMS agencies for training purposes. Commissioner Polk asked if there are parameters that would define an emergency. Mr. Casey stated that an emergency in the aircraft itself are governed by the pilots and their knowledge, intuition and judgment. There are certain conditions that happen in aircr aft for landing as soon as possible and safely, such as engine failure , the l anding is -4- going to happen but the pilot will have to do it as controlled and safely as possible. Commissioner Bowers asked how frequently the trainings are held or how frequently are trainings anticipated. Mr. Casey responded that it varies -there could be months without any training and then months were there is a week or two at a time. He emphasized the importance of the proposed code amendment so that they can provide emergency medical services in situations where time is of the essence. Commissioner Bachart clarified that as the code is currently written, Northwest MedStar cannot legally make their landings in Pasco. Mr. Casey replied that is correct, they can only land at the airport or an approved heliport, which is currently only at Lourdes , unless they apply for a special event permit, in which would take several weeks and would not be appropriate for emergencies. Chairman Cruz added that they could land but would be subject to pay the fine. Todd Blackman, 7428 Deseret Drive, spoke on this item stating that he has worked with Northwest MedStar as a volunteer firefighter and believes they are a highly trained and professional organization. They cooperate with the Fire Department and it is a great asset for the community. Commissioner Greenaway added that she is in support of the code amendment, as her family has pilots. Commissioner Greenaway moved, seconded by Commissioner Khan , to close the public hearing on the proposed code amendment, initiate deliberations and develop a recommendation for City Council for the June 13, 2015 meeting. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Greenaway moved, seconded by Commissioner Khan, to recommend the City Council adopt the proposed ordinance allowing emergency aircraft landing as contained in the June 18,2015 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. WORKSHOP: A. Code Amendment Arterial Corridor Commercial Design Standards (MF# CA 20 15-003) Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed the proposed code amendment of arterial corridor commercial design standards. During the last discussion on this item, the Planning Commission posed some questions that staff has tried to answer in the first part of the staff report. Mr. White asked for feedback from the Planning Commission on the following questions: (1) Should the new standards apply only to new buildings and if so, is 50% the correct -5- threshold? Chairman Cruz responded that in the past, 50% has been the threshold and he is m support of that number. The Commissioners were all in agreement. (2) If the standards apply to all buildings -what is the threshold (percentage of a remodel or addition) for triggering compliance with the new standards? Mr. White stated that question was already answered. (3) Will the standards apply to all zoning districts? Mr. White stated that staff is looking at areas outside of the I-182 Corridor. Many of Pasco's Commercial District's east of Highway 395 are not meant for retail sales but for very heavy commercial and/ or industrial types of uses. Staff recommends the design standards would only apply to the Office "0" Zone and the Retail Business "C-1" Zone and only along specific corridors. Chairman Cruz asked the Commissioners if they wished to push the applicability beyond office or retail. Commissioner Khan asked for clarification on C-2 Zoning. Mr. White answered that C-2 is Downtown. C-1 is the zoning typically along Court Street or Road 68. Commissioner Bachart asked what the zoning was for the building that triggered the need for this code amendment. Mr. White r esponded that it was zoned C-1. Commissioner Bowers asked for examples that didn't follow design standards of what isn't desired in a C-1 Zone . Mr. White couldn't think of another example other than the building directly west of the Gesa Credit Union on Sylvester Street. Chairman Cruz added that the goal is to uphold consistent curb appeal without overly impugning property owners. Commissioner Polk stated that the reason the particular building in question seems so out of place is because it doesn't match the surrounding buildings and character of the neighborhood, so she wouldn't mind language in the code addressing the style and character of the existing neighborhood. Chairman Cruz responded it gets touchy. The Planning Commission should address areas because for example, Lowe 's doesn't have to match Walmart but they both have to be pre sen table. -6- Mr. White added that m further discussion, Commissioner Polk's concern might get a ddressed. (4) Should the standards apply to only certain street corridors? Mr. White reminded the Commissioners that it would only pertain to the "0" and "C-1" Zones in these corridors . The staff report contained a list of suggested corridors . Commissioner Bowers stated that there should be caution in terms of "standards" because different communities have different ideas as to what works for them and what is attractive and the C ity should be as inclusive as possible. Chairman Cruz responded that the staff report addresses those issues. It isn't about making every building look the same, but rather, e liminating huge blighted buildings that don't fit the neighborhood. Commissioner Polk said that was her earlier point in that the building in question didn't remotely match the character of the neighborhood. She would like the building to match the neighborhood but not a specific design. Commissioner Mendez asked about the Downtown Area. Mr. White clarified that the Downtown Area is zoned C-2 and is common-wall construction so the same concerns won't apply. There are some C-1 stand-alone buildings along those streets. Mr. White asked if the standards were imposed, would they only apply to the part of the building or fa<;;:ade facing the street or would they apply to the sides as well as the street and in some cases, the rear. Staff would recommend the Commissioners only consider the street facing facades for properties that are not adjoining residential properties but that the sides and rear be addresses for properties that do adjoin residential properties. Chairman Cruz agreed with the staff recommendation and the Commissioners were m agreement. Mr. White added that staff would like to require certain baseline items as "Mandatory" and creating a second tier of items where the property owner could choose suggested standards at their discretion, such as: massing and architectural features, prominent entrance, fa<;;:ade transparency, corner treatments, rear of building and screening of electrical and mechanical equipment. Chairman Cruz stated that he would be fine with "faux" features , such as fake windows, for certain structures due to security reasons , etc. Commissioner Polk asked if the pump house structure that went before the Planning Commission a while back had fake windows. David McDonald, City Planner, responded that the pump station mainly had brick and a -7- pitched roof and some landscaping. Mr. White responded that what staff is looking for is an approach that establishes the minimum baseline and allows a menu of options to choose for enhancing the baseline or not. Chairman Cruz replied that to Commissioner Bower's previous concerns of design standards, this would offer a lot of flexibility to the property owners. Variety is good, this is just to prevent an eye sore. These standards will help keep the character of the neighborhood yet meet the functional requirements for the property owner. Commissioner Bowers stated that she would like to see an example of the "faux" windows. Mr. McDonald responded that a good example is on the Lowe's building on Road 68. Commissioner Khan asked why Sandifur, Burden and Road 68 weren't listed and if it was because there were already rules that apply to those areas. Chairman Cruz stated those areas fall within the I-182 Overlay District. Commissioner Bowers asked what the process is going to be moving forward. Chairman Cruz answered that staff will draft a final proposed code amendment and bring it back to the Planning Commission where a recommendation will be made to City Council. Commissioner Khan discussed using this as an opportunity to define neighborhoods by a set of characteristics rather than a base, such as how the Downtown has a theme and that theme is matched with facades, roofing and vegetation. Commissioner Polk responded that the Downtown Area is her neighborhood and she hopes that the proposed code amendment will protect her neighborhood from industrial looking buildings . Commissioner Bowers asked if there would be an opportunity for public comment. Mr. White answered that when a more finished draft of the code amendment is ready a public hearing will be held for public comment. Chairman Cruz suggested examples for the next time it is brought back to the Planning Commission . In terms of defining neighborhoods, that would be nice but a little difficult, especially retroactively. Typically those would have to be enforced with restrictive covenants which are either a boost or barrier to people developing. Mr. White responded that the notion of having a menu might allow for what Commissioner Khan was talking about to happen on its own. There was no further discussion. -8- COMMENTS: Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, discussed having a special meeting on July 30, 2015 at 7:00 p .m. to hold a public hearing for 2016 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) allocations. Commissioner Bowers, Commissioner Mendez, Commissioner Greenaway, Chairman Cruz, Commissioner Polk and Commissioner Portugal stated they could attend the special meeting. With no further discussion or business, the Planning Commission was adjourned at 7:58p.m. Respectfully submitted, David McDonald, City Planner -9- REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: SP 2015-003 HEARING DATE: 6/18/2015 ACTION DATE: 7/16/2015 BACKGROUND APPLICANT: Franklin PUD 1411 W . Clark Street Pasco, WA 9930 1 REQUEST FOR SPECIAL PERMIT: Location of a Community Solar System in a C-1 Zone 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: The west half of Bloc k 6 and all of Block 5 , Pettit's Second Addition General Location: 1411 W Clark Street Property Size: Approximately 2 . 73 acres 2. ACCESS: The site has access from Clark Street, 14th Avenue and Bonneville Street. 3. UTILITIES: Water lines are located in Bonneville Street, 14th Avenue and transect the site through the parking lot. A sewe r line comes into the site from the southwest corner (at 14th Ave . and Clark St.) and a sewer line borders the east property line in an alley. The propose d solar system will not require sewer or water services. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING : The property is zoned C-1 (R e tail Business). The zoning and land use of the surrounding properties are as follows : NORTH : R -1/R-2 Library EAST: R-2 Single & Multi-Family Reside nces SOUTH: C-1/C-3 Residential/Commercial WEST: R-1 Single-Family Residences 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The site is designated in the Comprehensive Plan for future Public/Quasi-Public Government uses. The Plan doe s not specifically address community solar system faciliti es, but elements of the Plan encourage the promotion of orderly d evelopment within the City. The Comprehensive Plan (UT-2 -A) encourages coordination between utility providers' plans for utilities with City land use plans and development permits. Policy UT-2-B also encourages the design of utility substation to be consistent adopted codes and standards. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. Based on the SEPA checklist, the adopted City Comprehensive Plan, City development regulations , and other information, a threshold determination resulting in a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) has been issued for this project under WAC 197- 11-158. ANALYSIS The local Public Utility District (Franklin PUD) has applied for special permit approval to allow installation of a 60 kilowatt photovoltaic (solar) panel array in the parking lot of the PUD office on Clark Street. The PUD falls under the definition of a community service facility and the proposed modification to the PUD site is considered an unclassified use under PMC 25.86.020 (10) as it is a community service facility. Unclassified uses require special permit review before being issued a building permit. The PUD facilities have been located at the northeast corner of 14th Avenue and Clark Street for approximately 50 years. The offices, auditorium and most recently the shop and parking addition have been an accepted part of the neighborhood. The operations of the PUD facilities have not permitted any condition to occur that interferes or obstructs with the free use of neighboring properties. Additionally, no activity on the PUD site has created any condition that would render a neighbor insecure in the use of his/her property or would impose a health or safety concern that would injure or endanger the comfort, repose, health and safety of others. Apart from the initial construction activity, the solar array will not generate additional traffic, dust, noise, fumes or night lighting. Depending on construction materials the solar panels may create some glare. However the properties directly to the south of the solar installation are commercial businesses that are not as sensitive to glare as other types of development. There have been no reports or complaints about glare from the existing solar panels that line the south and west walls of the PUD offices. The solar array will be constructed as an elevated structure and will serve as a shaded carport covering twenty-six (26) parking stalls toward the east side of the site. The panels will be elevated at least 9 feet off the surface of the parking lot. Residents of Pasco will have an opportunity to invest in the solar system; thereby securing ownership of a defined surface area of the solar panels. The surface area will equate to units (kilowatt hours) of electric energy production which in-turn results in a PUD bill credit and an annual State incentive program cash payment. 2 FINDINGS OF FACT Findings of fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial findings drawn from the background and analysis section of the staff report. The Planning Commission may add additional findings to this listing as the r esult of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record hearing. 1. The site is located at 1411 W Clark Street. 2. The site is accessed from Clark Street, Bonneville Street and 14th Avenue. 3. Currently the site is approximately 2.73 acres in size. 4. Municipal sewer and water currently serve the site from the surrounding rights-of-way. 5. The site contains the Franklin County Public Utility District main office and Engineering shop. 6. The PUD has been located at the northeast corner of 14th Avenue and Clark Street for 50 years 7 . The site is zoned C-1 (R e tail Business). 8. The properties south of the solar installation site are zo n ed C-1 and developed with a commercial/ industrial tool supply store and a tire repair store. 9. The PUD offices contain solar panels. 10. The current solar pane ls on the PUD offices have not c reated glare problems for the neighborhood . 11. Installation of a solar photovoltaic system will not to generate additional vehicle traffic to the site after the initial construction is completed. 12. The site contains 118 off-street parking stalls. CONCLUSIONS BASED ON THE FINDINGS OF FACT B e fore recommending approval or denial of a special permit the Planning Commission must develop findings of fact from which to draw its conclusion based upon the criteria listed in P.M.C. 25.86.060 and determine whether or not the proposal: ( 1) Will the proposed use be in accordance with the goals, policies, objectives and text of the Comprehensive Plan? The PUD use of the proposed site is consistent with the land use map designation of Public/Quasi-Public Government uses. The Plan does not specifically address community solar system facilities, but elements of the Plan encourage the promotion of orderly development within the City. The Comprehensive Plan (UT-2-A) encourages coordination between utility providers' plans for utilities with City land use plans and development 3 permits. Policy UT-2-8 also encourages the design of utility substation to be consistent adopted codes and standards. (2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure? The proposed solar facility does not require water and sewer service and does not generate traffic. The proposed use will support the electric utility in that it will produce power rather than consume power. (3) Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained and operated to be zn harmony with existing or intended character of the general vicinity? The existing PUD facility has defined the general character of the neighborhood for 50 years. The current PUD office contains solar panels. The proposed solar panels will augment the existing solar equipment on the PUD property. The existing character of the general neighborhood will not be altered by the proposal. (4) Will the location and height of proposed structures and the site design discourage the development of permitted uses on property in the general vicinity or impair the value thereof? The height of the proposed structure (9 feet) will be less than the height of the existing buildings on the property and less than the height of the commercial buildings to the south. The existing PUD facilities have not discouraged development of surrounding properties nor have they impaired neighborhood values. The PUD site is separated from surrounding properties by streets and an alley so building heights and setbacks are less of an issue than they would be if the site actually abutted other properties. (5) Will the operations in connection with the proposal be more objectionable to nearby properties by reason of noise, fumes vibrations, dust, traffic, or flashing lights than would be the operation of any permitted uses within the district? There will be some initial traffic and noise associated with construction activities but, likely no more noise than what is generated from the tire repair store to the south. The operation of the solar panels will not create fumes, noise, vibrations, dust, traffic or flashing lights. The only concern with the proposal maybe the possibility of glare from the solar panels. However, from the experience with the existing solar panels on the PUD office building glare has not been an issue. In this case the panels will be arranged differently but, will be elevated such that there will be no glare that will impact vehicular traffic on surrounding streets. 4 (6) Will the proposed use endanger the public health or safety if located and developed where proposed, or in any way will become a nuisance to uses permitted in the district? The operations of the existing PUD facilities including the solar panels on the main office building have not created health and safety issue and nor have they become a nuisance to adjoining properties. APPROVAL CONDITIONS 1) This Special Permit shall apply to the west half of Block 6 and all of Block 5, Pettit's Second Addition (Franklin County Tax Parcel 112271409); 2) The site shall be developed in substantial conformance with the site plan submitted with the Special Permit application; 3) The Special Permit shall be null and void if a building permit has not been obtained by August 1, 2016. RECOMMENDATION MOTION for Findings of Fact: I move to adopt findings of fact and conclusions therefrom as contained in the July 16 , 2015 staff report. MOTION for Recommendation: I move based on the findings of fact and conclusions as adopted the Planning Commission recommend the City Council grant a special permit for community solar system on tax parcel # 112-271-409 with conditions as contained in the July 16, 2015 staff report. 5 Vicinity Map Itetn: Special Permit-Solar Project Applicant: Franklin PUD File #: SP 2015-006 Land Use Map Itetn: Special Permit-Solar Project Applicant: Franklin PUD File #: SP 2015-006 City Park H OP K INS S I ~ ~ ~ ~ : Residential------'-----'----"---11 ,_.. I I b I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ ">>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Yi '--""""'" I ~ CLARKST I , , , , , I~, : ~ J I I I #" I : ' I I ' : , : I I :a ueS.: Commercial Comm. • Zoning Map IteiTI: Special Permit-Solar Project Applicant: Franklin PUD File #: SP 2015-006 R-1 (Low-Density Residential) BONNEVIL ~~ ~~ I I I I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ : : I I~ ~ f I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I> < C-1 ~II ~I R~~3 l ~l I~ t;;L ~ ~ CLARKST ,. ~2-tJ ' I C-3 (General Business) --~ C-1 (Retail Business) i I I lj j I ;· l/t E l I t . I !I I -1 I D i I )!.. i I !5 : I l!!"l I \ \ REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: SP 2015-02 HEARING DATE: 7/16/15 ACTION DATE: 8/20/15 APPLICANT: Pasco School District# 1 1215 W Lewis St Pasco, WA 99301 BACKGROUND REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Stevens Middle School Site Improvements 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: A portion of the SW 1/4 of the NE Quarter of NE 1/4 of Section 25, Township 9 North, Range 29 East, W.M. contained within Parcel # 119332080 adjoining parcels and Hillhaven Addition. General Location: 1120 22nd Avenue Property Size: Approximately 16.18 acres 2. ACCESS: The site is accessible from 22nd Avenue and 24th Avenue 3. UTILITIES: All municipal utilities serve the school site. 1. 4 . LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is zoned R-2 and R -3 (Medium Density Residential) and is developed with The Stevens Middle School Campus. The zoning and land use of the surrounding properties are as follows : NORTH: SOUTH: EAST: WEST: C-1 -Commercial Businesses R-2 & R -3 -Multi-Family Residences R -1 -Single Family Residences R-2-Single Family and Multi-family Residences 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan desig nates the site as public and quasi-public uses. Goal CF-5 suggests adequate provisions should be made for educational facilities located throughout the urban growth area. Policy CF -5-A encourages the appropriate location and design of schools throughout the community. 6 . ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. Based on the SEPA checklist, the adopted City Comprehensive Plan, City development regulations, and other information, a threshold determination resulting in a Determination of Non-significance (DNS) has been issued for this project under WAC 197- 11-158. DISCUSSION Stevens Middle School was constructed in 1960 and has been a part of the surrounding neighborhood for the past 55 years. As the community has grown Stevens Middle School and the school site have been modified to meet increased enrollment. Since 2010 the School District has been working on plans to improve vehicular and pedestrian safety around the school. In 2011 the Planning Commission reviewed plans for a new parking lot on the east side of 22nd Avenue and new bus staging and unloading area for the parking lot to the north of the school. The first phase of the plan was completed in 2014 with the construction of the new parking lot across 22nd Avenue from the main entrance of the school. The next phases of the plan called the construction of the new bus staging area on the north side of the school with bus traffic being re-routed from 22and Avenue to 24th Avenue. Additionally to improve traffic safety at the new bus entrance on 24th Avenue and to eliminate safety concerns of having 960 students a day across 24th Avenue (1,920 students crossing for going over and back) to the sports field a portion of 24th Avenue is proposed to be closed. Closing that portion of 24th Avenue between the sports fields and the main school campus will enable the School District to enlarge the sports fields to regulation size and eliminate the need for students crossing 24th Avenue for PE activities or sports games. Closing 24th Avenue will require the School District to reconstruct the intersections at Octave and Marie Streets and modify street drainage facilities and possibly relocate a fire hydrant. Coordination with the PUD will also be required for undergrounding power lines. Closing 24th Avenue will undoubtedly impact traffic circulation around the sports fields. Adjustments will have to be made to daily travel for residents of the neighborhood. However these adjustments will involve an extra turn or two and in a few cases require perhaps two blocks of additional travel. It is anticipated people will adjust their travel to 26th Avenue and 22nd Avenue and the east/west streets thought he neighborhood. The attached Traffic Report indicates there would be less than one additional vehicle per minute during most hours of the day on the new travel routes. The impact to traffic circulation will be offset the elimination of 960 students crossing 24th Avenue to attend PE classes. This will be a significant safety improvement. 2 STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Findings of fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial findings drawn from the background and a n a lysis section of the staff r e port. The Planning Commission may add additional findings to this listing as the r esult of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record hearing. 1. The site is located in an R-2 zone. 2. The Comprehe nsive Plan identifies the site for public and quasi-public uses. 3. Comprehensive Plan Goal CF-5 suggests that adequate provisions should be made for the location of educational facilities throughout the urban growth area. 4 . Schools are conditional la nd uses in the R-S-1 zone a nd require review through the special permit process prior to permitting for construction. 5. Stevens Middle School has been locate d at the current site for the past 55 years. 6. The Planning Commission considered a Stevens Middle School re- development plan during a Special Permit review in 2011. The Development plan included a new parking lot on the east side of 22nd Avenue a revised bus parking area on the north side of the school and bus access from 24th Avenue rather the 22nd . 7. The Stevens School sports fields are separated from the main school campus by North 24th Avenue. 8. Nine hundred and sixty Stevens Middle School students are require d to cross 24th Avenue to access the sports fields for PE classes on a consistent basis during the school year. 9. The access gate from the main Stevens Campus for crossing 24th Avenue is midway b e tween Octave Street and Marie Streets. There is no cross walk at this location. 10. A Traffic Study was prepared for the proposed street closure in July of 20 14. The study indicated motorists will shift their travel to 22nd Avenue and 26th Avenue. This would result in less than one additional vehicle per minute on those streets during most hours of the day. 11. 22nd Avenue and 26th Avenue are connected to Court Street with a traffic signal. 12. 24th Avenue is not connected to Court Street with a traffic signal. 3 CONCLUSIONS BASED ON STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a special permit the Planning Commission must draw its conclusion from the findings of fact based upon the criteria listed in P.M .C . 25.86.060. The criteria and staff listed conclusions are as follows: 1) Will the proposed use be in accordance with the goals, policies, objectives and text of the Comprehensive Plan? The proposed use supports the following plan policies or goals: CF -5 suggests adequate prov1s10ns be made for educational facilities throughout the Urban Growth Area. The Comprehensive Plan land use map indicated the site is to be developed with public and quasi-public land uses. Schools are a public land use. 2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure? Stevens Middle School has been located on the site for over 50 years and has not adversely impacted public infrastructure. The proposal will not increase the need for municipal utilizes. The proposal will impact the current configuration of the neighborhood street network by decreasing vehicle trips on 24th avenue and cause a slight increase in traffic on 22nct avenue and 26the Avenue. 3) Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained and operated to be in harmony with existing or intended character of the general vicinity? Stevens Middle School is part of the neighborhood character and has been for 55 years. Schools are typically located in or near residential neighborhoods and are an accepted part of the character of residential areas. 4) Will the location and height of proposed structures and the site design discourage the development of permitted uses on property in the general vicinity or impair the value thereof? The construction and height of the school will not be altered as a part of the site redevelopment. The neighborhood is fully developed as a result there is no development to discourage . Past experience has shown the location of schools within Pasco neighborhoods has not impaired the value of residential development within those neighbor hoods. 4 5) Will the operations in connection with the proposal be more objectionable to nearby properties by reason of noise, fumes, vibrations, dust, traffic, or flashing lights than would be the operation of any permitted uses within the district? Experience has shown that schools within Pasco generate few complaints from neighbors. Schools typically are not a source of dust, fumes, vibrations or flashing lights. During weekends, the summer break, and other break periods very little activities occurs on school sites .. 6) Will the proposed use endanger the public health or safety if located and developed where proposed, or in anyway will become a nuisance to uses permitted in the district? The proposal with the closure of 24th Avenue will enhance public safety be eliminating the need for 960 students to cross a public street to access fields for PE classes Proposed Approval Conditions 1. The special permit shall apply to Parcel Nos. 119341114, 119332080, 119362333, 119362093 and 119362342 and any subsequent parcel # use to consolidate the parcel numbers referenced herein. 2. The school site shall be d e veloped in substantial conformity with t he site plan submitted with the special permit application. 3. The School District sign a letter of agreement with the City prior to beginning design work on the plans for closing 24th Avenue betwee n Marie Street and Octave Street. 4. The letter of agreement shall identify the steps necessary for closure of 24th Avenue including a time line for street vacation. 5. The School District shall be responsible for all engineering, design construction costs, and utility relocation costs associated with the closure of 24th Avenue. 6. The special permit shall be null and void if a permit for site redevelopment has not been obtained by December 31, 2017 . 5 RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move to close the hearing on the proposed site redevelopment for the Stevens Middle School site and initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of findings of fact, conclusions and a r e commendation to the City Council for the August 20 , 2015 meeting. 6 Vicinity Map Item: Special Permit Applicant: Pasco School District File #: SP 2015-002 Land Use Map /~1 -r--1 --, -----,1 SFR's IMFR's SFR's Itetn: Special Permit Applicant: Pasco School District File #: SP 2015-002 ..-....................... ----. c,..o...._u ..... RT,._S-..T ..-.....-... .----......--. I I~.__ ____ > < r I ~~ I I I , ~h . . le I , ~~ t=i Conunercial -.-.' 'nit MFR's ---,- M --. iVacan Parking oc Church I 1' MFR's·' • Church T H Commercial MFR's Zoning Map R-3 (Medium-Density Res.) Item: Special Permit Applicant: Pasco School District File #: SP 2015-002 ~~~~------~ CrO_.U.R~T•S•T~--~~ C-3 C-1 C-1 (Retail Business) I ·~ > < r I 8 I I I I ~b . . I~ , . ~-... C-1 (Retail Business) R-4 R-3 (Medium-Density Res.) BR ~ M oc ,.-----,- 11 !~ '~ ~0 (/) ~ ~ , ,.- >-z !) -- l I I 'I I i ! J ! . i ' I I ,, i' il 'I J, !I ~I . "' § !l ~ ij I ! ., 1-'I ll II ·-· J i~i I : i I .. ~ PROPOSED SITE PLAN i OPT10N1 r-!I :j i i i i I il ll !I 11 i i I i ti :i 1. 'I i i i .! ·-·-~ ~ ---J1 ~------·--------~---~ L 25tn AVfJU ., /?~ r= ij ( ~ :0 ! I! II \-~·1 1 i• d '--vI " ,. II i " ·i i I il i . i ~ i I ~ ,: il ,J I ' I! ·' !I !I I! J; II i i I i i I i i i i ·i i •· i [ _____ ---____ , __ j --- 24th A\fli.E STEVENS IUU saiOOl • ,.. ~ r;;;;l ~ r;;;;l SITE EXPANSION AND IMPROVEMENTS :·: 1 1 1 • 1 1 1 1 • 1 ckjt architects -• ~,.. ~--• ...... aiiiM 1120N.2211dAve«.E PASCO,WASIMTON -I ... _ -·--~ '-------' REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: SP 2015-008 HEARING DATE: 7/16/2015 ACTION DATE: 8/20/2015 APPLICANT: Verizon Wireless cjo Land Services Northwest PO Box 302 Bend, OR 97709-0302 BACKGROUND REQUEST: SPECIAL PERMIT: Location of Wireless Communication Facilities in an R-S-1 (Suburban) Zone 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: Parcel # 117 190 022: the W V2 of the NW 1,4 of the SE 1k together with the E 1h of the NE 1/4 of the SEV4 of the NE 1/4, all in Section 14, Township 9 North, Range 29 East W.M., Franklin County, WA: and together with that portion of the SV2 of the S V2 of the NE % of said section 14 as conveyed to the city of Pasco under auditor's file no. 482245. General Location: Northeast corner of Desert Platea u Drive and Horizon Drive Prope rty Size: The parcel is approximately 10.55 acres; the lease area contains 1 ,354.4 square feet. 2. ACCESS: The site is accessed from Desert Plateau and Horizon Drives. 3. UTILITIES: All municipal utilities are currently available to the site. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is currently zoned R -S-1 (Suburban) and contains a potable water reservoir. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: NORTH: SOUTH: EAST: WEST: R -S-1 -McGee Elementary School and Park R-S-1 -Single-Family Residences R-S-1 -Single-Family Residences R-S-1 -Single-Family Residences 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for low-density residential uses. Goal UF -2 suggests the City ought to maintain land use flexibility in regard to placement of infrastructure for public and private utilities. Policy UF-2-A encourages the sound management of all energy and communication utilities through coordination and cooperation dealing with construction of such facilities . Policy UF-2-B encourages the placement of utility substations which are necessary for the surrounding neighborhood. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. Based on the SEPA checklist, the adopted City Comprehensive Plan, City development regulations, and other information, a threshold determination resulting in a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) has been issued for this project under WAC 197- 11-158. ANALYSIS Verizon Wireless is requesting special permit approval to locate a 49' stealth monopole antenna support structure and associated ground-based equipment in a fenced, landscaped area just east of the water reservoir at the Northeast corner of Desert Plateau Drive and Horizon Drive. The proposed tower will be located a few feet northeast of the existing radio communication tower at the southeast corner of the reservoir. The current 30-foot tall tower is used by the City's Public Works Department to monitor and control valves, pumps and equipment related to the delivery of water and sewer services in the City. Unlike the existing City tower the proposed tower will utilize a stealth antenna support structure that will be painted with a color to blend in with the sky. The applicant's request is an effort to fill a coverage/ capacity gap between Roads 36 and 44. The installation is intended to better support existing users between Roads 36 and 44 and would also potentially increase Verizon's ability to support more users in the same area (See coverage maps). Wireless Facility zoning regulations were specifically developed to permit (through special permit review) cellular tower/antenna equipment on publicly owned facilities, including water reservoirs, as per PMC 25.70.075. The PMC special permit review criteria for wireless facilities are written as follows: 25.70.075 WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES. Wireless Communication Facilities are permitted under the following conditions: (1) Such structures shall be permitted in all industrial or C-3 zoning districts provided the location is 500 feet or more from a residential district. Any location closer than 500 feet requires special permit approval. (2) Such structures may be permitted by special permit in all other zoning districts provided said structures are: 2 (a) Attached to or located on an existing or propose d building or structure that is higher than thirty-fiv e (35) feet; or (b) Located on or with a publicly owned facility such as a water reservoir, fire station, police station, school, county or port facility. (3) All wireless communication facilities shall comply with the following standards (a) Wireless faciliti es shall be screened or camouflaged by employing the best available technology. This may be accomplished by use of compatible materials, strategic location, color, stealth technologies, and/ or other measures to achieve minimum visibility of the facility when viewed from public rights-of-way, and adjoining properties such that a casual observer cannot identify the Wireless Communication Faci lity. (b) Wireless facilities shall be located in the City in the following order of preference: i) Attached to or located on buildings or structures higher than 35 feet. ii) Located on or with a publicly owned facility iii) Located on a site other than those listed in a) or b). Commonly, cellular providers locate the equipment cabinets w ithin a fenced area surrounding the base of a pole; in t his case the ground-level equipment is proposed to be housed in a m etal shelter designed for functionality. Re nditions submitted with the application show a fenced and landscaped enclosure surrounding the ground-based equipme nt. The screening must m eet design requirements of the 1-182 Overlay District (PMC 25.58). A determination of non-sig nificance from the FAA has been obtained by the appli cant according to the TOWAIR (or Landing Slope F acility Calculator) software program; as required by PMC 25.70.075(4) a copy has been included in t he application submittal. Furthermore, the Southwest Regional Office of the Federal Aviation Administration Obstruction Evaluation Group posted the following comments in a memo sent May 5 , 20 1 5: Initial findings of this study indicate that the structure a s described exceeds obstruction standards and / or would have an adverse phy sical or e lectromagn etic interference effect upon navigable airspace or air navigation facilities. Pending resolution of the issues described below, the structure is presumed to be a hazard to air n avigation. 3 If the structure were reduced in height so as not to exceed 49 feet above ground level (560 feet above mean sea level), it would not exceed obstruction standards and a favorable determination could subsequently be issued. As the current plan specifies a tower height limited to 49 feet it appears this issue has been resolved. A building permit cannot be issued for the proposed tower unless and until the proper FAA forms are submitted with the application indicating the proposed tower will not interfere with airspace or airport operations. The applicant has resubmitted the FAA paper work for a 49 foot tower as indicated in the May 5, 2015 FAA memo and is expecting approval. Typical neighborhood concerns expressed over proposed cell towers in the past have included fear of electromagnetic radio waves and the unsightliness of tall towers within the neighborhood. Under Federal regulations cities are barred from considering electromagnetic radio waves in the permitting process for cell towers. An application for a cell tower cannot be conditioned or denied based on concern over electromagnetic waves . The site location and height restrictions placed on the proposed tower by the FAA will help address possible concerns over the height of the tower. At 49 feet the tower will be less than 20 feet taller than the street lights in the neighborhood. However a portion of the tower height will be mitigated or obscured by the height of the water reservoir and the arborvitae hedge around the reservoir. The proposed tower will also be located over 100 feet from any property line or street, providing some distance between the tower and adjoining properties. The landscaped equipment compound at the base of the tower will also help screen the east wall of the reservoir from the residential properties to the east. INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Findings of fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial findings drawn from the background and analysis section of the staff report. The Planning Commission may add additional findings to this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record hearing. 1. The site is zoned R-S-1 (Suburban). 2 . The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site for low-density residential uses. 3 . The site is approximately 10.55 acres in area; the lease area is 1 ,354.4 square feet. 4 4. The site contains the main City water reservoir of approximately 72 ,838 square-feet in area and associated equipment and communication tower. The existing communication tower is approximately 30 feet in height. 5 . The proposed tower incorporates stealth features into the design to hide all wiring and antennas from surrounding streets and property. 6. The proposed tower will be partially obscured on the west and southwest by the existing water reservoir and hedge along the south side of the reservoir. 7. All municipal utilities currently serve the site. 8. In the R-S-1 zone cellular towers may be permitted by special permit provided the tower is either: i) Attached to or located on an existing or proposed building or structure that is higher than thirty-five (35) feet; or ii) Located on or with a publicly owned facility such as a water reservoir, fire station, police station, school, county or port facility. 9. The cellular tower will be adjacent a publicly owned water reservoir. 10. The overall tower height will be 49 feet. 11. Equipment serving the proposed antennae within the tower will be located within a 1,354.4 square-foot fenced and landscaped lease area. 12 . Federal regulations bar the City from considering electromagnetic radio waves in the permitting process for cell towers or conditioning or denying permits based upon concerns over electromagnetic radio waves. 13 . The proposed tower will be set back over 100 feet from adjoining streets and property lines. 14. The landscaped screening for the tower equipment will obscure a portion of the bare eastern wall of the reservoir from adjoining residential properties. 15. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the City should maintain land use flexibility with regard to placement of infrastructure for public and private utilities. 16. The Comprehensive Plan does not specifically address cellular equipment. 17. Cellular equipment creates minimal demands on City infrastructure. 18. The proposed cellular tower site is located on the east side of the main City reservoir in an area that is not landscaped or improved in any way except for fencing. 5 TENTATIVE CONCLUSIONS BASED ON INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a special permit the Planning Commission must develop findings of fact from which to draw its conclusions based upon the criteria listed in PMC 25.86.060 . The criteria are as follows: ( 1) Will the proposed use be in accordance with the goals, policies, objectives and text ofthe Comprehensive Plan? The Comprehensive Plan does not specifically address cellular equipment. The Comprehensive Plan goal UF-2 and policy UF-2-A discuss the need for sound management and coordination in the location of utilities and community facilities. Policy ED-1-C promotes the need to support Pasco's urban area as a good business environment by enhancing the infrastructure of the community. The applicability of policy ED-1-C is enhanced due to the fact that the new tower will provide more/better service primarily to commercially zoned properties . Policy UT-1-C encourages coordination of utility providers' functional plans with the City's land use and utility plans to ensure long term service availability. (2) Will the proposed use adversely affect public infrastructure? The proposed use is a part of the communication network utilized by the general public. The proposed equipment will be located in such a manner so as not to impact other public utilities or services. The proposed use does not require water and sewer. Only one service trip is expected to be generated each month. (3) Will the proposed use be constructed, maintained and operated to be in harmony with existing or intended character of the general vicinity? The character of the vicinity is dominated by residential suburban development but also includes a public school and the main City reservoir with ancillary equipment such as a 30 foot communication tower. The antenna tower enclosure will be located adjacent to the 10- million gallon municipal water reservoir and park area. (4) Will the location and height of proposed structures and the site design discourage the development of permitted uses on property in the general vicinity or impair the value thereof? The neighborhood is fully developed with permitted uses which were located in the neighborhood well after the construction of the water reservoir. The antenna tower enclosure will be located adjacent a municipal water r eservoir and public park area. Market conditions within the Tri-Cities general account for variations in the assessed value of residential properties in the community. The values of homes to the west of the water towers on Road 76 (with multiple cellular antennas) 6 have shown little variation in values according to the Franklin County Assessor's records. (5) Will the operations in connection with the proposal be more objectionable to nearby properties by reason of noise, fumes, vibrations, dust, traffic, or flashing lights than would be the operation of any permitted uses within the district? The proposed cellular equipment will create no fumes, dust or noise during normal operations. An emergency generator may start up in cases of power outages, but this would be rare. Cellular facilities have been located throughout the community in residential, commercial and industrial zones without generating any complaints received by the City. The cellular site is a part of a large area located east of the water reservoir that is not treated with landscaping elements as is the rest of the reservoir property. (6) Will the proposed use endanger the public health or safety if located and developed where proposed, or in any way become a nuisance to uses permitted in the district? The proposal is required to be designed by a professional engineer to withstand the forces of nature. The applicant is also required by law to coordinate with the FAA and FCC prior to obtaining a building permit. The FAA has made an initial determination that the tower can be no taller than 49 feet. Verizon will be required to provide a copy of the Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation before a building permit can be issued. Radio waves at frequencies utilized by local cellular networks have not been proven to be harmful to human health. Radio wave activity is focused on the antennas which are elevated approximately 40 to 50 feet above grade, away from human activity. Federal law prohibits the City from considering the impacts of radio wave frequencies when reviewing permits for cellular towers. The operation of the emergency generator could become a nuisance if not designed and constructed to mitigate noise impacts on the neighborhood. TENTATIVE APPROVAL CONDITIONS 1) The special permit shall apply to parcel # 117 190 022 ; 2) The property shall be developed in substantial conformity with the elevations and site plan submitted with the application except as conditioned herein; 3) The cellular antennae tower shall not exceed 49 feet in height as measured from existing grade; 4) The cellular antennae shall be enclosed within a stealth assembly tower surround; 7 5) The tower enclosure shall be painted to provide addition camouflaging of the tower; 6) Verizon shall coordinate with the City to develop a landscaping plan for the unimproved area on the east side of the water reservoir. Through a mutual agreement the landscaping plan shall be implemented with the City accepting maintenance responsibility when the landscaping is completed; 7) The landscaping plan must be submitted as a part of the tower and equipment enclosure permitting package; 8) The ground-level equipment shall be located within a landscaped and sight-screened enclosure which fully blocks the view from all directions at the time of installation. Design of the sight-screening shall meet the requirements of the I-182 Overlay District (PMC 25.58); 9) The proposed cellular facility must comply with all FCC and FAA regulations; 10) The tower shall not emit light. If the FAA requires a strobe light the tower shall be lowered to a point that a strobe is not required; 11) The emergency generator shall be muffled or screened with a solid wall to eliminate the impact of associated noise. Noise levels shall not exceed Class A "Environmental Designation for Noise Abatement' (EDNA) standards, as per PMC 9.61. 12) The special permit shall be null and void if a City of Pasco building permit is not obtained by December 30, 2016. RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move to close the hearing on the proposed Verizon Wireless Cellular Tower and initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of findings of fact, conclusions and a recommendation to the City Council for the August 20, 2015 meeting. 8 Overview Map Item: Wireless Cell Tower Applicant: Verizon Wireless File #: SP 2015-008 ~····,·~~~k~-.,~~ ~-~~-~-~-~-~---~ \.:_::; :.:-&"'4~ P.o.~U;~iiU~~e:e:.~ ~*·~~~~~-~---~~· ii:iiii:~iiil!iiiiiOi~a;; ~-·---~-----~-~ Vicinity Map Item: Wireless Cell Tower Applicant: Verizon Wireless File #: SP 2015-008 Land Use Map SAHARA DR Item: Wireless Cell Tower Applicant: Verizon Wireless File #: SP 2015-008 McGee Elementary School I I ~ t-------1 < • ~ 1 z 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I 0 I I I } ' ,. o · 1 I I I I •'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-Q HILLTOP DR ·, , SFDUs~ DESERT PL w CJ) SANTA ANNA LP SFDUs +" c: ca 0 ~ • Zoning Map Item: Wireless Cell Tower Applicant: Verizon Wireless File #: SP 2015-008 at Cll I z R-S-1 L-..------,-----.--,---.----r----r-r~ot:o L-J___l____L_~------L....----~ J I 0::: 0 < l ~~I --~J~--.~--~~~----~,~~~~r---~~----.l I I I I I I I I I I I 11 1 1 I I ' ( ( ( ( < ' < < ( ( < < ( ( (( < @ I (/) "'II I \. I I ._j; HILLTOP DR I I I R -S -1 --t---+-----i R-S-1 DESERT PL ,··· : l '( 'I (. ... .. 'j ' rf.~ •'' I -'-.._ "" ! I I I O.STANCE f"R()W TOWER TO PROPERTY UNE NORTH: IS13'::t SOU'fli: !>5'-4'":t: i I 5j 1:• ~i OIIST. 8UILDING I TO DESERT: 131 '-9 '"± PIA TOO EAST: 281'-5'"± WEST: 548' -7'":t g;: t------------------------ I I I ~I Z I ol fjQ!t; SOURCE & ROUTE OF NEW UTILITIES TO BE O£TERIJINEO. PROJECT pARCEL' TA.X LOT: 1 17190022 ZONIN G: R-S-1 SUBURBAN JURISOtenON: CITY OF' PASCO i I EXIST BUILDING ~I i I ·-·-·-•-·-·-·-·-·-·J;c'-~ · · ·---, ...iC' · · ~~-~~cc~ ""'..c::~ --~ r-·-·-·-·--:-:-·-·-·-·l ~~'"g:,~ '~~( 1--------------------------- SCRUS ~ ~ I I (XISTINC COVEREO RESERVOIR ··---, I ~--___.! n~ I §I ~I ~I I l -,-----,--.------,-•· ----, .... ____:.~._ _j ! ' I _=._--;r.:-_:=-=~~·-• g~N~U~·,;.;:J 7 ./"EXISTING •• -- I!) EXIST\NG ~DSCAPE_j / PUMP HOUSE ... BUF'F'ER /~~Sr:.c0R t..4£R 1~ PROPERTY LINE ' ----------------------------------------------------- OCIST . 8UILOONC EXIST. BUILDING t> i -L_j : J I : "--j_____________ ------_____ j __ --.... __ >-------I !JlJACENT PARCELS· I ..... EXISTING ZONING : R-S-1 SUBURB.AN / BUILOIHC JURISOtCTION: CITY OF" PASCO o~:scf?r ,oYr~u Df?'vc 1/.· / / / ...... ...... _ ...... EXISTING 6' WOOD rENC£ I ~ ...... ...... ...... OVERALL SITE PLAN ~~ ~l; ~::n.~ "~ ~<*lH'-'1:.-U o.....,.~ .... e,.. ... CPA ARCUITE.CTS Ltc l~INV>'\'•-:tlt"'<:.ttirr~ f'rn•ti•IH(f}I(,7ZI• 5411-174-l'ftNI ~ ~!i ~ 1 ~~~ .. ~ 8 1 i!i;i ~~ ~ ~~~ ~ 3 l!l~c: ~ ;:;-!! i~~ ~,. !!In A,fj>t_.., ·-· 14-lot ~,,,,,, ...... I o. •• ;.""" ... -....... z.-.~ ~ O.lt .. _.. , .. .......,.,.. ..... _ 110 0tr Qt OOQIT JJV.l(,IU --•ASCO..••ttJOI A1.0 \_"--···~ ~~~ 9 1 ~ -:.... s 0~ .... ~ .. t) !:' ~ ·:;--:_• ---·.--.,. -'----•). ·-----""'~-. ·---EXISTING~ . I CONCC~ EXISTING "'-'t.T EXISTING POW[R TRANSFORt.!ER ENLARGED SITE PLAN unurv v POST· ~Dl~NNAS r £XISllNG I FENC£ r- 1 I I I I I ~--------~-=.~:~~-~-0~~=.~.----------(1 r------------------------;/ I I I 10·-o·_j SETBACK I I ~t i ' ' h .i 9 2 c .. ·~ ~i! ~~I J.0'-0~ I.W( AAu. 2·-·- I '\GRAVE~~: I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I NEW H.-.M MER HEAO TURNAROUNO NEW 12' -0" WIO£ ACCESS GATE ~ ~XIS~NG~ GRASS ~X~NC~ GAASS NEW 12' -0 · GATE, MATCH EXISTlNG BL..AC~ F'ACTORY FlNISI·( 4 :t2X34 SCAlf.: 1/Pr . t·-o· HXI? 5CJU: 1/16" "' 1'-o ~ venZRJ!wireless J~ ~;;;tCE.C: 'l' 'OOJ.Tifl,l,'f~'if 0..-.p ~~s,-,. CPA ARCNrrtCTS r rc ~.=.~?:n~i'U .M I-Jr4-1Nt ~~ .... "' .. ' ' ' Mh ~~~h 5 ~h . .:::. ih ;; "? 5 . ~; b n. ,., o..;,,.; tr Ow'v.,n ~~~ C'-hd b)' AD ,..~Dy Ool<• ...... ,., ,..., ...... 0.1• !tl_,j ,... ......,..,..,...,. Oat ........ ·~ .. o.te lu u.d lr.~c-t N(~I '"""r«t 1~11 ' 14-101 ~/If/IS TRI SAHARA fiJI)(J#'f()f"0[$(1TII'I,.A1(.1,V """"· PASCO, W& "JOI ENLARGED SITE PLAN A2.0 GRAOC ~--~----~------------------r--- "I ~ _I ~ ~~ ~ I § ~ r1! ·~ I i ; 0 I ;, j.-AHrrNNA RADCENTER - 0 I S> {---------AHTENNA RAO CENlCR (llEYOt<D) EXISTING \ TREES, NEW TRI:f.S (BEYOND) 1- 1--- 1--- l-- ~ V NEW VERIZON WIRElESS MONOPOLE. MAITE GRAY FlNISH W/ {6) PANE:l ANTENNA ANO (9) RRU12 W/A-2 UNITS. All ANTENNAS & EOVIPWENT UOUNTED WTTHIN SHROUDS I r N[W VERIZON WIRELESS UTIUTY H-F'RAME n l -1 f-------j ----:If 9 ... (IT I I I I ·I II ~~ I I i I I !. I NEW VERIZON WIRtLESS EOVIP MEI'{J CAB/NOS NEW COAX C...SlE BRIOCE W/CPS NH. o 12·-o· A.Cl NEW ~IZON wtR£lESS NA.TVRA.l CAS GENERATOR EXISTING COVERED R[SERVOfR (BEYOND) // NEW 6'-0 " TALL CHAINLNK fENCE Wl'fl.t BARBEO WIRE r ·~~-~ ANTENNA PLAN I NOTE' lANDSCAPtNG IN fOR(CROUND NOT SHOWN fOR ct.ARfTY. .z , 'i6<1 '{¥ ~ t------tv ~-... '(): rxP A! I RAP Cft<JIRS M :W VERIZON WIR[l[SS MONOPOLE F'OUNOATION NEW VERIZDN WJRU£SS PANEL ANTENNAS, TYP o.-(6) HEW VER1ZON WIRElESS MONOPOlE 4 Wtl4 SOU: t/4' • 1"-ol 2 t1)CI1SCM£: •tr · 1·-cr I ~ venZSLIIwiretess ...)l, ~:;:t(~ '1 (""""" souuwr.sr O.o•iN;J~~•d lty- .... GPA ARCHITECTS I LC V'II.\""'V~J;;.,iH1"4 r..t/~ 01(91:te .MI-1:'4-Jtilllt ~~~WI! 1i ~ m~~ I ~ '!iu ~ 15 $~~ "N ~ ~ fS ~h «Nt:: . ~ 2' ~ b ,.,.. ~o. 14-lot Oet• 0!./1./IS o..:-· ~ Or.a-""' a-.~.M .,. .. ..-.. Get• lnwo o.t•~-O fO<I ZOI'IIi<lt P"""'l tto-t•in.,.tllor e..~o:ng p.,.ma ?,:'•~•u•d Ootc "--' lcr Coros~rvdio": _.., TR I SAHARA 180 OFT ~ OUDII II'UIIU.U """· ,..t.SCO, WA HJOI EAST ELEVATION ~~~~~~~~~------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~~~~~~~~~' EAST ELEVATION ,',','1'; :::i,' 1'/.~-: ,'-":% 1 A3 .0 • • Mai l Processin g Center · .. :· • Federal Aviation Administrat ion . • Southwest R eg io na l Office Obstruction Evalu ation G roup 260 I Meacham Boulevard Fort Worth, TX 76193 Iss u ed D ate: 06119/20 15 Mikha il R aznobriadsev Verizon Wire less (YAW) LLC 11 20 Sanctuary Prkwy Suite 150 GASA5REG A lpharetta, GA 30004 Aeronautical Study No . 20 15 -ANM-6-0E **DETERMINATION OF NO HAZA RD T O AIR NAVIGATION** T he Federal Avia ti on Adminis tra ti o n has conduc ted a n aeronauti cal study under the p rov is io ns of 49 U.S.C ., Sect io n 44718 and if app li cable Title 14 of the Code ofFederal Regulations, part 77, concern in g: Structure: Location: Latitude: Lo ngitude: Heights: Monopole TRI Sahara Pasco, WA 46-15-55.40N NA D 83 119-08-30.40W 51 1 feet s it e e levation (SE) 49 feet above ground leve l (AGL) 560 feet above m ean sea leve l (AMSL) This aeronau ti ca l study rev ea led that the st ructure does n ot exceed obstruction standard s and wou ld not be a ha za rd to air navigation provided the fo ll owing condition(s), if any, is( are) m et: It is required th a t FAA Form 7460-2 , Notice of Actual Constructi on or Alteration, bee-filed a ny time the project is abandoned or: __ At least l 0 days prior to start of constructi o n (7460-2, Part 1) X Within 5 days after th e cons tru ct ion reaches its greatest he ig ht (7460-2, Part 2) -- Based on thi s evalu atio n , marking and li ghtin g are n o t necessa ry for aviation safety. Howeve r, if marking/ li ghting are accomplished o n a vo luntary bas is, we recommend it be installed and maintained in accordance with FAA Advisory c ircular 70/7460-1 K Change 2. Any he ight exceed ing 49 feet above ground level (560 feet above mean sea level), will r esu lt in a s ub s tant ial adverse effect and would warrant a Determination of Hazard to Air Navigati o n . Thi s determination exp ir es on 12119/2016 un l.ess : (a) th e construction is started (not necessarily completed) and FAA Form 7 460-2 , Notice of Actual Construction o r Alteration , is recei ved by thi s office. (b) extended, revised, or term inated by th e issuing office. P age I of5 (c) the construction is subject to the licensing authority of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and an application for a construction permit has been filed, as required by th e FCC, within 6 months of the date of thi s determination. In s uch case, the determination expires o n th e date prescribed by the FCC for completion of construction, or the date the FCC d en ie s the application. NOTE: REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF THE EFFECTIVE PERIOD OF THIS DETERMINATION MUST BEE-FILED AT LEAST 15 DAYS PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION DATE. AFTER RE-EVALUATION OF CURRENT OPERATIONS IN THE AREA OF THE STRUCTURE TO DETERMINE THAT NO SIGNIFICANT AERONAUTICAL CHANGES HAVE OCCURRED, YOUR DETERMINATION MAY BE ELIGIBLE FOR ONE EXTENSION OF THE EFFECTIVE PERIOD. This determination is based, in part, on the forego ing d escription which in c ludes spec ific co o rdinates , h eights, frequency(ies) and powe r. Any changes in coordinates, h e ights, and frequencies or use of greater power will vo id this determin atio n. Any future construction or alteration , including inc r ease to heights, power, o r the addition of other transmitters, requires separate notice to the FAA. Thi s determination does include te mporary construction equipm e nt such as cra nes, d e rricks, etc., which may b e use d during actual con struction of the s tructure. However, thi s equipment sha ll not exceed th e overall hei g hts as indicated above. Equipment which ha s a he ight greater than th e studied s tru cture requires separate notice to the FAA. This determination concerns the effect of thi s s tructure on th e safe and efficient use of navigable airspace by aircraft and does not relieve th e s ponso r of compliance respons ibi lities re latin g to any law, ordinance, or regulation of any Federal, State, or local government body. Any fai lure or malfunction that lasts more than thirty (30) minutes and affects a top light or fla shin g obstruction li ght, regardless of its position, should be re ported immediate ly to (877) 4 87-6867 so a Notice t o Airmen (NOT AM) can be issued . As soon as th e norma l operation is restored, notify the same number. A copy of thi s d etermination will be forwarded to the Federal Communications Commi ssion (FCC) because the structure is subject to their licensing authority. If we can be of further assistance, please contact our office at ( 425) 227-2791 . On a ny future correspondence concerning thi s matter, please refer to Aeronautical Study N umber 2015-ANM-6-0E. Signatu re Control No: 239147282-255652873 Daniel Shoemaker Specialist Attachment( s) Frequency Data Map(s) cc: FCC Page 2 of 5 (DNE) Frequency Data for ASN 2015-ANM-6-0E LOW HIGH FREQUENCY ERP FREQUENCY FREQUENCY UNIT ERP UNIT 698 806 MHz 1000 w 806 824 MHz 500 w 824 849 MHz 500 w 851 866 MHz 500 w 869 894 MHz 500 w 896 901 MHz 500 w 901 902 MHz 7 w 930 931 MHz 3500 w 931 932 MHz 3500 w 932 932.5 MHz 17 dBW 935 940 MHz 1000 w 940 941 MHz 3500 w 1850 1910 MHz 1640 w 1930 1990 MHz 1640 w 2305 2310 MHz 2000 w 2345 2360 MHz 2000 w Page 3 of 5 ·. ,. ; i i I -~······-.- ' i '· I' .. -.. l • >· .··· TOPO Map for ASN 2015-ANM-6-0E .... 'I Page 4 of 5 . ' .. ':·-· ··- -' ' .. ,_? j:-- Sectional Map for ASN 2015-ANM-6-0E ~r~------- Page 5 of5 B ENJAMIN r . D AwsoN I H. r E THOMAS M . ECKE LS, PE STEPHEN S. LOCKWOOD. PE DAVID J . PIN ION , PE ERIK c. SWANSON, PE THO~I AS S. GORTON , PE MICHAEL H . MEI·II GAN , PE H ATFI E LD & D A WSON CON SU LTING ELECTRICAL E NG INEERS 9500 GREEN W OO D AVE. N . S EATTLE, W AS HING TON 98 1 0 3 T ELEPHONE (206) 783-9 15 I FACS IMILE (206) 789-983 4 E-MAIL pini on @ hatd aw.com JAMES B . H ATFIELD . PE CONSULTANT M AURY L. H ATFIELD . PE ( 1942-20 09) PAUL W . L EONARD, PE (1925-201 1) NON -IONIZING ELECTROMAGNETIC EXPOSURE ANALYS IS AND ENGINEERING CERTIFICATION PREPARED FOR Verlzon Wireless "TRI SAHARA" PROPOSED W I RELESS FAC IL ITY AT CITY RESERVOIR SITE , DESERT PLATEAU DRIVE CITY OF PASCO FRANKLIN COUNTY, WASHINGTON JULY2015 2 INTRODUCTION Hatfield & Dawson Consulting Engineers has been retained to evaluate the proposed Verizon Wireless personal wireless telecommunications facility "TRI SAHARA" for compliance with current Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and local guidelines regarding public exposure to radio frequency (RF) electromagnetic fields (EMFs). The proposed Verizon facility will have antennas installed within a new CommScope stealth monopole tower at the water reservoir site off of Desert Plateau Drive, Pasco, in Franklin County, Washington 99301. According to information furnished by Verizon representatives , all of the Verizon antennas will be mounted and centered approximately 34 feet above grade and higher. The tower and all Verizon RF equipment will be surrounded by a chain link fence topped with barbed wire. Therefore it is unlikely that anyone other than authorized workers could approach near enough to any of the Verizon antennas to cause that person 's RF exposure to exceed FCC limits. ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED OPERATIONS Personal wireless and microwave antennas are directional in the vertical plane and project the majority of the transmitted RF energy towards the horizon and well above all nearby accessible areas. To avoid reflections and signal attenuation , the antennas are pointed away from any nearby obstructions. Because th e Verizon antennas will be orientated towards the horizon and away from habitable structures, RF exposure conditions within nearby buildings and near ground level due to the Verizon antennas will be well below the FCC public exposure limits . The operation of the proposed Verizon facility will NOT create significant RF exposure conditions in any occupancy, habitable area or publicly accessible area. Hatfield & Dawson Consulting E ngineers 3 EMISSION CHARACTERISTICS The proposed Verizon facility may operate within the 700 MHz Upper Block "C " frequency band , the 1.9 GHz Personal Communications Service (PCS) frequency bands , and the 2.1 GHz Advanced Wireless Service (AWS) frequency bands. CALCULATION OF MAXIMUM EXPOSURE CONDITIONS RF power densities and exposure conditions are computed in accordance with methods described in Evaluating Compliance with FCC Guidelines for Human Exposure to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields, OET Bulletin 65, August 1997. OET Bulletin 65 describes the methods established by the FCC for predicting compliance with FCC-specified exposure limits. Personal wireless and microwave facilities are required to comply with the FCC "Rules & Regulations" 47 CFR §1.1310, Radiofrequency radiation exposure limits. The following formula has been used to calculate the power densities at specific locations: S(mW/cm2) = 0.36 x ERP (watts) I (Distance in feet)2 This formula is derived from Equation 9 on page 21 of OET Bulletin 65. It includes the effect of reflections . The Effective Radiated Power (ERP) in a particular direction depends on the vertical and horizontal antenna patterns. A composite vertical antenna pattern is used to determine the predicted power density. This composite antenna pattern is a worst-case envelope that encompasses the maximums of the downward lobes of the vertical patterns of the Verizon antennas . H a tfi e ld & Dawson Consulting Engineers 4 It is expected that RF exposure conditions near ground level at the project site , within nearby buildings , and on all adjacent properties , due to the contributions from all of the tower-mounted antennas, will be well below the FCC Public Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE) limit. Installation of the new Verizon antennas will not cause any occupancy or public area to exceed the FCC limits for human exposure to radio frequency electromagnetic fields. FCC COMPLIANCE The FCC has determined through calculations and technical analysis that personal wireless and microwave facilities, such as those operated by Verizon , are highly unlikely to cause human RF exposures in excess of FCC guideline limits. The proposed Verizon personal wireless facility will be in compliance with FCC RF exposure rules and guidelines provided that direct access to the Verizon antennas is positively restricted. Because the proposed Verizon Wireless facility will be in compliance with federal rules , it will also be in compliance with local regulations concerning RF emissions. Transmission equipment for the proposed Verizon wireless facility is certified by the FCC under the equipment authorization procedures set forth in the FCC rules. This assures that the wireless facility will transmit within assigned frequency bands , and at authorized power levels. The proposed Verizon wireless facility will operate in accordance with all FCC rules regarding power, signal bandwidth , interference mitigation , and good RF engineering practices. The proposed Verizon wireless operations at the project site will not have a significant environmental impact as defined by the FCC Public MPE limits . Furthermore, the proposed Verizon facility will not cause any nearby wireless facilities to exceed NIER exposure standards. Hatfie ld & Dawso n Cons ultin g Eng in ee rs 5 COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL REGULATIONS Because the proposed Ve rizon Wireless facility will be in compliance with federal rules , it will also in compliance with local regulations concerning RF emissions. The following is the complete text of 47 U.S. C. § 332(c)(7)(B)(iv): "No State or local government or instrumentality thereof may regulate the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent that such facilities comply with the Commission's regulations concerning such emissions." CONCLUSIONS BASED ON CALCULATIONS AND REGULATIONS The proposed Verizon Wireless facility "TRI SAHARA" will be in compliance with current FCC and local rules regarding radio frequency interference and public exposure to radio frequency electromagnetic fields . This conclusion is based on information supplied by Verizon representatives, and estimates of future RF exposure conditions due to the proposed Verizon facility. The stated conclusions are based on FCC rules and recommendations , and the comparison of predicted RF conditions in specific areas with the corresponding safe exposure guidelines set forth in the FCC rules . The FCC exposure limits are based on recommendations by federal and private entities with the appropriate expertise in human safety issues . Under the Commission 's rules, licensees are required to ensure compliance with the limits for maximum permissible exposure (MPE) established by the FCC. These limits have been developed based on guidelines provided by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. (IEEE) and the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP). Both the NCRP and IEEE guidelines were developed by scientists and engineers with a great deal of experience and knowledge in the area of RF biological effects and related issues. Hatfield & Dawson Consulting Engineers 6 To ensure full compliance w ith current FCC rules regarding human exposure to radio frequency electromagnetic fields , the Ve rizon transmitters should be turned off whenever ma intena nce and repair personnel are required to work in the immediate vicinity of the Verizon antenna s. This safety procedure should apply to all existing and future wireless transmission facilities at the project site. All instances of antenna-related work require that the subject antennas be completely de-energized. QUALIFICATIONS I am a Senior Member of the IEEE. As a partner in the firm of Hatfield & Dawson Consulting Engineers I am registered as a Professional Engineer in the States of Washington, Oregon , California and Hawaii. I am an experienced radio engineer with over 30 years of professional engineering experience, whose qualifications are a matter of re co rd w ith the Federal Communications Commission, and I hold an FCC General Radiotelephone Operator License PG- 12-21740. All representations contained herein are true to the best of my knowledge. 13 July 2015 David J . Pinion , P.E. Hatfi e ld & D awson Cons ulting Engineers Network Engineering SAHARA-Radio Frequency (RF) Documentation Overview: ~ venz._onwireless Verizon Wireless 3245 158'h Ave SE MIS 231 Bellevue , WA 98008 Verizon Wireless strives to provide excellent wireless service with a network of cell sites that allows our customers to reliably place and receive mobile phone calls. In this particular case, we are trying to remedy capacity and coverage challenges in this area. Specifically, the Sahara site will provide capacity relief for the existing cell sites and produce better indoor coverage in the surrounding area. Construction of the proposed site entails a new 49' stealth structure , six (6) panel antennas, associated auxiliary equipment, supporting base station equipment, and a back-up natural gas generator. Coverage: In order to provide excellent Cellular service , which Verizon Wireless defines as -85 dBm or better, the antenna height and site location need to provide a line of sight to the roads , offices, and homes where our customers work and reside. Two sets of three antennas (a total of six antennas) are being proposed, in order to provide the necessary radio frequencies supporting all of Verizon Wireless voice and data services . Equipment cabinets will be placed within the proposed equipment area. The proposed antenna/tower height of 49' is the minimum height needed for the effective functioning of the proposed antennas. Due to the circumference of the stealth enclosure , we will need to space our antennas vertically at 39' and 49' tip heights instead of horizontally. If the antennas were any lower or further away, the signal would no longer be adequate for indoor service . Alternative Sites Reviewed: Verizon Wireless always reviews existing towers to see if adequate coverage can be obtained by co- location. No existing communications towers were in the immediate vicinity of the proposed tower location. Propagation Maps: There are several methods for determining where coverage gaps exist within a given network of wireless sites. One of these is through the use of propagation maps. The propagation map is a computer simulation of the strength of Verizon Wireless signals at a given height and location in the context of the network. Propagation maps are one tool for determining whether a proposed site will meet the coverage objective and what antenna height is needed to provide robust service for Verizon Wireless customers . The radio propagation tool is designed to take factors such as terrain , tree coverage, and existing buildings into account, so that it depicts a reliable estimate of coverage that would be provided by a proposed site. The propagation maps that follow show three levels of service, designated as the following colors : Green >= -80 dBm , a level of servi ce adequate for providing reliable coverage inside a building Yellow >= -95 dBm, a level of service adequate for providing reliable coverage outdoors or inside a car White<= -95 dBm , unreliable signal strength, may not be not capable of reliably making and holding a call depending on environment Exhibit 1A is a propagation map that shows the existing level of coverage in the proposed service area in the context of surrounding Verizon Wireless sites. • ···1':: . '" . -~ I·· IM -·-~ ...... l' ~ ~ """""•<" ( .•. ., :.L ~ ·~ Propo5ed "SAHA RA'' ; ·~'?/}/ lo<:a~on I ~ . .j ..... _'!""_... " .. ~,_ .'~> • ..,..;-... ,..··.-: / . RF Documentation -SAHARA Page 2 of 6 Exhibit 1 B shows the level of service that would be provided with the proposed site. Site Location: The location of the subject site has been selected based on its relationship with surrounding Verizon Wireless sites . Even though Verizon Wireless has a site 1.5 miles away from the proposed Sahara location, the distance and clutter (trees , houses, and terrain) will not allow the radio waves to propagate into the intended coverage area to provide excellent indoor service. The surrounding Verizon Wireless sites are also reaching their capacity limits for call traffic . Each site has a finite amount of capacity that is directly related to the amount of transmit power that the mobiles must generate to talk to the tower. The only way to effectively distribute this capacity resource is to build a site that is in close proximity to the users, therefor lowering the level of mobile phone transmitter power required on each device. RF Documentation -SAHARA Page 3 of6 Exhibit 1 C shows the location of the existing Verizon Wireless sites in the area (shown as green triangles on the ma below . (9 Del orme Topo North America no 10 www.del orme.com MN (15.1.E) (~) / ', .... \ 1 Ewua :z~ C-:u 7 ~-~ ... ... ("* .... __ , J .... ___ ;., ! . ~ ~ .. ... ~ft 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 Data Zoom 12~ RF Documentation-SAHARA Page 4 of 6 Antenna Diversity: Antenna diversity, also known as space diversity, is one method of enhancing wireless signal to improve the quality and reliability of a wireless link. Often , in urban environments such as the environment surrounding the subject site , there is not a clear line of sight between the antennas and customers ' handsets . In these cases, the signal may be reflected along multiple paths before it finally reaches the receiver. These reflections can result in phase shifts , time delays, attenuations , and signal distortion that the customer may experience as an echo or warbling in the signal , or the signal dropping altogether. Antenna diversity is especially effective at remedying these types of issues because multiple antennas provide several "observations " of the same signal. Each antenna will experience a different interference environment resulting in an added 5-8 dB in processing gain in the RF link budget. So , for example, if one antenna is experiencing a deep fade it is likely that another antenna physically separated, but in the same sector , will have sufficient signal. Providing receive signal diversity then , is absolutely necessary for providing robust signal at the proposed location . Spectrum: The Sahara site will utilize our PCS A5 & C3 1900 MHZ frequencies , 700 MHz L TE Upper C Block, and AWS A , B, and C blocks 2110-2130 MHz. It will basically be three wireless facilities located in the same physical equipment area , with separate antenna requirements for each frequency set as outlined below. For the Sahara site, each frequency set will provide voice over LTE and data services on LTE 4G MIMO. Common Name Rad1o Serv1ce Freque ncy B an d (MHz) Call Sign/lease 10 V e nzo n 'l\1reless iOO MH : 74 5 ·75 7 776 . 78 7 WOJQ694 Ve n:on V.J1retess '\WS ·1 ·no .· 7>0 WOGB2 3 1 2·2o .:··3o V en :o n .N1re le% .".loS · 1 •735. •7 40 WQPW444 2.35 ·2.40 V enzon W1r el e.~s B road ba n d PCS ·efi5 . ·9 ·o •§75. '990 WPOK58 7 v er za n .-'1ilr e l es~ B roa d ba nd PCS ·e5o. ·as s •£1 30·.945 WPQN806 V enzon W1 re 1 e~~ B roa d ban d FCS 'ti65 · · BiO KNLG764 •9J5· .9 50 Design: Each licensed frequency has specific propagation characteristics further influenced by hardware power limitations. The 750 MHz has better propagation characteristics than the 1900 MHz (PCS) and AWS band. The lower frequency bands received signal will be stronger at the mobile phone than the higher frequency signal if all are transmitted from the same base station with the same output power and same coding scheme. With the addition of the new L TE band and AWS licenses, and recognizing jurisdictional need to minimize the number of antennas per sector/site Verizon Wireless has made the design decision to utilize cross pole single band antennas for all frequencies. The cross-pole antennas can be thought of as two vertically stacked antennas in the same physical package . The aforementioned processing gain for spatial diversity in the RF link budget is reduced or eliminated depending upon the environment for all frequency sets . RF Documentation -SAHARA Page 5 of 6 Ideally an optimal design would utilize two phys ically separated antennas per frequency per sector. With four frequency sets this would lead to eight antennas per sector and thi rty two antennas for a four sector site such as this one . Verizon Wireless RF Design has made a conscious decisio n to minimize the antenna requirements at the expense of the RF link budget. The subject site has been designed with 9 antennas (3 per sector). This is the minimu m antenna requirement for this three sector site . Wireless E-911 Approximately 400 ,000 Wireless 911 calls are made every day nationwide, and this number continues to increase . (source: CTIA, the Wireless Association) Wireless E-911 service depends on reliable signal strength and a fairly dense network of antenna sites in order to function effectively. Becau se of our federally-mandated obligation to provide wireless E-911 service , signal reliab ility is paramount. Using multiple antennas with spatial diversity is an effective way to decrease the number of dro p-outs and lost connections to ensure that coverage in this area is robust and reliable. Summary: In summary, the proposed installation of a new 49' stealth structure would meet th e RF coverage objecti ve of the subject site. The proposed height of 49 ' is the minimum required for the effective functioning of the proposed telecommunication fac ility. Sincerely , 5Z- Scott Cashmore RF Engineer Verizon Wireless RF Docu mentatio n -SAHARA Page 6 of 6 PUBLIC TESTIMONY TURNED IN AT 7.16.15 MEETING - PHONE NUMBERS HAVE BEEN REDACTED FOR PRIVACY. REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MASTER FILE NO: Z 2015-002 HEARING DATE: 7/16/2015 ACTION DATE: 8/20/2015 APPLICANT: Envision Homes P.O . Box 3431 Pasco, WA 9930 1 REQUEST: REZONE: BACKGROUND Rezone from R-1 (Low-Density Residential) to R-3 (Medium-Density Residential) 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: Chapel Hill Phase 5, Tract B, less that portion dedicated for Chapel Hill Boulevard right-of-way General Location: The 5500 Block through the 5900 Block of Chapel Hill Boulevard Property Size: The site is approximately 4.25 acres 2. ACCESS: The site has unimproved access from Chapel Hill Boulevard. 3. UTILITIES: Municipal sewer and water lines are located in the future extension of Chapel Hill Boulevard. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is currently zoned R-1 (Low-Density Residential) and is vacant. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: NORTH: R-3 -Vacant (Future Park & Multi-family Residences) SOUTH: R-1 -Single-Family Residences EAST: R -1 -Single-Family Residences WEST: R-3 -Single-Family Residences 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for Mixed Residential uses. Goal LU-3-B encourages infill and (higher) density to protect open space and critical areas in support of more walkable neighborhoods. Goal LU-3-E encourages the city to designate areas for higher density residential development where utilities and transportation facilities enable efficient use of capital resources. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. Based on the SEPA checklist, the adopted City Comprehensive Plan, City development regulations, and other information, a threshold determination resulting in a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) has been issued for this project under WAC 197-11-158. ANALYSIS Envision Homes has applied to change the zoning classification of one 4.25 acre parcel from R-1 (Low-Density Residential) to R-3 (Medium-Density Residential) to allow for multi-family residential development. The subject site is a linear shaped tract fronting Chapel Hill Boulevard beginning at the intersection of Saratoga Lane ; extending east to Pimlico Drive. The end product desire d by the applicant is d escribed as a multi-family development similar to Columbia Villas on Road 76 at Sandifur Parkway where we see attached single-family dwellings divided only by the property line along a common wall; leaving a single dwe lling unit on each parcel, but giving the appearance of a duplex. This style of development is commonly referred to as zero lot-line development. The Pasco's Municipal Code does not offer a zero lot-line setback option. In the past accommodations have been made to permit this type of development through the use of multi-family zoning and platting. This allows the developer to take advantage of the smaller minimum lot sizes offered by multi- family zones. The R -3 zone permits minimum lot sizes of 5,500 ft2 • The City's Comprehensive Plan designates this site for Mixed Residential land uses which allows for a variety of residential zones/ densities ranging from RS-20 (Suburban) through R-3. Of the zones allowed under the Mixed Residential land use designation, R-3 zoning permits the highest residential density at a rate of one dwelling unit for every 3,000ft2 of land area or 14.5 units per acre. For comparison, the single-family R-1 zone p e rmits an approximate density of 6-units per acre. Currently the site totals approximately 185,130 ft2 in area; since the goal of the applicant is to create sellable units on individual parcels , residential density would be confined to the minimum lot size of 5,500 ft2 • After the required right-of- way dedication the site area would total approximately 156,263 fF, allowing up to 28 dwelling units. Under the parameters described by the applicant the proposed change in zoning would gain the applicant seven additional units compared to development permitted under the existing R-1 zoning. The 4.25-acre site is undeveloped vacant land. Adjacent roadways are entirely unimproved. Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, utility lines and other improvement extensions will be required before the building permits will be issued. The applicant indicates the expense associated with right-of-way improvements required to extend Chapel Hill Boulevard with municipal sewer and water would be cost prohibitive for single-family development. The applicant is only able to utilize the street improvements along the south side of the street. Chapel Hill Boulevard in this location is identified in the Major Street Plan as a collector roadway. The site lies at the eastem terminus of Chapel Hill Boulevard which is not planned to extend east of the site; rather Chapel Hill Blvd. will connect to Pimlico Drive to create a loop . 2 It is common urban p lanning practice to a ssign higher-d e nsity r esid e ntial zon es to transitional areas where they serve as buffers between highe r and l e sse r intense land uses such as we see here with the highway to the north and single-family homes immediately to the south. The site is separated from Highway 1-182 only by a narrow parcel of vacant land zoned R -3. The site is located 300-feet south of Highway 1-182 and is adjacent to existing single-family residential development to the south. Due to the sites' physical location between the highway and existing homes, d evelopment on this site will inevitably act as a physical buffer between the highe r intensity highway and lower intensity homes. The site is visible from the highway. Bolstering development of vacant parcels which are visibl e from the highway has an enhanced effect on the general p e rception of the economic h ealth of a community. Eliminating vacant land on sites visibl e from the main thoroughfares is in the best interest of Pasco 's economic development. Concern is often expressed about impacts to lower density property values when n earby properties are being considered for higher density zoning. Past searches of the Franklin County Auditor's records in areas of the community where multi- family development is located adjacent to lower density development have indicat e d there is no diminution in the value of the surrounding single-family homes. Studies by the Urban Land Institute (Higher-Density Developme nt Myth and Fact, 2005, Urban Land Institute ) confirm this fact. Even so neighbors are often concerned about the impact of higher density development upon the charact e r of the surrounding neighborhood. To address those concerns The Planning Commission could consider a concomitant agreement setting a minimum lot size , permitting only one dwelling per lot, requiring several architectural features on each elevation and r equiring articulated front e l evation to provide a distinct identity for each unit. The initial review criteria for considering a rezone application are explained m PMC . 25.88.030. The criteria are liste d below as follows: 1. The date the existing zone b ecame effective: The current zoning classification was established 12 years ago prior to the platting process in 2003. 2. The c hanged conditions, which are alleged to warrant other or additional zonmg: The Mixe d -Residential land use designation allows assignment of a variety of residential zones/ densities ranging from RS-2 0 (Suburban) through R -3. Of the allowable zones under the Mixed R esid ential designation, the R -3 zone pennits the highest residential density at a rate of one dwelling unit for every 3, 000ft2 of land area or 14 . 5 units per acre. 3 In 2003 the Chapel Hill was planned as a mixed use subdivision the assignment of commercial, multi-family and single-family zones. This mix of zoning classification assignments set the tone for the subdivision to provide a variety of land use opportunities. Since the establishment of the original zoning the Crossings at Chapel and the Village at Chapel Hill have been constructed along with several hundred single-family homes creating the mixed residential component to the subdivision. The subdivision is basically built out except for the parcels on either side of the undeveloped portion of Chapel Hill Boulevard. 3. Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health , safety and general welfare: Changing the zoning classification of the site will foster development of a largely underdeveloped parcel of land within close proximity to the city's heaviest travelled freeway . There is merit in the elimination of dusty, weed covered parcel within an existing neighborhood to eliminate nuisance conditions. The construction of buildings on the parcel will add a buffer between the existing single-family dwellings to the south and the freeway to the north. Limiting development of the parcel to one dwelling per lot will also provide a transition area between the single-family dwellings to the south and future apartment development to the north. 4. The effect it will have on the value and character of the adjacent property and the Comprehensive Plan: A change in zoning classification will have little impact on the R-3 property to the north. The rezone may result in a benefit to the R-1 property to the south by encouraging the elimination of nuisance conditions created by the dusty vacant parcel in question. Conditioning the rezone to require additional architectural features and ensuring only one dwelling will be permitted per lot will assist in maintaining the value and character of the existing neighborhood. The rezone is consistent with the intent of the Comprehensive encouraging a full range of residential environments. The proposal is supported by the Comprehensive Plan 's Mixed-Residential Land Use Designation which includes R -3 (Medium -Density Residential) as a compatible zoning classification. 5. The effect on the property owner or owners if the request is not granted: Without increasing the allowable residential density site development may not be cost effective causing the developer to abandoned efforts to make further improvements in the neighborhood. 4 INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Findings of fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial findings drawn from the background and analysis section of the staff report. The Planning Commission may add additional findings to this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record hearing. 1. The site is currently zoned R-1 (Low-Density Residential). 2. The 4.25-acre site is vacant. 3. The site location extends from the 5500 Block through the 5900 Block of Chapel Hill Boulevard. 4 . The applicant is requesting R-3 (Medium-Density Residential) zoning be assigned to the site to allow zero lot-line single-family residential development. 5 . The property to the north of the site is a vacant parcel zoned R-3 (Medium- Density Residential without any restrictions). 6. 1-182 is located 400 feet north of the site. 7. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the site for Mixed-Residential uses which allows assignment of a range of residential zones including R-3 (Medium- Density Residential). 8. The R-3 zone allows a maximum residential density rate of one dwelling unit for every 3 ,000 square feet of land area. 9. The R-3 zone allows minimum lot sizes of 5,500 square feet. 10. Chapel Hill Boulevard adjacent to the site is undeveloped. 11. Right-of-way for the south half of Chapel Hill Blvd. must be dedicated to the City at the time of platting. 12. The Chapel Hill subdivision contains a mix of single-family and multi-family and commercial zoning. 13. Properties to the south of the site contain single-family dwellings. TENTATIVE CONCLUSIONS BASED ON INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a zoning amendment the Planning Commission must develop findings of fact from which to draw its conclusions based upon the criteria listed in PMC 25.88 .060. The criteria are as follows: 1. The proposal is in accordance with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. 5 The proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and several Plan policies and goals. Land Use Policy LU-3-B encourages "infill" development while H -2 -A suggests the City permit a full range of residential environments. Housing Policy (H-B-A) encourages standards that control the scale and density of accessory buildings and homes to maintain compatibility with other residential uses. The effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity will not be materially detrimental if a concomitant agreement is established requiring enhance building features and specifying a minimum lot size. 2. There is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole . There is merit in providing an increased range of housing opportunities available in those areas currently served by municipal utilities to enable efficient use of capital resources. The proposal is supported by land use goals and policies contained in the Comprehensive Plan. Establishment of medium-density residential zoning will encourage development thereby eliminating a dusty parcel adjacent to developed properties. Additionally development of the site will provide a buffer from the freeway to the north and a transition area between the R-3 properties to the north and the single-family homes to the south. 3. Conditions should be imposed in order to mitigate any significant adverse impacts from the proposal . Because the properties to the south are developed with single-family homes conditions should be imposed to limit development on the rezone site to one dwelling per lot and said dwelling should contain articulated front elevations and several additional architectural features on each evaluation. A minimum lot size should also be established 4. A Concomitant Agreement should be entered into between the City and the petitioner, and if so, the terms and conditions of such an agreement . A concomitant agreement is needed to incorporate the items discussed in conclusion number 3 above into the rezone ordinance. RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move to close the hearing on the proposed rezone and initiate deliberations and schedule adoption of findings of fact, conclusions and a recommendation to the City Council for the August 20, 2015 meeting. 6 Vicinity Map Itetn: Rezone R -1 to R-3 Applicant: Envision Hotnes LLC File #: Z 2015-002 Land Use Map Item: Rezone R-1 to R-3 Applicant: Envision Hornes LLC File #: Z 2015-002 II..,y /,182 ~-- PlMLlcoDR Single-Family Homes I '; 1 r .... -I I f • Zontng Map Itetn: Rezone R -1 to R-3 Applicant: Envision Homes LLC File #: Z 2015-002 ~ IJ,.,Jr 1~]82 rAt-ed/11/J:i ~--3 --J)eJlsfty ~e . 'SJdeh~. ~~(Jalj 1 1 I , (Low-Density Residential) I I I •)))))" L PIMLICO DR ~ " ., I ·' 'i' ' I ' ·' I · ( 1 1' I ' ·, \ July 91h, 2015 David I. McDonald, In reference to your letter regarding the Not ice of Public He arin g for the 5500 Block through 5900 Block of Chapel Hill to be rezoned to R-3 (Medium De ns ity Residential) from R-1 (Low Density Residen tia l), I am very concerne d and strongly opposed to r ezoni ng this location. As a homeowner on the south side of Chap el Hill Blvd , my property would be severely devalued due to a medium density residential building loo kin g down on my property . Prior to purchasing my home, I called the City of Pasco t o verify the zoning of this particular property in question. Had I known that it was going be rezoned I would not have purchased th is property. Across Chape l Hill Blvd . from the proposed si te is another 10 acre parcel that is for sale w ith the intent of building multifamily properties as well. The impact of traffic on Chapel Hill Blvd., Pimlico Dr., and Argent Rd. is a huge co nc ern and is compromising the safety of those that live in the area. My greatest conce rn if thi s property is rezoned is the privacy an d security of my family. How wou ld you feel if there was a townhouse at least 20-30 ft . above your backyard? I would like to know if there are any other sin gle family homes in the city of Pasco that have multifamily properties that look into th eir homes and know how it impacts their day t o day lives and property va l ues. If there aren 't any neighborhoods in this p red i came nt then why would you consider changing ours? Residents in our are a put ou r trust in En v isi on Homes and was sold no t on ly o n the qua lity of our home but our life as well. Like myse lf, when Env i sion Homes purchased the land they knew what it was zoned for and t ook a financial risk . With property values higher now than w h en t h ey bui lt o ur hom es, their investment should "pencil" better tha n before. 1 hope that my concerns are taken into account when you meet on July 16, 2015 on this particular issue. Si ncere ly, 7'_J_Af<k- JEI2A D &rzorff July 15,2015 The City of Pasco Community & Economic Development Department 525 N. 3rd Avenue Pasco, WA 99301 Re: Chapel Hill Phase 6 Re-Zone Application Dear Dave, I wanted to take some time to meet some of the concems raised by some of the neighbors of Chapel Hill Phase 6 as we approach the hearing tomonow evening. As a developer, we understand that the thought of a re-zone can be unsettling for current homeowners . They aren't sure of what type of product will be built, how it will affect their property value, or what the new neighbors will be like. Rather than looking at any benefits of an approved re-zone to R-3, the neighborhood tends to focus on the perceived negative impacts. I want to assure you and the neighbors that we will be building attractive, quality homes similar to the homes we previously built. We will do this by meeting all of the criteria in the CC&R's and the Architectural Review Guidelines. Our goal is to enhance the neighborhood and provide a smooth transition between the futme park and apartments that will be on the north side of Chapel Hill Boulevard. Envision Homes is committed to the orderly development of the Chapel Hill project, which includes the continuation and completion of Chapel Hill Boulevard east of Saratoga. This portion of the subdivision has been inactive longer than anticipated, and longer than the stakeholders in the area would have liked. Within the last year there has been some momentum in the area and a portion of the road along the City's future park was completed under a developers agreement by private development. This allowed for 28 feet of asphalt and a portion of the City 's water mainline to be installed, but still leaves Chapel Hill Boulevard unfinished and the utilities within the roadway prism incomplete. It is our opinion that with this proposal to rezone the property it will give Envision Homes the necessary working capital and returns that would be needed in order to complete our portion of Chapel Hill Boulevard which consists of completing the southern pot1ion of the roadway connection between Saratoga and Pimlico. By completing this pmtion of roadway the City and residents would see the benefit of decreased emergency vehicle response time and access routes to residents in the area, it will also provide the City with the necessary water system and irrigation system looping for the area which is a 2200 Sixth Avenue Suite 523 , Seattle, WA 98121 Phone: 206 .624.7888 Fax : 206.512 .3121 Web: www .envisionWA .com Envision Land & Development Llcense#ENVISLD931JL benefit. The sewer line will be completed within the roadway prism of Chapel Hill Boulevard and will be able to provide service to propet1ies on both the not1h and south sides of the roadway. Continued development of the property would also decrease the blowing dust and weeds that can come from the disturbed ground that is currently sitting vacant, and would allow for the installation of yards and landscaped street frontages . With the roadway complete and established access routes and utilities in place along Chapel Hill there will be increased interest in completing the vacant properties that are in place along the north side of the roadway as well as an oppm1Unity for the City to complete the improvements to the park that is planned at the intersection of Saratoga and Chapel Hill Boulevard . The completion of this park has been long awaited by all the residents in this area and would be a benefit to everyone. We feel that by granting this rezone we can develop a residential single-family product that is compatible with the neighborhood that is already in place and be compatible with the R3 zoning that already exists on the north side of Chapel Hill Boulevard. Our proposed use would be a good transition between the more intense uses that are cunently in place along the nm1h side of Chapel Hill and could be continued north of our proposal and the more traditional Rl single-family uses that are present south of this project. We thank you in advance for your consideration. Si~;Jy/- Austm Roupe Envision Land & Development 2200 Sixth Avenue Suite 523, Seattle, WA 98121 Phone: 206.624.7888 Fax : 206.512.3121 Web : www.envisionWA.com Envision Land & Development License #ENVISLD931JL I -· --1 . - ·-~- ,. ' .. ' ~ - Housing Policy Debate • Volume 7, Iss ue 1 37 ©Fannie Mae Foundation 1996. All Rights Reserved. Homeownership and Neighborhood Stability William M. Rohe University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Leslie S. Stewart Research Triangle In stitute Abstract A major objective of many n eighborhood revita li zation programs is to increase homeownership. Conventional wisdom holds t h at this is one of the best ways to s tabilize areas in decline. This article ques tions convention by presenting a conceptual model of how homeownership rates might affect various indicators of neighborhood stability and by determining whether there is support for this model in the literature. The article a l so presents a n origina l analysis of the relations hip between homeown ership rates and two measures of neighborhood s tability. The lite rature revi ew find s considerable s upport for an association between h omeownership a nd both improved property maintenance and l onger lengths of tenure. The analysis of cen s u s data s imil arly indicates less res idential mobility a nd g rea ter property value appreciation in areas with g reater hom e - ownership. Although initial values a nd city wide value ch a n ges appear to h ave muc h stronge r effects on changes in property values than the tract home- ownership rate, modest ch a nges in homeowne r s hip r ates a r e clearly associated with increased prope rty values. Keywords: Community development/revitali zation; Homeowners hip; Neighborhood Introduction Overwhelmingly t h e city dweller is not a homeowner, and since a transitory habit does not generate binding tradi- tions and sentiments, only rarely i s h e truly a neighbor. -Lewis Wirth (1937, 17) For a man who owns his own home acquires with it a new dignity. He begins to take pride in what is his own, and pride in conserving and improving it for his children. He be comes a more steadfast and concerned citizen ofhis community. He becomes more sel f- confident and self-re liant. The mere act of becoming a PUBLIC TESTIMONY TURNED IN AT 7.16.15 MEETING 38 William M. Rohe and Leslie S. Stewart homeowner transforms him. It gives him roots, a sense of belonging, a true stake in his community and well being. -Senator Charles Percy (1966, 2725B) Expanding home ownership is vitally important to our country, because home ownership is critical both to i ndi- vidual economic opportunity and also to the building of strong communities. -Henry Cisneros (1995, 3) These three quotes typify the common, long-held belief that, compared with renters, homeowners are better citizens, better neighbors, and even better persons. This belief can be traced to the very beginning of American culture. The dominant view of the colonists was that property ownership was a good indication of a person's moral worth. In fact, tenants were not allowed to participate in federal elections until 1860 (Dreier 1982). The view that property owners are better has pers isted through- out the years. Today, government-supported homeownership programs are often justified on the grounds that they benefit society as well as the individuals involved . Homeowners are believed to be more involved in civic affairs and to maintain their properties at a highe r standard. These activities, in turn, are thought to lead to more stable neighborhoods. The relationship b etween homeownership and neighborhood stability is taken for granted by hous ing practitioners and others involved in n e i g hborhood revitalization programs. A major objec - tive of those programs is often to increase the proportion of homeowners to stabilize or upgrade the area. Because it has b een taken for granted, the purported relation- s hip between homeowners hip rates and neighborhood stability has escaped close scrutiny. Many questions have no clear an- swers: What empirical support is there for a relationship b etween homeownership rates and various indicators of neigh- borhood stability? How does homeownership lead to g reater stability? Are a ny stabilizing influences of increased homeowner- ship a result of the persons who are attracted to that form of tenure, or is there something about homeownership that changes a person's behavior? In this article, we explore the relationship between homeownership and neighborhood stability by (1) d eveloping a conceptual mode l of the relationship, (2) reviewing the existing literature for s upport of the various links in the model, and Homeownership and Neighborhood Stability 39 (3) presenting an original analysis of the relationship between homeownership and two measures of neighborhood stability. Conceptual model of homeownership and neighborhood stability In claims about homeownership and neighborhood stability, the terms neighborhood and stability are rarely defined; it is not clear what homeownership is supposed to be stabilizing. Studies of neighborhood-level issues have used a variety of definitions for neighborhood, and what people consider to be their neighbor- hood can include the area within a 10-minute walk of home or t h e area encompassing all of a resident's key nodes of activity (e .g., grocery store, school, bank, church) near home . Studies of s p ecific cities or regions have sometimes used these more fluid definitions of a neighborhood or the d efinitions established by city planning d epartments. National studies, however, have usually relied on census tracts or other combinations of blocks as the best available proxy for a neighborhood. Also, the term neighborhood stability is somewhat misleading. When people use this term in the context of the effects of homeownership, they are often referring to what might be more accurately termed neighborhood health. Although they may be concerned with stabilizing conditions in relatively problem-free areas, they certainly are not interested in stabilizing conditions in areas that h ave sever e physical and social problems. Rather, they are interested in how increasing the homeownership rate might change these areas for the better. The argument seems to be that increased homeowners hip rates in areas t h at are experi- encing problems will lead to neighborhood h ealth , defined in terms of improved physical and social conditions and higher property values. For the purpose of this article, however, we will continue to u se the term neighborhood s tability because it is more commonly used. At l east four aspects of neighborhoods might be stabili zed by homeownership: 1. Length of tenure of the current r eside nts 2. Property values 3. Physical condition of properties 4. Social conditions in the neighborhood , such as school drop- out or crime rates 40 William M. Rohe a nd Leslie S. Stewart Although these measures of stability may be positively corre- l ated at the aggr egate l evel , particular n e ighborhoods can be judged stable on some indicators and uns table on others. A neighborhood may have rapid turnover of residents, for example, but be stable in all other respects. A related i ssue is that there are no clear criteri a for defining stability and instability. Mo st neighborhoods are changing on at least one of these four indica tors. What a mount of change is within normal or acceptable limits, and what amount is beyond those limits? Also, s hould sta bility or change in a neighborh ood b e define d r e lative to som e l a r ger geographic unit, such as t h e city or metropolitan statistical area (MSA), or should i t be d e - fined in absolute terms? Finally, should we be as concerned about large positive changes in stability indicators, s uch as property values, as w e are about n egative changes? Increasing h omeownership may result in dis placement and gentrification, which negatively aff ect at l east some of the househ ol ds in a neig hborhood. Mos t of the claims concerning homeownership and neighborhood s tability ignore this possible consequence. Building on a preliminary literature review, we developed a co n ceptu a l model linking h omeown ership with neighborhood stability (see figure 1). The model starts with the tenure deci- sions made by households. It is important to understand t h e factors t hat influence a household's d ecision to rent or own its dwelling unit . Those d ecid ing to purch ase their homes are differ- ent from renters in a number of social ch aracteristics. Thus, any increase in neighborhood stability may be a result of the types of h ou seholds that are drawn to homeownership rather than the experi ence of ~omeownership itself. The model also suggests that h omeownership a l ter s the domestic property interests of house- h olds. Unlike renters, h omeowners h ave economic (or exchange) interests in their property. They may a l so have heightened u se (or consumption) interests because it i s more costly and difficul t for homeowners to move. These additional interests in d omestic property, the model sug- gests, l ead to greater social interaction within, and p sychologi cal identification with, the n eighborhood. Homeowners may b e more likely to participate in community organizations designed to protect t heir interests, more like ly to get to know their neigh- bors, and more likely to develop a strong sense of community. The additional property inte r ests along with heig htened socia l interaction and sense of community affect both the extent of property maintenance and the demands for public and private Determinants of home ownership i Homeownership interests • E co nomic interests • Use interests F igure 1. Conceptual Model: Effect of Homeownership on Neighborhood Stability ....................................................................................................... !..,_ Actions of other residents and outsiders, e.g., credit flows , media portrayals, public policies • Participation in community organizations f------,>j • Social interaction • Sense of co mmunity • Proper ty mainte nance Neighborhood • De mands on conditions city s ervices Residential satisfaction ~ Neighborhood stability • Length of tenure • Property values • Physical conditions • Social co nditions :I: 0 8 <t> 0 :6 t:l <t> ;;; :. "0 Ql ::l 0.. z <t> a'Q" ~ 0'" 0 ; 0 0 0.. U1 ..... Ql 8': --· ~ ~ ..... 42 William M. Rohe and Leslie S. Stewart services. Better maintenance and increased demands on institu- tions outside the neighborhood-such as city government, finan- cial institutions, and real estate companies-affect neighborhood conditions directly and indirectly through their influence on the actions of outside institutions whose policies affect neighborhood conditions. The model also suggests that improve d neighborhood conditions lead to higher levels of residential satisfaction and ultimate ly to greater neighborhood stability, as defined by longer lengths of tenure, stable property values, improve d property upkeep, and stable social conditions. Testing the conceptual model through a review of the literature We u sed this model to organize our r eview of the available litera- ture . We searche d for theoretical and em pirical literature on each of the implied relations hips, represented by arrows in figure 1. Who beco mes a homeowner ? One confo unding factor in research on homeownership is the self-sel e c t ion involved in who owns and who r ents. Because house holds cannot b e r andomly assigned to one form of tenure or the other, it is difficult to determine whether differences in the b e haviors of owners and renters result from their different property interests or from the characteristics that influence tenure decis ions. Thus, t h ese characteristics must be understood and taken into account in our consideration of the effects of homeownership on neighborhood stability. The empirical literature on t he determinants of homeownership points to three sets of factors underlying t he homeownership d ecision: socioeconomic characteristics of the household, expecta- tions of household mobility, and local market cond itions. Virtu- ally all the studies find that the decision to own is positively associated with household income, family size, marital status, and t he age of the head of household, even after controlling for m any other variables (Carliner 1974; Chambers and Diamond 1988; Cooperstein 1989; Dreier 1982; Henderson and Ioannides 1987; Linneman and Wachter 1989; Megbolugbe and Linneman 1993; Moore 1991; Ong and Grigsby 1988). Hom eowners hip a nd Neighborhood Stability 43 A smaller number of studies suggest that wealth, income tilt (a measure of the upward trend in income ), and permanent income (a measure of the longer term stability of income) are also positively associated with the decision to purchase a home (Henderson and Ioannides 1986; Linneman and Wachter 1989; Wachter and Megbolugbe 1992). Age ,· marital status, and family size are components of the life cycle concept and indicate that families with or expecting children generally prefer to own a single-family home .1 The income and wealth variables, on the other hand, indicate a capacity to own. Race and ethnicity are also important predictors of homeowner- ship, even when income, family status, and other socioeconomic variables are taken into account (Carliner 1974; Dreier 1982; Henderson and Ioannides 1987; Megbolugbe and Linneman 1993 ). Blacks and Hispanics are less likely to own, probably because of discrimination in the lending and real estate indus- tries, but cultural differe nces in the importance placed on homeownership may also play a role. Previous and expecte d mobility has also been found to influence the decision to purchas e. Those who have moved often and those who plan on moving again in the near future are less likely to buy, other things being equa l (Brown 1981; Chambers and Dia- mond 1988; Linneman and Wachter 1989; Shelton 1968; Wachte r and Megbolugbe 1992). The most likely reason is the t rans action costs a s sociated with both buying and selling real estate. Given a moderately appre ciating hous ing market, it often takes three or more years of residence to r e ach the break-even point (She l t on 1968). Finally, local market factors can influence the decision to buy. The availability of units suitable for owner occupancy, the ave r- a ge price of dwelling units, housing price inflation , and the relative cost of owning versus renting all have been found to affect home purchase decisions (Brown 1981; Carliner 1974; Henderson and Ioannides 1987; Linneman and Wachter 1989; Megbolugbe and Linneman 1993). Homeownershipis more likely where there is a high proportion of owner-occupied units; gre ater supply creates a greater opportunity to own. Homeownership i s lower in areas with high housing costs; although if an area is 1 This pre ference i s largely due to t h e ame nities typically ass ociate d wit h s ingle-family units-s uch as more inte rior s pace and a yard-and to the high proportion of single -family units t hat a r e for sale, not for r e nt. According to t he 1991 Ame rican Hous ing Survey, 8 4 .9 pe r cent of all s ingle-famil y units were owner-occupied (or v aca nt and for s ale ), whil e only 15.1 p e rce nt w e r e renter-occupied (or va cant and for r e nt). 44 William M. Rohe and Leslie S. Stewart also experiencing rapid price appreciation, homeownership may be higher because people see an opportunity to make a good investment. Finally, homeownership is higher in areas where there is a smaller gap between the cost of owning and the cost of renting. Thus , homeowners and renters are clearly different in their socioeconomic characteristics and mobility expectations, and local market conditions are important in determining who owns and who rents. Although many studies on the effects of home- ownership statistically control for some of these differences, t he influence of self-selection is impossible to rule out. That is to say, causal relationships between homeownership and e ither indi- vidual behaviors or indicators of neighborhood stability are impossible to establish with confidence. Homeownership and property interests The potential effects of homeownership on neighborhood stability are influenced by the different interests that owners, landlords, and renters have in residential property. Each of the three groups gains different advantages by owning or occupying resi- dential property. Property interests can b e divided into two general categories: economic interests and u se interests. Economi c interests relate to the potential for financial gain and wealth accumulation. Use interests relate to the enjoyment, satisfaction, and other noneco- nomic benefits of residing in a particular house or apartment. These two categories of interests can b e divided. Davis (1991 ), for example, identifies three economic interests (equity, liquid- ity, and legacy) and three use interests (security, amenity, and autonomy). Homeowners, landlords , and renters have different combinations of interests in residential property. Unlike either renters or landlords, homeowners are generally interested in both economic and use interests ; they hope to build wealth through property appreciation and also to enjoy and socially benefit from their residence. Landlords, particularly nonresident landlords, are generally interested in the economic return through present income or property appreciation. Renters are mainly interested in the use value of property; they are primarily concerned with the enjoyment and other noneconomic benefits of residing in a particular dwelling. Homeowne rship and Neighborhood Stability 45 The interests of these three groups suggest and explain differ- ences in the behavior of their members. Homeowners might be expected to be the most active in maintaining or improving neighborhood conditions because they will benefit both economi- cally and socially if these activities are successful. Moreover, the use interests of homeowners mean that they sometimes take actions that are not economically rational. They may, for ex- ample , make improvements whose costs will not be recouped at the time of sale. Or they may fight gentrification, even though it is in their economic self-interest. With fewer interests at stake, both landlords and tenants might be expected to be less active in maintenance and improvement. Landlords have economic interests , but their everyday domestic experiences may not be directly affected by the condition of their properties or the surrounding neighborhoods. Tenants have use interests in their dwelling units , but their economic well-being is not as obviously affected by declining conditions in the dwelling unit or neighborhood. Also, moving is relatively easy for tenants, although the loss of social networks and familiar surroundings should not be undervalued . In the sections that follow, we assess the empirical support for the behaviors predicted by the domestic property interest analysis. Homeownership, social participation, and sense of community One way that homeownership may influence neighborhood sta- bility is through homeowners' social participation in and attach- ment to the local community. To protect their use and economic interests, homeowners may be more likely to participate in local neighborhood organizations and to associate informally with local residents. Participation in local organizations should bol- ster their capacity to ward off outside threats by both public and private entities and inside t hreats such as poor property mainte- nance by individual property owners. In addition, frequent interaction with neighbors may keep homeowners up to date on threats to neighborhood stability and result in social pressure to maintain property at some minimum standard. The economic and use interests of homeowners, and their ten- dency to move less often than renters, may also lead them to feel a greater sense of commitment to their local communities. Ac- cording to Davis (1991, 87), "the relational advantages of 46 William M. Rohe and Leslie S. Stewart domestic property link together neighboring parcels and neigh- boring actors in a 'community of fate'. Those who have a stake in property have a stake in place as well." What evidence is there for these claims of greater social participation and commitment to the community? The empirical evidence indicates that homeowners are indeed more likely than renters to participate in local organizations, even after controlling for income, education , and other socioeco- nomic characteristics (Ahlbrandt and Cunningham 1979; Baum and Kingston 1984; Cox 1982; Ditkovsky and van Vliet 1984; Fischer et al. 1977; Hunter 1975; Jeffers and Dobos 1984; Kingston, Thompson, and Eichar 1984; Lyons and Lowery 1989; Rohe and Stegman 1994; Saunders 1990; Steinberger 1981; Taub et al. 1977; Wandersman 1981). Only one of the studies reviewed failed to find a statistically significant association between homeownership and participation (Kingston , Th ompson, and Eichar 1984). These studies also suggest that participation increases with age, education, income, and the perception of neighborhood problems (Cox and McCarthy 1980; Hunter 1975; Rohe and Stegman 1994; Taub et al. 1977; Tomeh 1973 ). The weight of the evidence a l so supports an associat ion between homeownership and informal participation, such as frequency of interactions with neighbors, although this evidence is not as extensive or consistent as it is for participation in l ocal organiza- tions. We found five studies that report a positive relationship between homeownership and informal social part icipation (Baba and Austin 1989; Baum and Kingston 1984; Fischer 1982; Hunter 1975; Jeffers and Dobos 1984 ), two studies that show no statistically significant relationship (Fischer et a l. 1977; Taub et al. 1977), and two studies that s how a negative relationship between homeownership and informal social interaction (Rohe and Stegman 1994; Saunders 1990). Of these last two studies, one was conducted in Britain and relied on bivariate analysis only, and the other involved a group of relatively new home- owners in central-city neighborhoods. Over a longer time, their informal social interactions may more closely resemble those found in the majority of studies, since lengt h of residence is associated wit h the amount of informal interaction (Baba and Austin 1989; Fischer 1982; Jeffers and Dobos 1984; Kasarda and Janowitz 1974). Also, considerable evidence supports. a positive association be- tween participation in local organizations and informal interac- tion, although the direction of this relationship is not clear Home owne rship a nd Neighborhood Sta bility 47 (Ahlbrandt and Cunningham 1979; Greensberg, Rohe, and Will- iams 1985; Hunter 1975; Jeffers and Dobos 1984; Kasarda and Janowitz 1974). These two activities probabl y have a reciprocal influence, with one type of involvement leading to increased involvement in the other. Research on the relationship between homeownership and neigh- borhood commitment (as measured by questions about effective attachment to the area) is relatively sparse but does indicate that homeowners have a stronger commitment to their local area than renters do (Ahlbrandt and Cunningham 1979; Austin and Baba 1990; Fischer et al. 1977). In addition, participation in local organizations has been found to be associated with higher levels of neighborhood commitment (Ahlbrandt and Cunningham 1979; Babchuk and Edwards 1965; Litwak 1961; Podolefsky and DuBow 1980; Wandersman , Jakubs, and Giamartino 1981). Homeownership, property maintenance, and demands on public and private organizations There are a variety of reasons that homeowners might be ex- pected to maintain their dwelling units at a higher standard than l andlords and tenants (Galster 1987a). First, the condition and overall attractiveness of a dwelling unit, particularly if it is owned , reflects the householder's social status and personal characteristics. As Downs (1981, 466) notes, "since these [non- housing-related] status symbols are not recognized in our soci- ety, a household's place of residence becomes a central mani- festation of social status." Renters can blame poor property maintenance on their landlords , but homeowners must assum e full responsibility for the condition of their dwelling units . Second, as noted above , homeowners have stronger social ties to their neighbors than either tenants or landlords do and are more likely to be subject to social pressure to maintain their proper- ties at some minimum level. As noted by Taub, Taylor, and Dunham (1984, 127), "people's actions are not entirely indepen- dent of the social context .... Many people are socially pressured into upkeep spending because they do not want their home to be one of the worst looking on the block." Third, homeowners are more likely than landlords to rely on their own labor in making home repairs and improvements. Thus, the out-of-pocket costs of these repairs and improvements are reduced. 48 William M . Rohe and Leslie S. Stewart Fourth , homeowners can accurately predict the kinds of repairs and improvements that will enhance their enjoyment of the property. Given limited experience with a unit and its occupants, a landlord may have a more difficult time predicting what re- pairs and improvements will be valued by the tenants. Finally, for homeowners, the connection between the care of their dwelling unit and financial return upon termination of occupancy is more direct. The financial effect of poor care for tenants is typically limited to the amount of their security de- posit; homeowners have no such upper limit. Research consistently shows that homeowners are more likely than landlords to undertake repairs and that they spend more on them (Galster 1983, 1987a; Grigsby 1963; Mayer 1981; Peterson et al. 1973). The studies by Galster and by Mayer provide the most convincing evidence because they control for the character- istics of the occupants as well as the properties. Some studies also indicate that resident landlords maintain their properties at a higher level than absentee landlords (Mayer 1981; Schafer 1977). These results have led Galster (1987a, 1990), Grigsby (1963), and others to recommend increasing the rate of homeownership to improve housing conditions in lower income areas. Galster (1987a, 296), after considering the evidence from a two-city study, concludes with the following: If nontrivial numbers of previously rented dw e llings are converted to owner-occupancy in a given neighborhood, one can predict that the overall levels of upkeep in that area will be enhanced greatly. The expected impact likely is of a much larger degree than would ensue even from dramatic increases in resident socioeconomic status, optimistic neighborhood expectation, or neigh- borhood cohesiveness .... Indeed , expanding the num- ber of homeowners appears to be the single most potent means for encouraging the upkeep of dwellings in a n eighborhood . And the differences are even more dra- matic when considering low-income occupants. The literature on maintenance expenditures among homeowners indicates that they increase with local social involvement, in- come, family size, and confidence in the future of the neighbor- hood (Ahlbrandt and Cunningham 1979; Galster 1983, 1987a; Goetze 1979; Pedone , Remch , and Case 1980; Shear 1983; Varady 1986b; Winger 1973). Factors that have been found to decrease maintenance expenditures include longer length of Homeownership and Neighborhood Stability 49 residence and increased concern about racial change in the neighborhood (Mendelson 1977; Shear 1983; Varady 1986b). Turning to the relationship between homeownership and de- mands on public and private organizations, we have already seen that homeowners are more likely to participate in local organiza- tions, which in turn are often involved in lobbying and other activities designed to protect the interests of local property owners (Henig 1982; Lyons and Lowery 1989; O 'Brien 1975; Rohe and Gates 1985). Although these lobbying efforts are not always effective, the literature on neighborhood groups contains many examples of successful efforts to ward off proposed projects seen as detrimental to the interests of neighborhood residents (Rohe and Mouw 1991; Taub, Taylor, and Dunham 1984). Neigh- borhood groups have also banded together to form umbrella organizations at both local and national level s to advocate for changes in government policy and in the practices of financial institutions, real estate firms, insurance companies, and other organizations whose activities affect neighborhood conditions. At the national level, the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act and the Community Reinvestment Act are clear evidence of the effective- ness of low-and moderate-income neighborhood organizations in getting Congress to outlaw practices, such as redlining, that contribute to the decline of neighborhoods. At the local level, many communities have passed laws against blockbusting2 and other practices that undermine the stability of neighborhoods. Homeownership and residential satisfaction Homeownership might also be expected to have both direct and indirect positive effects on residential satisfaction. Homeowner- ship may directly improve satisfaction through the greater control that owners generally have over their dwelling units. They can alter their units to better suit their needs, and as long as they are current on their mortgage and taxes and are not in the way of a new road or other public project, they have security of occupancy. Homeownership may have an indirect effect through its impact on local social involvement and property maintenance. To what extent is there evidence in the empirical literature for a positive relationship between homeownership and residential satisfaction? 2 Blockbusting is the practice of real estate agents' aggressively soliciting the listing of owned units by emphasizing impending racial change in an area and its likely negative impact on housing values. In response, some communities have outlawed door-to-door solicitation of house listings or the placement of "for sal e" signs in yards. 50 William M. Rohe and Leslie S. Stewart Researchers typically distinguish between two types of residential satisfaction: satisfaction with the housing unit and satisfaction with the surrounding neighborhood. We will discuss the findings on each in turn. The literature on the determinants of housing satisfaction con- sistently reports that owner-occupants are more satisfied than renters with their dwelling units. Moreover, this relationship holds when the influences ofhousehold, dwelling unit, and neighborhood characteristics are controlled for (Danes and Mor- ris 1986; Galster and Hesser 1981; Kinsey and Lane 1983; Lam 1985; Lane and Kinsey 1980; Morris, Crull, and Winter 1976; Rent and Rent 1978; Taub, Taylor, and Dunham 1981; Varady 1983). The other factors that are positively associated with housing satisfaction are education (Danes and Morris 1986; Galster 1987b; Ha and Weber 1991; Lane and Kinsey 1980; Varady 1983), age or life cycle stage (Danes and Morris 1986; Galster 1987a, 1987b; Galster and Hesser 1981; Kinsey and Lane 1983; Lane and Kinsey 1980), the adequacy of space within the unit (Davis and Fine-Davis 1981; Galster 1987a, 1987b; Morris, Crull, and Winter 1976; Varady 1983), the physical condition of the unit (Galster and Hesser 1981; Kinsey and L ane 1983; Mor- ris, Crull, and Winter 1976; Varady 1983), and satisfaction with the surrounding neighborhood (Davis and Fine-Davis 1981; Kinsey and Lane 1983; Morris , Crull, and Winter 1976; Rent and Rent 1978; Varady 1983). Blacks (Galster 1987a; Ha and Weber 1991; Kinsey and Lane 1983; Lane and Kinsey 1980; Varady 1983) and those who live in older units (Galster 1987a; Ha and Weber 1991; Kin sey and Lane 1983; Varady 1983) tend to be less satisfied with their units. The results concerning the effects of income and gender on housing satisfaction have b een mixed (Galster 1987a; Kinsey and Lane 1983; Lane and Kinsey 1980; Morris, Crull, and Winter 1976; Varady 1983). Although the results are not as extensive as they are for housing satisfaction, homeownership has also been found to be positively related to neighborhood satisfaction, even after controlling for a variety of other explanatory variables (Austin and Baba 1990; Baba and Austin 1989; Baldassare 1982; Fried 1982; Galster and Hesser 1981). Other major factors positively associated with neighborhood satisfaction are age or life cycle stage (Austin and Baba 1990; Baba and Austin 1989; Davis and Fine-Davis 1981; Galster 1987a), social interaction in the local area (Ahlbrandt and Cunningham 1979; Davis and Fine-Davis 1981; Galster 1987a; Ha and Weber 1991; Marans and Rodgers 1975; Miller et al. 1980), satisfaction with current house (Fried 1982; Galster and Hesser 1981; Ha and Weber 1991; Marans and Rodgers Home owners h i p a nd Neighborhood Sta bility 51 1975), and proportion of homeowners in the area (Galster 1987a; Lee and Guest 1983; Varady 1986b). Factors that have been found to lower neighborhood satisfaction are perceived problems in the neighborhood (Ahlbrandt and Cunningham 1979; Davis and Fine-Davis 1981; Fried 1982; Galster and Hesser 1981; Marans and Rodgers 1975; Miller et al. 1980) and a racial mix in the neighborhood (Galster 1987a; Stipak and Hensler 1983). The research results concerning the effects of income , education , race , and length of tenure on neighborhood satisfaction show either no effect or an inconsistent effect (Ahlbrandt and Cunningham 1979; Austin and Baba 1990; Baba and Austin 1989; Davis and Fine-Davis 1981; Galster 1987a; Miller et al. 1980; Stipak and Hensler 1983). Homeownership and residential mobility Of all the relationships suggested in our model, the one between homeownership and mobility (length of tenure) has been the most frequently studied. Moreover, the collective findings of these studies are the most consistent and the strongest. All but one of the studies reviewed found that homeowners are much less likely to be planning a move or to have moved r e cently (Ahlbrandt and Cunningham 1979; G o odman 1974; Hamne tt 1991; Hanushek and Quig ley 1978; Meyer, Yeager, and Buray idi 1994; Newman and Duncan 1979 ; Quigley and W e inberg 1977; Roistacher 1974a; Ro ssi 1955; Spea re 1974). This relations hip holds even when s ocioeconomic diffe rences betwee n owne rs and r e nters are take n into a ccount. The one study that found home- owners more likely to mov e t han renters involved residents in central-city neighborhoods that w er e experiencing rapid racia l t ransition (Varady 1986b ). Several factors account for the relative residential s tability among homeowners . Because of the greater transaction costs associated with both buying a nd selling a unit, those who expect to stay in an area for only a s hort" time normally choose to rent. In other words, it is mainly those who plan on stay ing for an extended period who buy, and in most cases their predictions are correct. As s tated by Roistacher (1974a, 50), "the fact that a family owns a home is to a great extent a statement of its com- mitment to maintaining its present employment and housing for a long period of time ; hence, homeownership may be viewed as the result of other forces which discourage mobility ." Purchasing a home might be seen as a symbolic act announcing that a house- hold is committed to remaining in a community for a long time. In addition, once a home is purchased , the transaction costs 52 William M. Rohe and Leslie S. Stewart associated with moving also act to discourage mobility, at least in the short run. Beyond tenure status, residential mobility or mobility plans are also affected by a variety of socioeconomic, attitudinal, and neighborhood characteristics. Mobility is positively associated with household income (Goodman 1974; Hamnett 1991; Newman and Duncan 1979; Roistacher 1974a), change in income (Quigley and Weinberg 1977; Roistacher 197 4a), household size (Rois- tacher 1974b; Rossi 1955 ), change in household size (Roistacher 1974a; Rossi 1955), and minority status (Goodman 1974; Varady 1986b). It is negatively associated with the age of the head of household (Ahlbrandt and Cunningham 1979; Goodman 1974; Murie 1991; Roistacher 1974a; Rossi 1955). In addition, dwelling unit crowding (Goodman 1974; Newman and Duncan 1979; Roistacher 1974a), dissatisfaction with the neighborhood (Ahlbrandt and Cunningham 1979; Galster 1987a; Ros si 1955; Varady 1986b), lack of confidence in the future of the neighbor- hood (Varady 1986a, 1986b), and neighborhood racial change (Varady 1986a, 1986b) have been found to foster mobility, while social involvement has been found to reduce it (Ahlbrandt and Cunningham 1979; Connerly 1986; Rossi 1955; Varady 1986b). Homeownership and other measures of neighborhood stability Evidence about the relationship between homeownership and other measures of neighborhood stability-including property values, physical conditions, and soc ial conditions-is less exten- s ive. We have been unable to find, for example, any direct test of t h e relationship between homeownership and prope r ty values. Nor have we found studies of the association between the propor- tion of owner-occupied units in a neighborhood and property values. We have, however, presented substantial evidence that owner- occupants are more likely to invest in dwelling unit maintenance and improvements. This investment should be reflected in t he values of individual properties. In analyzing Canadian data on maintenance expenditure and housing value, Chinloy (1980, 105 ) concludes that "[lack of] maintenance represents a large portion of observed gross depreciation." Moreover, given the interdepen- dence of property values in an area, we should also expect proper maintenance to have some positive cumulative influence on the values of all properties in the immediate vicinity. The effect of the homeownership rate in a neighborhood , howeve r , may be Homeowners hip and Neighborhood Stability 53 small compared with other factors that affect property values. The effe cts of m a jor public projects (such as a new highway or passe n ger r a il system ), for example, may overwhelm any change from an increase or decrease in the h omeowners hip rate. Clearly , more research is neede d on the full set of factors that affect housing val ues . Turning to the r elations hip between homeownership and phys i- cal conditions, we find that homeowners are more likely to invest in the upkeep and improve ment of their properties and more like ly to participate in neighborhood organizations. Thus, we anticipate that individua l owner-occupied units are typically in better condition than renta l units and that areas with a highe r proportion of h omeowners a r e in better condition overall than a r eas with a higher proportion of renta l units. Two studies that included direct observation of dwelling unit condition s did find that owner-occupied dwe llings were 10 to 15 p ercen t l ess likely to have interior , exterior, or structura l problems even after controlling for a host of occupant, structural , and neighborhood characteristics (J effer s a nd Dobos 19 84; Kasarda and Janowitz 1974). These two studies, h owever, compared a sample of the owner-occupied units in t h e study areas with all renter-occupied units in those areas. They did not l ook specifica lly at the condi- tion of units owned by lo w-income h ouseholds. Thus, these stud- ies tell us little a bout the relative condition of homes owned by l ow-incom e households. In fact , D oling ( 1986) studi e d t he co ndition of housing units owned b y lo w-inco m e persons in Britain and concluded t h at "owner-occupie d houses now account for the major s h a r e of the total national cost o f outstanding repairs .... There a re m any owner occupiers w ho, wh atever the punitive incentive for main- tainin g t h e ir house, s imply do not h ave s ufficient resources to do so" (p. 185). He criticized l ow-co st owner s hip initiatives for failing to account for the "running costs" associ ated with owner- s hip. Great caution should be exercised in assuming that units own e d by p e r sons in all income categories are i n better co nditi on than t hose of comparable renters. W e have found no direct evidence, however, of an association between the proportion of h omeowners in a neighborhood and the l evel of property upkeep by owner-occupants. That i s, do homeow n er s who live in n eighborhoods with a higher proportion of owner-occupants maintain their properties at a hig her leve l ? The two s tudies that have a ddressed this issue found no associa- tion b etween the proportion of homeowner s in a n eighborhood 54 William M. Rohe and Leslie S. Stewart and investment in property upkeep or property condition (Galster 1987a; Varady 1986b). Given the greater participation of homeowners in local organiza- tions, one might also expect the public areas to be better main- tained in neighborhoods with a high proportion of homeowners. This assumes, however, that these local organizations can influ- ence the actions of city officials; that they can positively affect street maintenance, park maintenance, sanitation, and other services provided by city agencies; or that they sponsor self-help activities that improve neighborhood conditi ons. Although the evidence is not extensive and is based largel y on case studies, many neighborhood organizations do seem to be effective in influencing the quality of service delivery to their areas (Henig 1982; Knoke and Wood 1981 ; Rohe and Gates 1985; Schoenberg and Rosenbaum 1980). One might expect that homeownership , by i tself, would have little impact on neighborhood social conditions such as crime, teen pregnancy, and the school dropout rate. Studies of these problems have focused on the influence of income, race, family composition, and other socioeconomic variables and have largely ignored the possible influence of homeownership. One recent study, however, suggests that homeownership may affect these behaviors. Green and White (1994) used four different data sets to test the influence of homeownership on dropout rates, arrest rates, and teen pregnancy rates. After controlling for race, sex, income, education, family composition, employment, length of tenure, and hous ing quality, they found that children of homeowners in each of the sampl es were less likely than chil- dren of renters to drop out of school, b e arrested, or become pregnant. The explanation for this, they suggest, is that the homeowners may acquire transferable skills d eveloped through managing their home environments (p e rforming maintenance and becoming involved in the community). Al though these re- sults are intrig uing, more research is needed to verify and ex- plain these findings . Reciprocal impact of neighborh ood stability As suggested in our model, the relationship between homeowner- ship and neighborhood stability is likel y to be reciprocal. That is, living in a relatively stabl e neighborhood will further encourage participation in community organizations, local social inter- action and attachment, property maintenance , neighborhood Homeownership and Neighborhood Stability 55 satisfaction, and positive expectations about the future of the neighborhood. Empirical literature on neighborhood stability and these atti- tudes and behaviors is scant, primarily because it is difficult to collect data sets that contain both individual and neighborhood variables. Some studies, however, do provide evidence for recip- rocal effects of neighborhood stability. Those who live in areas with lower turnover rates, for example, have been found to be more satisfied with their neighborhoods, to have more local friendship ties, and to have greater confidence in the future of the area (Galster 1987a; Sampson 1988; Varady 1986b). They may not, however, be more likely to participate in local commu- nity organizations or engage in housing improvement efforts (Sampson 1988; Varady 1986b). The physical condition of n e ighborhoods is also associated with important attitudes. With other factors held constant, those who live in areas with better maintained housing units are more like ly to be satisfied with their neighborhoods (Galster 1987a). The research findings on the relationship between neighborhood housing conditions and upkeep and repair, however, are mixed. Although one study found a positive relationship between hous- ing conditions and improvement expenditures (Boehm and Ihlenfeldt 1986), three others found no such relationship (Galster 1987a; McConney 1985; Varady 1986b). Finally, the limited evidence on the relationship between repair activity and perceived positive changes in the market value of properties in the neighborhood is mixed. One study reported a positive relationship between anticipated market value increases and improvement plans (Ahlbrandt and Cunningham 1979), while another found no relationship between the perception of rising market values and actual repair activity (Varady 1986b). Testing the model through an original empirical analysis To test the findings from the literature review, we constructed a database on homeownership and neighborhoods using U.S. census data for 1980 and 1990 and developed two original em- pirical models of neighborhood stability. 56 William M. Rohe a nd Les lie S. Stewart Description of the data set Tract-level data from the Census of Population and Housing (Summary Tape File 3A [STF3A]) form the basis of our analysis file. From among the numerous geographic levels of aggregation the Census Bureau computes, the census tract was selected as the best available proxy for a neighborhood because it is the closest in size to a neighborhood . Tracts typically have popula- tions between 1,000 and 7,500. To examine neighborhood characteristics at a given time (1990) as well as over time (1980 to 1990), we constructed an analysis file u sing data from both cen suses. Problems arose where tract boundaries were altered between 1980 and 1990, because there is no straightforward way to discern the changes in other vari- ables in these tracts. Tracts where boundary changes affected 1990 population counts by more than 2.5 percent were excluded from our sample. 3 Recognizing that neighborhoods are influenced by t he conditions in the cities around them , we also accessed census data for MSAs from Summary T ape File 3C on several of the same m easures used at the tract level. We identified and sel ected only nonaffluent urban neighborhoods (see figure 2 ), because these types of neighborhoods are of key po licy interest to t h e U .S. Department of Housing and Urban D evelopment and Fannie M ae. Our resulting analysis file con- tains 2 ,5 69 neighborhoods that (1) are located within t h e urban- ized areas of cities across the United States , (2 ) are nonaffluent compared with their larger MSAs , (3 ) had limited growth in new housing stock between 1980 and 1990, and (4 ) have limited populations in group quarters such as nursing homes or prisons. Measures of homeowne rship and n eighborhood stability Previous studies examined the determinants of homeownership , treating homeownership as an outcome. This analysis treats homeownership as a theore tical cause of neighborhood condi- tions. In t he two models we present below, neighborhood stabil- ity is t he outcome, or dependent variabl e, and homeownership is t h e key independent variable. 3 We identified these trac t s with the Census Bureau 's Topogra phically Inte- grated Geographic Encoding a nd Refer e ncing (TIGER) S ystem/Cen s u s Tract Comparability File for the Cens u s of Population and Housing, 1990. Homeownership and Neighborhood Stability 57 Figure 2. Analysis File Creation from U .S. Census Data 1980 1990 All Census Tracts in Metropolitan Areas, 1980 (N = 40,335) All Census Tracts in Metropolitan Areas, 1990 (N = 45 ,000 ) N = 20,090 Analysis File: 1980 and 1990 data for a national sample of nonaffiuent w·ban tracts with limited new housing stock Eliminate tracts with more t han 10 pe rcent rura l housing units (N = 10 ,000) Eliminate tracts with a 1980-90 boundary change that affected population by more than 2.5 percent (N = 8,500) Eliminate tracts whose median household income exceeded the MSA median income b y more than 20 percent (N = 5 ,000) Eliminate tracts where • more than 10 percent of housing was built s ince 1980 (N = 7 ,000 ) • total population was less t h a n 1,000 or more than 7,500 (N = 1 ,200 ) • the population in group quarters exceeded 15 percent (N = 450) N = 10 ,164 Select a 25 percent random sample N = 2,569 N = 21,278 58 William M. Robe and Leslie S. Stewart Homeownership rate is constructed for each census tract as follows: H h . t (ow ner-occupied housing units) + (vacant units for sal e) omeowners 1p ra ·e = . (occupied housing units) + (vacant units for sale or rent) This measure of ownership includes all owned properties in the neighborhood that are either occupied or vacant and on the market. The denominator excludes "other vacants" such as boarded-up properties. Any of the measures of neighborhood stability described earlier would be interesting to examine. However, the two best mea- sures of stability that can be constructed with census data are the length of tenure of the current householder and the property value of owner-occupied housing units.4 Therefore, we specified two models, each using one of these as the dependent variable. In addition to the measures of homeownership and n eighborhood stability, our models include several other independent variables as control variables. These are characteristics of the households, economy, and housing units that may also have effects on neighbor- hood stability, effects for which we want to control to isolate the effect of homeownership. The mix of control variables is slightly different for each model and is discussed separately below. Model of homeownership's effect on length of t en ure As the measure of length of tenure, we used the p ercentage of occupied units in the tract where the current householder had resided for five or more years,5 hypothesizing that neighborhoods where a high p ercentage of residents stay for that long would be more stable than neighborhoods where people move more often.6 4 The American Housing Survey (AHS ) includes data that could be used to measure stability, but its geographic units of a n alysi s (cities a nd 10-unit clusters) are not good approximations of a neighborhood. Only by linking AHS city or cluster data with censu s t ract data could researchers access the AHS's more qua litative data on n eighborhood conditions. 5 Census data on length of tenure are in categories by the year the house- holde r moved in , such as (in 1990) 1989 to March 1990 , 1985 to 1988, and 1980 to 1984. These categori es allow the construction of only a thres hold measure of le n gth of tenure, not a continuous meas ure such as mean length of tenure. 6 An alternative h y pothesis is that length of tenure may wo rk to the detriment of neighborhood conditions or vitality if res ide nts stay a long time but do not keep up their properties. L e ngth of tenure is thus an incomplete measure of neighborhood stability. Homeownership and Neighborhood Stability 59 Because the length of tenure as of 1990 is the outcome of interest in this model, the causal factors (independent variables) should predate it. In other words, the d ecision to have stayed in one's current residence for five or more years by 1990 was influenced by household and housing characteristics that existed prior to that time. Therefore, we used 1980 values for each of our inde- pendent variables as potential pre dictors of the percentage of 1990 householders who stay at least five years. In addition to the key independent variable, which is the 1980 homeownership rate in the tract, the model includes several other variables to control for population and housing characteristics that may affect length of tenure. First, we expect (in part from our review of the literature ) that householders in the middle age range (3 0 to 61 ), when careers tend to stabilize, are likely to stay in one home longer than young adults and retirees. One control variable i s thus t he 1980 percentage of householders in the tract who are between the ages of 30 and 61. Similarly, we expect that households with children, particularly school-age children , are more likely to stay in one home longer than those without children, provided the household does not run out of space. The 1980 p ercentage of households with chil- dren and the 1980 tract-level mean number of bedrooms per unit are included as covariates in predicting length of tenure. Another characteristic expected to influence the mobility of households is income. While families of a ll incom es may tend to stay in one h ome longe r during certain phases of their life cycle, those with higher incomes are in a better position to move if they choose to do so. Because mobility opportunities and patterns may differ among racial groups, we a lso included as a covariate the percentage of 1980 householders who are black. In addition to the mean number of bedrooms, we included as covariates several other housing characteri stics that may affect the leng th of tenure: the 1980 percentage of owner-occupied units that are condominiums, the 1980 vacancy rate, the per- centage of 1980 housing units built before 1940, and the percent- age of 1980 housing units without complete plumbing facilities. To predict the effect of homeowners hip rate on length of tenure, controlling for the additional factors discussed above, we used an ordinary least squares (OLS) regression model and determined the means for each model variable (see table 1 ). 60 William M. Roh e and Lesli e S. Stewart T able 1. Model of Homeownership's Effect on Length of Tenure, Parameter Estimates, 1980 to 1990 Parameter Estimate Significance Mean Value Homeownershi p 3 P e rce ntage of housing units t h at a re owner-occupiedb 0.3634 0 .000 1 50 .08 Co ntrol variables3 Perce ntage of hou seholders ages 30 to 61 0 .7547 0.0001 34.50 Percentage of households with children 0.1407 0.0001 42.00 Percentage of householders wh o are black 0.0944 0.000 1 24.18 Me dian househ old income in tract0 -0.000665 0.0001 $14,563 Mean number of bedrooms p e r unit 3.795 0.0001 2.28 Percentage of hous ing units that a re vaca nt -0 .4774 0.0001 6.15 Percentage of ow n e r -o ccupi e d uni ts that a r e co ndominium s 0 .1437 0.0001 9.98 Perce ntage of occupied h ousing units built prior to 1940 -0.0147 0.3073 9.80 Percentage of housing units with ou t complete plumbing 0.2296 0.0333 1.62 Intercept 2 .070 0.2509 Note: The dependent variable is the percentage of 1990 occupied housing u n it s where the householder ha s r·esided for five or more years. Analysi s of variance: Mean of dependent variabl e = 54.52 percent; N = 2,442; F = 304 .1 ; p robabi lity > F = 0.000 1 ; R 2 = 0.5557; adjuste d R 2 = 0.5538. a 1980 data u nl ess oth e r wise s pecified. b Inc ludes units that are vacant and for sale. c 1979 data. Income data reporte d in each decenni a l cen s u s are a n nual figure s for the previou s full year. Overall, t his model explains more than half (R 2 = 0.56) of the variance in length of tenure. Clearly other factors, such a s over- all satisfaction with the neighborhood , neighborhood conditions (including crime), and the career situations of h ou seholders, Homeownership and Neighborhood Stability 61 affect the decision to move, but these variables are not available in census data. This model does provide some neighborhood-level evidence to corroborate the literature review finding at the individual level that homeowners tend to stay longer in one home than renters do, even after controlling for family life course and housing characteristics. The parameter estimate for the homeownership variabl e suggests that, holding all the other factors constant, a 10-percentage-point increase in owner-occupied housing units in a tract would be associated with a 3.6-percentage-point increase in households that stay in their homes for five or more years. The causal relationship between tenure and length of tenure is likely to work in both directions, however: Tracts where people stay l onger also tend to be tracts where people buy homes. As expected, the age of the householder and the presence of children also are positively associated with length of tenure. The prevalence of householders ages 30 to 61 has an especially strong relationship: For every 10-percentage-point increase in house- holders in this age group , tracts have about a 7.5-point increase in the percentage of householders who stay five or more years. The model also suggests that black householders and households with lower incomes tend to have higher percentages who stay five or more years. Each $10,000 increase in the median house- hold income of the tract predicts a 6. 7 -point drop in the percent- age of households that stay in their homes for five or more years. Presumably, households with higher incomes often move on to more expensive homes. The signs on the coefficients for the race and income covariates suggest that length of tenure s ometimes reflects a lack of household mobility, not necessarily n e ighbor- hood stability. The size of the housing unit, as expected, has a strong positive association with the length of tenure. The coefficient suggest s that tracts where housing units have an average of three bed- rooms might expect the percentage of their households that stay for five or more years to be 4 points higher than in tracts with an average of only two bedrooms per unit. The model also suggests, as expected, that higher vacancy rates are a deterrent to remaining in a tract for a long time. The vacancy rate is our best avail abl e proxy measure for neighbor- hood housing conditions or markets. Again, however, the model does not establish the causal relationship: Tracts with a higher turnover rate may a l so have higher vacancy rates. 62 William M. Rohe and Leslie S. Stewart Other things being equal, tracts with condominiums in 1980 had greater proportions of householders who stayed at least five years. Tracts with condominiums tend to be concentrated in large cities with high home prices such as New York and San Francisco, whe re condominiums in 1980 were among the only affordable homes available to own. A higher proportion of resi- dents in the tract may have stayed longer either because they could not afford to buy up or because they could not sell their condominiums after interest rates declined and made single- family starter homes more affordable. The prevalence of older housing stock (built before 1940) in a tract might be expected to be a deterrent to longer tenure, but its effect i s not statistically significant in our mode l. Similarly, though lack of plumbing facilities might be expected to prompt peopl e to move, it shows a weakly significant p ositive association with length of tenure. Again , l ength of tenure may be reflecting the lack of mobil- ity of pe rsons living in substandard hous ing rather than being a complete and valid measure of neighborhood stability. This model, though limited , does support the h ypothesis that tracts where there are high proportions of homeowners and middle-aged householders with children tend to have higher proportions of people who stay in their homes longer. Tracts with high proportions oflower income, however, a lso have higher proportions of people who remain for five or more years, suggesting that some tracts' residents remain longer b ecau se of lack of mobility rather than commitment to the well-being of the n e i ghborhood . Model of homeownership's effect on property values R ecognizing the above limitations of l ength of tenure as a mea- s ure ofneighborhood stability, we also developed a model using property value as the outcome measure. Like length of tenure, property values measure the desirability of a neighborhood, but they are a better indicator of the economic stability of neighborhoods. The property value model is a longitudinal model of the effect of changes in homeownership rates on changes in p roperty values over the 1980-90 period. The specific measure of property value we used as t he dependent variable is the m ean value of owner-occupied single-family dwelling units in the tract.7 The 7 The property value data on STF3A are limited to "specified" owner-occupied units, which exclude properties in multifamily dwelling units and those that share property with a commercial or medical office. Although the median Homeownership and Neighborhood Stability 63 census data on property values are subject to some measurement error because values are estimated by property owners and may not coincide with appraised values.8 This bias may be especially impor- tant in cross-sectional models, but because it was used consistently in 1980 and 1990 it seems unlikely to affect change in value.9 Nearly all the tracts in our sample had some increase in single- family property values from 1980 to 1990. The mean and the median of the change in the property values of single-family owner-occupied units were $50,915 and $24,475, respectively. Changes in homeownership rates between 1980 and 1990, how- ever, were small. The mean change in homeownership rate from 1980 to 1990 was -0.9 percent and the median was -1.06 per- cent. About 38 percent of tracts had an increase in homeowner- ship from 1980 to 1990. Only 6 percent saw changes (up or down) of 10 percentage points or more in the proportion of homeowners in the tract. Thus, for most of our tracts the regression model estimates the effect of relatively small changes in the home- ownership rate on changes in property values. We constructed a cross-tabulation to examine the joint distribu- tion of property value changes versus homeownership rate changes (see table 2 ). If the relationship were consistently posi- tive, the distribution would be concentrated in the lower right and upper l e ft cells of the table. There are clearly exce ptions to this positive relationship.10 Moreover, evidence from our lite rature review sugge sts that ch a nges in homeownership rates not only affect but also are value of ow n e r-occupi e d hous ing units is a vail a ble for 1990, onl y the m ean can b e c onstructed from 1980 cen s u s data. F or compa r a bility, we u sed the m ean for both years. 8 N e ls on (1978) found th a t thi s error i s r e lative ly s mall. In a comp a ris on of m e dian owne r estimates a nd thos e made by professional a ssessors in the Washing ton , DC, area, h e found owne r estima t es w e re on a ver age 3 to 6 p e r ce nt higher. The s impl e correlation b etw een t he two e s timates w as 0 .90. 9 In 1990 cross-se c tiona l models run prior to d eveloping the longi t udina l mode l , we includ e d a covariate for le ng th of t e nure, the s am e m e a s ure we u s ed as the depe ndent v ari a bl e in our firs t mode l: the perce ntage of 1990 hous ing units where the householder has lived there for five or more years . We ex- pe cted (and found ) that long-time residents may be lower estimators of the market value of their properties than thos e who bought them more r e ce ntly. 10 In nume rous e arly s pe cifications of our r e gression model , both the 1980 homeownership rate a nd t h e 198 0-90 cha nge in homeowne r s hip r a te s howed a (s ome times s ignificant) negativ e rela t ions hip with 1990 mean property values, 1980-90 changes in property values , and tra ct values relative t o MSA values. 64 William M. Ro h e and L eslie S. Stewart Table 2. Cross-Tabulation of Chan ges in Property Values by Changes in Homeownership Rate, 1980 to 1990 Change in Homeownership Rate (Percentage Points) Dropped Increased Percent Change in Dropped by up by up Increased of Property Val ue by > 3 to 3 to 3 by> 3 Total Sample Dropped or increased l ess than $5,000 100 55 20 26 20 1 8 Increased $5,000 to $25,000 422 317 180 119 1,038 43 Increased $25,000 to $100 ,000 165 260 225 108 758 31 Increased more th an $100 ,0 00 72 12 3 107 130 432 18 Total 759 755 532 383 2 ,429 100 Percent of sample 31 31 22 16 100 S ource: S TF3A data fo•· s elected cens u s tracts. affected by changes in property values. Neighborhoods with h ealth y property appreciation tend to attract more homeowners and per haps also more rental conversions as landlords see a greater return in selling than in renting their property. Our primary independent variable and our dependent variable thus appear to be endogenously related, rendering OLS regression inadequate to estimate the relationship between them.n There- fore , we developed a two-stage least s qua res model that first predicts 1980-9 0 changes in homeowners hip rate using changes in property value as well as household and housing characteris - tics expected to influence homeowners hip rates.l2 The second stage ofthe model estimates the change in property value using 1 1 A critical assumption of OLS is that the r egressors are uncorrelated with the residual-or, in this case, that changes in homeowner s hip are uncorrelated with the unexplained variance in property value changes. When an indepen- de nt variable and t h e dependent variable are endogenously related (i.e., d epend on each other), this assumption is violated and the OLS parameter estimates are biased and inconsistent. 12 Specifically, the regressors for the first-stage equation included 1980 homeownership rate; median household income, 1979 and 1979-89 change; and 1980 value and 1980-90 change for proportion of housing units with one unit per dwelling, ratio of mean single-family property value to mean rent, proportion of housing uni ts vacant, mean number of be drooms per unit, Homeownership and Neighborhood Stability 65 the predicted values of homeownership rate change from the first model rather than actual values. To isolate the relationship of homeownership changes and prop- erty value changes, we included in our model a variety of control variables that we also expected to affect neighborhood property values. First, we included the 1980 homeownership rate and the 1980 mean property value as baseline measures. Next, recognizing that neighborhood housing markets are influ- enced by market conditions in the larger urban areas, we in- cluded several covariates describing the economic conditions of the MSA where each tract is located: the 1980 single-family mean property value of the MSA and the 1980-90 change and the 1980 population of the MSA and the 1980-90 change. These variables attempt to control for local business cycle and market effects; for instance, tracts in cities with very high or rapidly increasing property values or with fast population growth may experience different change dynamics from tracts generally.13 Moreover, the model controls for several characteristics of tracts' households that may be related to property values. As an income measure we included the tract-level median household income relative to the MSA median, both the 1979-89 change measure and the 1979 value. To capture any differences in tract property values that may be associated with having a large elderly popu- lation, we included the 1980 percentage of householders age 62 or older as well as the change from 1980 to 1990. Change in value (as perceived by owners) may also be related to a tract's racial composition and change, measured here by the percentage of black householders in 1980 and the 1980-90 change. Another characteristic of households that may affect a tract's perceived property values is the householders' length of tenure; we in- cluded the percentage of householders who had lived in their unit five or more years in 1980 , as well as the 1980-90 change in this percentage. single-family mean property value of the MSA, homeownership r ate of the MSA, population of the MSA, unemployment rate of th e MSA , proportion of households with householde r age 30 to 61, proportion of households with householder age 62 or older, proportion of householders who are married with children, and proportion of households with black householder. The R 2 for this first-stage equation is 0.43. 13 The inclusion of MSA-leve l variables in the model may result in some heteroskedasticity in the error t erms, as the MSAs vary greatly in size. This is not likely to be a serious problem, however, since the differences in MSA s ize are not very large and the number of MSA-level variables in the model is small. 66 William M. Rohe and Leslie S. Stewart Finally, we include d several covariates describing the housing stock of the tract in terms of s upply, type, age, and size. The 1980 vacancy rate and 1980-90 change control for s u p ply factors that might affect value. The p e rcentage of units with a single dwelling (1980 and 1980-90 change) controls for the amount of and changes in single-family housing stock. The percentage of units built before 1940 and the average number ofbedrooms per u nit control in part for the age and size of the tract's housing stock. Changes in homeownersh i p rate d o have a positi ve and s i gnifi- ~ r:ant r e lations hip to ch anges in prope rty values (see table 3 ). I f / v: £~~ll other variables could be held constant, each percentage point -(,~incr ease in t he h om eowner s hip r ate of a tract would y i e ld abou t ·\ :\ ft a $1 ,600 increase in the property value of the average singl e - \ ~~ -family home (which was $42,529 in 198 0 ) over a 10-year p eriod. ~ J Since the majority of singl e -family properties are built f or owner- ~~ J occupants, however, changes in the percentage of s ingle -famil y ~~ p roperties nearly always bring about changes in the homeowner- shi p rate. In effec t , these variables are too highly correlated (r = 0. 70 ) for their p a r ameter estim ates to be interpreted se parate l y. Rather, for every percentage po int increase in the homeowner- s hip rate in a tract from 1980 to 1990, which often meant a co rrespon ding unit increase in the p er cen tage of singl e-family homes, the property value of an average sin g l e -family home increased by about $8 00. A 10-pe r centage-point increase in the homeownership rate of a tract wo uld be associated with about an $8,000 increase in t h e mean single-family property value over a 10-year period. This model suggests that current property owners w ill recei ve an ad ded b enefit whenever the h omeowner s hip rate in their nei g h - b orhood increases. The negative s i gn on the coefficient for change in single-family homes a l so s u ggests that homeownership progr ams need n ot focus entirely on singl e -family homes to increase the property values of the neighborhood. The other var iabl es w h ose r e l ati onships with property values are s i gnificant (at t h e 0 .00 1level) and the directions of the r e lationships (in p arentheses) are property values in 1980 ( + ); t h e chan ge in MSA-leve l values (+); the change in tract income relative to the MSA (+);t h e percentage of 1980 householders who had s t ayed in their unit fi ve or more year s ( +) and the change in t his p e rce ntage ( + ); the p e r centage of e lde rly residents (-); the Homeownership a nd Neighborhood Stability 67 Table 3. Model of Homeownership's Effect on Property Values in Parameter Estimates from Two-Stage Least Squares Estimation, 1980 to 1990 Parameter Mean Estimate Significance Value Home ownership Ch ange in percentage of housing units that are owned, 1980-90 1,641 0.0002 -0.996 P ercentage of hous ing units that are owner-occupied,8 1980 -172.1 0 .1549 52.46 Co ntrol variables Mean value of single-fami l y , owner- occupied homes, 1980 1.184 0.0001 42 ,529 Mean value of s ing le-family, owner-occupied h om es in MSA, 1980 0 .1764 0.0040 48 ,341 Change in mean value of singl e- famil y, owne r-occupi ed hom es in MSA, 1980-90 0 .2 768 0.0001 101 ,2 22 Population of MSA, 1980 -0.0004 0 .5864 2,681,000 C hange in population of MSA, 1980-90 -0.00 12 0.0854 -1 ,654,000 Median household incom e in t r act relative to MSA, 1 979b 20 1.4 0.0024 80.77 C h ange in median h ousehold income in tract relative to MSA , 1979-89b 702.5 0 .0001 -8.62 Percentage of householders age 62 or older, 1980 -523.0 0.0001 16.53 Change in percentage of h ouse h olders age 62 or older, 1980-90 -356.6 0.1337 0.339 Percentage of householders who are black, 1980 -31.86 0.2491 22.91 C h ange in percentage of householders who a re black, 1980-90 60.33 0.5163 3.22 Perce ntage of househ olders in unit fi ve or more years , 1980 669.0 0.0001 53.39 C h ange in perce ntage of householders in unit five or more years, 1980-90 399.2 0.0003 1.1 58 Percentage of h ou si n g units with one uni t per dwe lling, 1980 -39 .09 0.5373 57.01 C hange in pe rce ntage of housing units with one unit p er dwe lling, 1980-90 -862.4 0.0001 1.186 68 William M. Rohe and Leslie S. Stewart Table 3. Model of Homeownership's Effect on Property Values in Parameter Estimates from Two-Stage Least Squares Estimation, 1980 to 1990 (continued) Parameter Mean Estimate Significance Value P e rcentage of hous ing units that are vacant, 1980 240 .9 0.1 807 6 .06 C h ange in p ercentage of housing units that are vacant , 1980-90 132.6 0.4261 2.01 Mean number of bedrooms per unit, 1980 -18,274 0.0001 2 .3 1 Percentage o f 1980 occupied hous ing units built prior to 1940 215.2 0.0001 43.10 Intercept -28,618 0.0003 1.00 Note: Th e dependent variable is the 1980-90 change in the mean value of s ingle-fami ly , own er-occupied units in the tract. Analys is of variance: Mean of dependent variable = $51 ,188; N = 2,286 ; F = 349.3; probability> F = 0.0001; R 2 = 0.7641; adjusted R 2 = 0.7619. a Includes units that ar·e vacant and for sale. b Income data repor·ted in each d ecennial census are a nnual figure s for the previous full year . p ercentage ofpre-1940 housing in 1980 (+);and the mean num- ber of bedrooms per unit (-). A s we hypothesized, tracts that enjoyed income growth relative to their MSAs experienced greater property value appreciation, as did tracts in MSAs that saw larger increases in value. Hous - ing in tracts with higher 1980 values a lso tended to appreciate better. In addition, places where higher proportions of 1980 householders had stayed at least five years and where that proportion increased over time enjoyed greater value apprecia- tion. Perhaps areas with longer householder tenure , and t h ere- fore less frequent turnover in the housing market, convey an image of stability and desirability that pushes up property values. The direction of the other s i gnificant relationships requires further exploration to understand . For instance, tracts with a high proportion of elderly residents in 1980 tended to have lower value increases. Given the urban and nonaffluent nature of our sample, tracts with a preponderance of elderly residents are likely to be modest city neighborhoods where residents have lived for many years, not rural retirement havens for more affluent retirees. Property values may appreciate more slowly in these tracts partly because older residents have more difficulty with property maintenance. Homeownership and Neighborhood Stability 69 We might expect tracts with substantial proportions of older housing stock to appreciate less rapidly; however, the simpl e relationship between value changes and proportions of pre-1940 housing is positive (r = 0.11). In nearly 40 percent of the tracts, the housing stock is relatively new, but other factors such as general economic downturn have held property value apprecia- tion below average. These tracts are disproportionately located in Florida , Michigan, Oklahoma, and Texas. In addition, nearly 20 percent of the tracts with a high proportion of older housing experienced quite high value appreciation; these tend to be in Boston, New York City (and the surrounding areas of Connecticut and New Jersey), and the San Francisco Bay Area of California. While values might be expected to rise with housing size, nearly 40 percent of the tracts are in areas that had higher than aver- age (more than 2.31) bedrooms per unit in 1980 but where value increases between 1980 and 1990 were below average. Many urban tracts in the industrial belt states of Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin fit this pattern. Moreover, another 20 percent of the tracts had smaller than average units in 1980 but experienced higher than average increases in value. These tracts are concentrated in areas with very tight markets for starter homes, including Boston, New York City (and the sur- rounding areas of Connecticut and New Jersey), and the San Francisco Bay Area. For many of these tracts, in fact, increases in value may be a poor measure of neighborhood stability. Downs (1981) argues that healthy neighborhoods experience steady price appreciation and turnover, not dramatic shifts. These patterns of appreciation between 1980 and 1990 are per- haps atypical of 10-year periods generally. The important point for interpreting the model is that it controls for these apprecia- tion patterns by isolating the relationship of changes in homeownership and changes in value. The change in homeownership rate was one of the strongest influences on change in property value; specifically, it ranked fourth in terms of standardized magnitude behind the change in MSA-level property values, 1980 property values at the tract level, and the change in tract-level household income relative to the MSA.14 1 4 The standardized coefficie nts are as follows: change in MSA-le vel mean prop- erty value, 0 .505; 1980 mean tract value, 0.457; change in tract-level household income relative to MSA, 0.179; change in homeownership rate, 0.143. 70 William M. Rohe a nd Leslie S. Stewart Changes in homeownership are often assumed to be tied to changes in income , because ofthresholds of home affordability. Most of the tracts where homeownership increased also had increases in median h ouseh ol d income, but t h ere are many exceptions (see table 4 ). About 38 percent of the tracts where homeownership increased by more than 3 percentage points from 1980 to 1990 had below-average increases (less t han $10,000) in median h ousehol d income over that period. Table 4. Cross-Tabulati on of C h anges in Homeownership Rate by Chan ges i n Hou seh o ld Income, 1980 t o 1 990 Change in Median Household Income $3,000 $10,000 $20 ,000 Percent H om e ownership Rate Under to to or of (Percentage Points) $3,000 $9,999 $19,999 More Total Sample Dropped by more th a n 3 73 368 256 29 726 30 Dropped by up to 3 66 288 352 64 770 31 Increased by up to 3 53 171 266 67 557 23 Increased by more than 3 40 116 1 82 68 406 17 Total 232 943 1,056 228 2,459 100 Percent of sample 9 38 43 9 100 Source: STF3A data for se lected census tracts. Note: Percentages may not a dd to 100 because of rounding. Moreover, tracts with above-average growth ($10,000 or more) in income account for 39 percent of the tracts where homeowner- ship rates dropped by more than 3 percentage points, s uggesting that high income growth occurs frequently in areas with rental growth as well . Although there is less coincidence of h ome- ownership and income changes than we might have expected , increasing the homeownership rate in an area still may ad- versel y affect or displ ace low-income tenants. Conclusions Our literature review provides substantial evidence that homeownership l eads to greater neighborhood stability as mea- sured by length of residence and property condition. Two pro- cesses seem to be at work. The first concerns the types of Homeowne r s hip and Neighborhood Stability 71 households that are attracted to , and capable of affording, homeownership . These households tend to be higher income family households with older household heads. They anticipate staying in an area a longer time. Clearly, self-selection plays an important role in the stability of homeowners relative to renters. The second process, however, seems to be related to the addi- tional interests that homeowners have in their dwelling units and the transaction costs associated with buying and selling real estate. Studies that control for socioeconomic and other poten- tially important characteristics still find that homeowners are more likely to be stable , defined in terms of length of residence and property condition. Homeowners, unlike renters and landlords, have both an eco- nomic and a use interest in their properties. This combination of interests seems to provide powerful incentives for owner- occupants to maintain their properties at a higher standard and to join organizations that protect the collective interests of homeowners in the area . The owner-occupied dwelling unit has become a major source of wealth for many families , which they will work hard to protect. It has become an important indicator of status in our society and a visible indicator of success. It also offers greater control over one's living environment. A household's dwelling unit and neigh- borhood also provide important social and psychological benefits, which are closely guarded. Thus, threats to the condition of the house and the neighborhood may be interpreted as threats to the status and security of the occupants. The original empirica l analysis further supports an association between homeownership and neighborhood stability as defined by length of tenure. Census tracts with a higher proportion of homeowners have a lower turnover rate, even after controlling for famil y life course and housing characteristics. However, factors related to lack of mobility (especially income) also affect the length of tenure , and these may have mitigating effects on overall neighborhood health, especially in the long run . House- holders without the means to make a move may also lack the resources to maintain their properties. The l ack of turnover in an area may not translate into better property conditions. The property value model suggests that changes in the homeownership rate in an area also have a positive association with changes in property values . After controlling for housing stock characteristics, household characteristics, and MSA-level 72 William M. Rohe an d Leslie S. Stewart economic factors, a 5-percentage-point change in the homeowner- ship rate of a tract would be associated with about a $4,000 increase in mean single-family property value over a 10-year period. In terms of magnitude, initial property values and MSA- level changes in property values affect changes in tract property values much more than the horneownership rate does . Nonethe- less, modest increases in homeownership rates, even in areas with a high proportion of multifamily dwelling units, may in- crease neighborhood property values over time. The results of the literature review and analysis s h ould not be interpreted as a condemnation of renters or of predominantly rental neighborhoods. Though higher rates of homeownership are associated with some measures of neighborhood stability, many predominantly rental neighborhoods are stable and attrac- tive places to live. Not everyone is capable of owning a horne, and oth ers, for a variety of reasons, do not want to own. An adequate supply of affordable and attractive rental units and areas is needed. A major challenge, then, is to find ways to improve the stability of areas with a predominance of rental units without converting them to owner-occupied units. An additional caveat is that increasing the proportion of home- owners in an area should not b e seen as a magic elixir for neigh- borhood problems. First, as d emonstrate d in our empirical anal ysis, many other factors affect mobility and housing value . Second, t h e type of structures in t h e area and t he amount of public subsidy restrict any increase in the proportion of homeowners in many urban areas. The homeownership rate may n ee d to be increased by several percentage points to dra matically affect any measure of neighborhood stability. Third, even where there is an opportunity for a large increase in the homeowner- s hip rate in an area, such an increase may come at the exp ense of the original residents of the area. Thus, homeownership pro- grams should focus on current r enters who are both capable of and interested in buying a home. In this way, the neighborhood is stabilized but not at the expense of former low-income residents. Housing policy makers and practitioners should exercise caution in qualify ing home buyers, ensure that the units being sold are in good condition, and select neighborhoods that have a goo d chance of providing a livable environment. Encouraging families with highl y variabl e or even flat income trajectories to purchase dwelling units is counterproductive: They are unlike l y to be abl e to afford t h em over the long run. Encouraging low-in come fami- lies to purchase units that they will not be able to maintain at a Homeownership and Neighborhood Stability 73 reasonable standard is also harmful. In assessing the British experience with inner-city homeownership programs, Karn, Kemeny, and Williams (1985) described it as "the privatization of squalor." Certainly, we want to avoid this problem. Homeowners must be able to make repairs when needed. Finally, homeowner- ship programs must be targeted to areas with a reasonable probability of stable or increasing property values and of positive social conditions. Encouraging households to buy in areas that are like ly to continue to decline over time is unwise, if not unethical. Future research needs Because most research looks at middle-and upper-income homeowners, we do not know if low-income owners, particularly those with relatively small investments in their units, will be- have in the same way with respect to maintenance, participa- tion, and other actions as higher income homeowners do. Carefully designed longitudinal research is needed to assess how homeownership affects the relevant attitudes and behaviors of low-income owners. The ir relative lack of income , for example, may depress the amount they can spend on repairs, and their units may be in greater disrepair. This, in fact, was the conclu- sion of a British study comparing the condition of owner-occu- pied dwellings and rental units with low-income occupants (Doling 1986). The hedonic modeling literature has sought to both i dentify and quantify the effects of various housing characteristics on the price of housing. Although these models have included selected characteristics of the surrounding neighborhoods, such as the racial mix and the air pollution level, t heir developers ignored the potential effect of neighborhood tenure characteristics on housing prices (Anderson and Croker 1971; Freeman 1979; Kain and Quigley 1970; Muth and Goodman 1989; Quigley 1979). To further assess how tenure affects housing prices , future hedonic pricing studies should include the proportion ofhomeowners in the area as a predictor variable in their models. In addition, there is very little literature on the relationship between homeownership and indicators of the social stability of an area . The recent study by Green and White (1994) showed surprisingly strong and consistent associations between owner occupancy and the incidence of several social problems. More research is needed to corroborate and explain the results of this study. 74 William M. Rohe and Leslie S. Stewart Another question worthy of further research attention is whether there is a threshold or tipping point associated with tenure as there is for the racial composition of households. Par- ticularly in areas that are composed predominantly of single- family dwelling units, is there some percentage of rental units that will trigger the rapid conversion of most of the existing owner-occupied units to rental units? Is the percentage of rental units in an area seen as an indication that the neighborhood is going downhill, thus causing widespread conversion? We also know very little about the process involved in the con- version of owner-occupied units to rental units. At what point do these units become attractive to investor-owners? What housing characteristics are associated with investor-ownership? What role do real estate agents play in this process? In addition, our empirical analysis of census data raises ques- tions that could be better answered through other sources of data. For instance, what do the National Board of Realtors data and the Fannie Mae-Freddie Mac data add to understanding the dynamics of actual property values at the neighborhood level? What do data on neighborhood conditions and neighborhood satisfaction (e.g., from the American Housing Survey) contribute to an understanding of n eighborhood dynamics related to ten- ure? What do data about credit flows (e.g., from the Home Mort- gage Disclosure Act data set) suggest about the effect of credit flows on neighborhood conditions, expectations, or stability? Finally, from a policy standpoint, further research is needed on which actions of outsiders (including media portrayals, public policy programs, and credit flow s) are most effective in changing neighborhood conditions or expectations. Authors William M. Rohe is the Dean E. Smith Professor in the Department of City and Regional Planning and the Director of t h e Center for Urban and Regional Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Leslie S. Stewart is a Research Associate in the Health and Social Policy Division at Research Triangle Institute. The authors wish to thank Priscila Prunella and Margery Turner at the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for their support of this project and their comments on earlier drafts of this article. They also owe a debt to George McCarthy and Roberto Quercia, who provided valuable advice on the analysis presented here. Homeownership and Neighborhood Stability 75 The r esearch formi n g the b asi s for t his article was conducted pursuant to a contract with HUD. The s t atem ents and conclus ions contained herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. governmen t in general, of H UD in p a rticular , or of Fannie Mae. References Ahlbrandt, Roger, a nd James C unningham. 1979. A New P ublic Policy for Neighborhood Preservat ion. New York: Praeger. Anderson, Robert, and Thomas Croker . 1971. Air Pollution and Res idential Prope r ty Values. Urban Studies 8(0ctober):171-80. Austin, D. Mark, and Yoko Baba. 1990 . Social Determinants of Neighborhood Attachments. Socio l ogical Spectrum 10:59-78. B aba, Yoko, an d D. Mark Austin. 1989. Neighborhood Environmental Satisfac- tion, Victimization , and Social Participation as Determinants of P e rceive d Neighborhood Safety. Environment and Behavior 21(Novembe r ):763-80. Babchuk, Nichol as , and John Edwards. 1965. Vol untary Associations and the Integration H y pothes i s. Social inquiry 35:149-62. Baldassare, Mark. 1982. The Effects of Neighborhood Dens ity and Social Co ntrol on Resident S atisfaction . Sociological Quarterly 23(Winte r ):95-105. Baum, Thomas, and Paul Kingston. 1984 . Hom eown e r s hip and Social Attach- m ent. Sociological Perspectives 27(2):159-80. Boehm, Thomas, a nd Keith Ihle nfe ldt. 1986. The Improvement Expenditures of Urban Homeowners: An Empirical An a lysis. AREUEA Journal 14:48-60. Brown, Thomas. 1981. Tenure Choice and Expected Mobility: A Synthesis. Journal of Urban Economics 10 :375-89 . Carliner, G e offrey. 1974. Determinants of Home Ownership. Land E co nomics 50:109-19. Ch ambers, Dani el, and Douglas Diamond. 1988. Who Never Becomes a Home- own er? Housing Finance R eview 7:149-67. Chinloy, P e t e r . 198 0. The Effect of Maintenance Expenditures on the Measure- ment of De preci ation i n Housing. Journal of Urban Economics 8:86-107 . Ci sneros, Henry. 1995. Home Ownership Goals for the Year 2000. Stone Group 13(Spring):3 . Connerly, Charles. 1986. The Impa ct of Neighborhood Social Rel ations on Prospective Mobility. S ocial Science Quarterly (March): 12-20. Coop e r s t ein, Richard. 1989. Quantifying the Decis ion to Be come a First-Time Home Buyer. Urb an Studies 26:223-33. Cox, Kevin. 1982. Hous ing Tenure and Neighborhood Activism. Urban Affairs Quarterly 18(1):107-29. 76 William M . Rohe an d Leslie S. S t ewar t Cox, Kevin, and J e ffe r y J. M cCarthy . 1980. N eig hborhood Act i vism in t he American C ity: Behaviora l R el a t ion s hips a nd E valua tion . Ur ban Geography 1( 1):22 -3 8 . Da nes, Sharon, and E arl M orris. 1 986. Hous ing Status, Hous ing Expe nditures a nd Satis faction. H ousing and Society 13 :3 2-43. Davis, E a rl , and M a r gar et F i n e-Davi s . 1981. Pre dictors of S ati sfacti on with H ou s ing a nd N e ig hbourhood : A Nati onwid e Study in the Re public of Irelan d. Social I n d icators R esearch 9:4 77-94. Davis, J ohn . 199 1. Contested Ground: Collective Action and the Urban Neigh- borhood . Ithaca, NY: Cornell U niversity Press. Di t kovsk y, Orit, a nd Will e m van Vliet. 1984. Housin g Tenure and Co m munity P a rtici p a tion . E kistics 307(J uly-Au g u s t ):345-4 8. Doling, J ohn . 1986. O w ne r Occupation , Ho u se Condition, a nd G overnm e n t S ubs idies. In L ow Cost H ome Owner ship , e d . Philip Bo oth and T on y C r ook, 1 70-89 . Ald er shot, Engl a nd: Gower . Downs, Anthony . 1981. N eighborh oods a nd Ur ba.n De velopment. W ashin gton, DC: The Brookings Ins tituti on . Drei er , Peter . 1982 . Th e Statu s of Rent e r s in t h e Unite d States . Social Force s 30 (Decembe r ):1 79-98. Fisch er, Cl a u de. 1 982. To Dwell among Friends: Personal Networks in T own and Country. Chicago : U ni versity of Chicago P ress. Fisch er, C l a ude , Rober t Jackson , C. Ann Stu eve, Kathleen Gerson, and Lynne Jones. 1977 . Networks and Pla ces: Social Relations in the Urban S etting. New York: F r ee P ress. Freeman , A. Myrick. 1 979. T he H edonic Price Ap p roach to Measuri n g Demand for Neigh borh oo d Characteristics. In The Economics of Neighborhoods, ed. David Segal , 19 1-21 7. New York: Academi c P r ess. Fried , Mar k . 1982 . Residential Attachment: So urces o f Res ide n t i al and Co mmunity Satisfaction. Journal of Social Issues 28(3):1 07-19. Gal ster , George. 1983 . Em p irical Evidence on Cross-Te nure Di ffe r ences in Home M a inte n a n ce a nd Co ndition s. Land Economics 59(F ebr uar y):107-13. Gal ster, Geor ge. 1987a. Homeowners and Neighborhood Reinvestment . D urha m , NC: Duke University P r ess. Galster, Geor ge. 1987b . I den t i fyi n g t h e Cor r e lates of Dwel ling Satisfaction. Environment and B ehavior 19 (5 ):539-68. Ga lster , George. 1 990. Neighborhood Evaluations, E xpectations, Mobil ity, and H ousing R einvestment : Measuring the Social I mpacts of Community Develop- ment Corporations. New York : New School for Socia l Research, Comm unity Devel opme n t Resear ch Center. Gals t e r , G e orge, a nd Gary Hesser. 198 1. Resi de n t ia l S ati sfaction: Composi - t ional a nd Contextu a l Correl ates. E nvir onment and B ehavior 1 3:735-58. Homeownership and Neighborhood Stability 77 Goetze, Rolf. 1979. Understanding Neighborhood Change: The Role of Expecta- tions in Urban Revitalization. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger. Goodman, John. 1974. Local Residential Mobility and Family Housing Adjust- ments. In Five Thousand American Families: Patterns of Economic Progress , ed. James Morgan 2:79-105. Ann Arbor, Ml: Institute for Survey Research, University of Michigan. Green, Richard K., and Michelle White. 1994. Measuring the Benefits of Homeowning's Effect on Children. Chicago: University of Chicago, Center for the Study of the Economy and State. Greensberg, Stephanie, William Rohe, and Jay Williams. 1985. I nformal Citizen Action and Crime Prevention at the Neighborhood Level. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice. Grigsby, William. 1963 . H ousing Markets and Public Policy. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Ha, Mikyoung, and Margaret Weber. 1991. The D eterminants of Residential Environmental Qualities and Satisfaction: Effects of Financing, Housing Programs, a nd Housing Regulations. Housing and Society 18(3):65-76. Hamnett, Chris. 1991. The Relationship between Res ide ntial Migration and Housing Tenure in London, 1971-8 1: A Longitudinal Analysis. Environment and Planning 23 (August):1147-62. Hanushek, Eric , and John Quigley. 1978. An Explicit Model of Intra-Metro- politan Mobility. Land Economics 54(4):411-29. Henderson , J. Vernon, and Yannis I oannides. 1986. Tenure Choice and the Demand for Housing. Economica 53:231-46. Henderson, J. Vernon, and Yannis Joannides. 1987. Owner-Occupancy: Invest- ment vs. Con sumption Demand. Journal of Urban Economics 21:228-41. Henig, Jeffrey. 1982. Neighborhood Mobilization. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. Hunter, Albert. 1975. The Lo ss of Commu n ity: An Empirical Test through Replication. American Sociological Rev iew 40(5):537-555L. Jeffers, Leo, and Jean Dobos. 1984. Communication and Neighborhood Mobili- zation. Urban Affairs Quarte rly 20:97-112. Kain, John, and John Quigley. 1970. Measuring the Value of Housing Quality. Journal of tir e American Statistical Association 65(June):532-48. Karn, Valerie, Jim Kemeny, and Peter Williams. 1985. Home Ownership in the Inner City: Salvation or Despair. Aldershot, England: Gower. Kasarda, John, and Morris Janowitz. 1974. Community Attachment in Mass Society. American Sociological Review 39:328-39. Kingston, Paul, John Thompson, and Douglas Eichar. 1984. The Politics of Homeownership. American Politics Quarterly 12(April):131-50. 78 William M. Rohe and Leslie S. Stewart Kinsey, Jean, and Sylvia Lane . 1983. Race, Housing Attributes, and Satisfac- tion with Housing. Housing and Society 10:98-116. Knoke, David, and James Wood. 1981. Organized for Action: Commitment in Voluntary Associations. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. Lam , Julie. 1985. Type of Structure, Satisfaction, and Propensity to Move. Housing and Society 12:32-44. Lane, Sylvia, and Jean Kinsey. 1980. Housing Tenure Status and Housing Satisfaction. Journal of Consumer Affairs 14(Winter):341-65. Lee, Barrett, and Avery G u est. 1983. Sociological Quarterly 24(Spring): 287-303. Linneman, Peter, and Susan Wachter. 1989. The Impacts of Borrowing Con- straints on Homeownership. AREUEA Joumal17(4):389-402. Litwak, Eugene. 1961. Voluntary Associations and Neighborhood Cohesi on. American Sociological Review 26(2):258-71. Lyons, William, and David Lowery. 1989 . Citizen Responses to Dissatisfaction in Urban Community: A Partial Test of a General Model. Journal of Politics 15(4):841-68. Marans, Robert, and Willard Rodgers. 1975. Toward an Understanding of Community Satisfaction. In Metropolitan America in Contemporary Perspec- tive, ed. Amos Hauley and Vincent Rock, 299-352. New York: Wiley. Mayer, Neil. 1981. Rehabilitation Decisions in Rental Housing. Journal of Urban Economics 10(July):76-94. McConney, Mary. 1.985. An Empiric a l Look at Housing Rehabilitation as a Spatial Process. Urban Studies 22:39-48. Megbolugbe, Isaac, and Peter Linneman. 1993. Home Ownership. Urban Studies 30(4-5 ):659-82. Mendelson, Robert. 1.977. Empirical Evidence on Home Improvements. Jour - nal of Urban Economics 4(0ctober):458-68. Meyer, Peter, Jerry Yeager, and Michael Burayidi. 1994. Institutional Myopia and Policy Distortions: The Promotion of Homeownership for the Poor. Journal of Economic Issues 28(June):567-76. Miller, Frederick, Sam Tsemberis, Gregory Malia, and Dennis Grega. 1980. Nei ghborhood Satisfaction among Urban Dwellers. Journal of Social Issues 36(3 ):101-17. Moore, Dora J. 1991.. Forecasting the Probability of Homeownership: A Cross- Sectional Regressional Analysis. Journal of H ousing Research 2(2):125-43. Morris, Earl, Sue Crull, and Mary Winter. 1976. Housing Norms, Housing Satisfaction, and the Propensity to Move. Journal of Marriage and the Family 38:309-20. Homeownership and Neighborhood Stabi li ty 79 Murie, Allen. 1991. Divi sions of Homeownership: Housing Tenure and Social C hange. En vironment and Planning A 23 (February):349-70. Muth, Richard, and All en Goodman. 1989. The E conomics of Hou sing Mark et s . New York: Harwood Academic. Nelson, Richard. 1978. Economic Analys is of Transportation Noi se Abatement . Cambridge, MA: Ballanger. Newman, Sandra, and Greg Duncan. 1979. Residential Problems, Dissatisfac- tion, and Mobility. J ournal of the Ame rican Planning A ssociation 45:154-66. O'Brien, David J. 1975 . Neighborhood Org anization and I nterest Group Processes . Princeton , NJ: Prince ton University Press. Ong, Paul , and Eugene Grigsby. 1988. Race and Life-Cycle Effects on Homeowners hip in Lo s Angeles 1970-1980. Urban Affairs Quarterly 23 (June ):601-15. Pedone, Carla , Patricia Remch, and Karl Case. 1980. Evaluation of the Urba.n Homesteading D emonstration Prog ram: The Neighborhood Impact of Urban Home steading. Vol. 5. Rockvi ll e, MD: U.S. Department of Housing a nd Urban Development. Percy, Charles . 1966. A New Dawn for Our Cities. Congre ssional R eco rd , October 17 , 89th Cong., 2nd sess. Vol. 11 2, Part 20 , pp. 2 725B-26B. P eterson , George, Arthur Solomon, Hadi Madjid, and William Apgar. 19 73. Property Taxes, Hou sing, and the Cities. Le xington, MA: Heath/Lexington. Podolefsky, Aaron , and Fredric DuBow. 198 0 . Th e Reactions to Crime Papers . V ol. II : S t rategies for Community Crime Prevention. E van ston, IL : Nor t hwest- ern Univers ity, Center for Urban Affairs. Quigl ey, John. 1979. Wh at Have We Learned a bout Urban Housi n g Markets? In Current I ssues in Urban Economics, ed. Peter Mieszkows ki and Mahlon Straszheim , 391-429. B a l timore: Johns Hopkins Univer sity Press. Quig ley, John, and D aniel W e inber g. 1977. Intra-Urban Resid e n tial Mobility: A Review and Synthesi s. International R egional S cience Review 2 (2):41-66. Rent, George, and Clyda Rent. 1978. Low-Income Housing: Factors Related to R esidential Satisfaction. Environment and B ehavior 10 (December):459-88 . Roh e, William, and Laure n Gates. 1985. Planning with Neighborhoods. C hapel Hill , NC: Univers ity of North Carolina Press. Rohe, Wi ll iam, and Scott Mouw. 1991. The Politics of Relocation: The Moving of the Crest Street Community. Journal of the American Planning A ssociation 57:57-68. Rohe, William, and Michael Stegman. 1994. The Impact of Hom e Owne r s hip on t h e Social and Political I nvol vement of Low-Income Peopl e . Urban A ffairs Quarterly 30(Septembe r ): 152-72. 80 William M. Rohe and Leslie S. Stewart Roistacher, Elizabeth. 1974a. Residential Mobility. In Five Thousand Ameri- can Families: Patterns of Economic Progress, ed. James Morgan, 2:1-40. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan, Institute for Survey Research . Roistacher, Elizabeth. 1974b. Housing and Home Ownership. In Five Thou- sand American Families: Patterns of Economic Progress, ed. James Morgan, 2:41-79. Ann Arbor , MI: University of Michigan, Institute for Survey Research. Rossi, Peter. 1955. Why Families Moue. Glencoe, IL: Free Press. Sampson, Robert. 1988. Local Friendship Ties and Community Attachment in Mass Society: A Multilevel Systemic Model. American Sociological Review 53(0ctober):766-79. Saunders, Peter. 1990. A Nation of Home Owners. London: Unwin Hyman. Schafer, Robert. 1977. Maintenance and Operating Behavior of Resident and Absentee Landlords. Department of City Planning Discussion Paper DD77-10. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Schoenberg, Sandra, and Patricia Rosenbaum. 1980. Neighborhoods That Work: Sources of Viability in the Inner City. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. Shear, William. 1983. Urban Housing Rehabilitation and Move Decisions. Southern Economic Journal 49(April):1030-52. Shelton, John. 1968. The Cost of Renting versus Owning a Home. Land Economics 44(February):59-72. Speare, Alden. 1974. Residential Satisfaction as an Intervening Variable in Residential Mobility. Demography 11:173-88. Steinberger, Peter. 1981. Political Participation and Communal ity: A Cultural/ Interpersonal Approach. Rural Sociology 46(1):7-19. Stipak, Brian, and Carl Hensler. 1983. Effect of Neighborhood Racial and Socioeconomic Composition on Urban Residents' Evaluation of Their Neighbor- hoods. Social Indicators Research 12:311-20. Taub, Richard , George Surgeon, Sara Lindholm, Phyllis Otti, and Amy Bridges. 1977. Urban Voluntary Associations, Locally Based and Externally Induced. American Journal of Sociology 83(2):425-42. Taub, Richard, D. Garth Taylor, and Jan Dunham. 1981. Neighborhoods and Safety. In Reactions to Crime: Individual and Institutional Responses, ed. Dan Lewis. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Taub, Richard, D. Garth Taylor, and Jan Dunham. 1984. Paths of Neighbor- hood Change. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Tomeh, Aida. 1973. Formal Voluntary Organizations: Participation, Corre- lates, and Interrelationships. Sociological Inquiry 43(3-4):89-122. Home owners hip and Nei ghborhood Stability 81 Varady , David. 1983. Dete rmin a nts of Res idential Mobility Deci si on s. Journal of the American Planning A ssocia t ion 49:181-99. Varady, David. 1986a. Ne ighborhood Confidence: A Critical Factor in Neigh- borhood Revitali zation? E n vironment and B ehavior 18:480-501. Varady , David. 198 6b. Neighborhood Upgrading: A Realistic A ssessment. Albany: State University of New York Press . Wachter, Susan, an d I saac Meg bolugbe. 1992. Racial and E t h nic Disparities in Hom e ownership. H ousing Po licy Debate 3 (2 ):333-70. Wanders man, Abraha m . 198 1. A Framework of Participat ion in Community Organi zations. J ournal of Applied B ehavioral S cience 17(1 ):27-58. Wanders man , Abrah am, J ohn J a kubs, and Gary Giamarti no. 198 1. Participa- tion in Block Organi zation s. Journal of Community Action 1 (1 ):40-47. Winger, Alan. 1973. Some Internal Determinants of Upkee p Spending by Urba n Home Owners. Land E conomics 49(November):474-79. Wirth , Lewis. 1937. U rbanism as a W ay of Life. American J ournal of Sociology 44:3-24.