City of Dayton Priority Boards:
Quality of Life Indicators
2002
Prepared By:
The Center for Business and Economic Research, University of Dayton
In partnership with the City of Dayton Priority Boards
And with assistance from
The City of Dayton Department of Planning and Community Development
The City of Dayton Division of Citizen Participation
August 21, 2002
Introduction
Purpose:
The City of Dayton Quality of Life Indicators are designed to give Dayton residents in each Priority Board and Neighborhood an accurate picture of how their community is doing on quality of life issues important to them.
How the Report was designed:
The Center for Business and Economic Research facilitated the selection of a set of Quality of Life Goals by each Priority Board in 1997. In conjunction with the Department of Planning and Community Development, the Center researched and collected relevant information from each department of the City and the public schools that could serve as indicators of progress on those goals. The Priority Boards oversaw the development of the indicators and gave final approval to the indicators used. The first edition of the Indicators was published in June 1998.
The Indicators are a work in progress. There are goals each Priority Board has that information is not available currently to measure. Where that is the case, the information required is noted. If in addition, plans are in place to develop that information, those are noted as well.
It should be noted that many Quality of Life Goals and therefore Indicators were similar across Priority Boards. However, each Priority Board has some goals and therefore indicators that are unique.
Whenever possible, information at the neighborhood level has been included in detailed tables at the end of relevant sections. However, data for smaller neighborhoods will show greater year to year variability. As a consequence, trends at the neighborhood level should be interpreted cautiously.
How to Read the Report:
The report is organized into five sections, Housing, Security, Neighborhood Appearance, Parks and Recreation, and Education. These sections are associated with a set of goals defined by the FROC Priority Board. In each section, summary tables or graphs are provided with a short verbal summary to the side. More detailed tables follow the summary tables and figures. Cautionary notes are provided when necessary.
Prepared by:
The Center for Business and Economic Research at the University of Dayton
Richard D. Stock, Ph.D.
Paul Woodie
Marvin Hartsfield
Funded by:
The City of Dayton Department of Planning and Community Development
Thanks to:
The Dayton Division of Citizen Participation
The Dayton Department of Parks, Recreation, and Culture
The Dayton Public Schools
Citywide Development Corporation
The Dayton Police Department
The Department of Building Services
The Ohio Department of Education
The Human Relations Council
FROC Priority Board
Quality of Life Indicators
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Demographic Information and Map1
Goals2
Housing Quality of Life Indicators3
Table 1.1Number of People Purchasing Home After Mortgage Counseling3
Table 1.2Number of Subsidized Home Improvement Investments4
Table 1.3Number of Home Mortgage Loans5
Table 1.4Average Value of Home Mortgage Loans5
Table 1.5Aggregate Value of Home Mortgage Loans5
Table 1.6Number of Home Improvement Loans6
Table 1.7Average Value of Home Improvement Loans6
Table 1.8Aggregate Value of Home Improvement Loans6
Table 1.9Loans as a % of Owner Occupied Housing (Home Mortgage Loans)7
Table 1.10Loans as a % of Owner Occupied Housing (Home Improvement Loans)7
Table 1.11Count and Condition of Significant and Historic Structures8
Security Quality of Life Indicators9
Figure 2.1Percentage of Residents That Feel Safe in Neighborhood9
Figure 2.2Percentage of Residents Indicating Drug Sales are a Serious Problem9
Figure 2.3Percentage of Residents Indicating Burglary is a Serious Problem9
Figure 2.4Percentage of Residents Indicating Vandalism and Graffiti are Serious Problems10
Figure 2.5Percentage of Residents Indicating Loud Radios are Serious Problems10
Figure 2.6Percentage of Residents Satisfied with Police10
Table 2.1Tier 1 Crimes per Neighborhood11
Table 2.2Tier 2 Crimes per Neighborhood11
Table 2.3Tier 3 Crimes per Neighborhood12
Map 2.1Total Per Capita Crimes by Neighborhood13
Neighborhood Appearance Quality of Life Indicators14
Figure 3.1Percentage of Residents Satisfied With Neighborhood Appearance14
Figure 3.2Percentage of Residents Satisfied With Street Cleanliness14
Figure 3.3Percentage of Residents Satisfied With Alley Cleanliness14
Figure 3.4Percentage of Residents Satisfied With Vacant Lot Maintenance15
Figure 3.5Percentage of Residents Satisfied With Neighborhood Overall15
Figure 3.6Number of Times Residents Have Attended Neighborhood Meetings16
Table 3.1Number of Vacancies on the FROC Priority Board16
Table 3.2Percent of Structures Classified 1 or 217
Table 3.3Absolute Count of Structures Classified 3 or 417
Table 3.4Changes in External Condition Ratings (All Residential Structures)18
Table 3.5Changes in External Condition Ratings (Rental Residential Structures)18
Park and Recreation Quality of Life Indicators19
Table 4.1Maintenance Schedule of Parks (Mowing Intervals)19
Figure 4.1Percentage of Residents Satisfied With Park Maintenance19
Table 4.2Condition of Park Equipment20
Table 4.3Condition of Playground Equipment20
Figure 4.2Residents Satisfied with Dayton Parks21
Figure 4.3Residents Satisfied with Youth Recreational Opportunities21
Education Quality of Life Indicators22
Figure 5.1-5.6Fourth Grade Proficiency Test Results by Subject22
Figure 5.7Sixth Grade Proficiency Test Results by Subject24
Figure 5.8-5.10City of DaytonSchool Enrollment Data25
Table 5.1-5.6Fourth Grade Proficiency Test Results by Subject and Neighborhood26
Table 5.7-5.12Sixth Grade Proficiency Test Results by Subject and Neighborhood28
Table 5.13Number of FROC Students Attending a NeighborhoodSchool29
Table 5.14Number of MilesFROCElementary School Students Live From School31
Table of Contents
FROC Priority Board
Quality of Life Indicators
FROC Priority Board
Demographic Information and Map
Neighborhood / 1990 Population / 2000 Population / % ChangeFairview / 2,579 / 2,618 / 1.5%
Five Oaks / 4,931 / 4,181 / -15.2%
Grafton Hill / 1,514 / 1,375 / -9.2%
Hillcrest / 3,542 / 4,116 / 16.2%
McPhersonTown / 512 / 500 / -2.3%
Mount Vernon / 1,000 / 911 / -8.9%
North Riverdale / 5,446 / 5,250 / -3.6%
Philadelphia Woods / 1,463 / 859 / -41.3%
Riverdale / 2,449 / 1,696 / -30.7%
Santa Clara / 3,080 / 2,800 / -9.1%
FROC Total / 26,516 / 24,306 / -8.3%
Dayton Total / 182,005 / 166,179 / -8.7%
Note:Population figures have been produced from 2000 Census Blocks. Because Census Blocks may not exactly match neighborhood, priority board and city boundaries, the population totals may be slightly inaccurate.
FROC Demographic Information and Map
Page 1
FROC Priority Board
Quality of Life Indicators
FROC Priority Board Quality of Life Goals
Housing Goals
- Create an incentive program to encourage homeownership
- Increase the number of owner occupied housing units
- Preserve Significant and Historic Structures in the Priority Board area
Security Goals
- Eliminate the Fear of Crime
- Eliminate the Negative Perception of Crime in FROC
- Eliminate All Types of Crime and Incivilities
Neighborhood Goals
- Improve the Visual Quality of Private Property Through Maintenance
- Preserve Neighborhood Feel in Public Areas with Sidewalks, Trees, Etc.
- Increase Citizen Participation in Neighborhood Associations and the Priority Board area
- Upgrade Housing to Category #1 Housing Standards
Park and Recreation Goals
- Create More and Better Youth Programs After School
Education Goals
- Increase Parental and Neighborhood Involvement in Schools
- Re-establish neighborhood level schools for grades K through 6th.
Other Goals
- Create an in-movement of middle and upper income citizens
- Create more long term, “high-quality” employment opportunities
- Improve delivery of city and county services (fire, police, trash and social services)
- Preserve and promote neighborhood based businesses
- Preserve diversity -- all kinds including racial, religious, and age
Goals
Page 1
FROC Priority Board
Housing Quality of Life Indicators
GOAL: Create an incentive program to encourage homeownership
GOAL: Increase the number of owner occupied housing units
Mortgage Counseling
Individuals desiring to purchase a home in the city of Dayton can receive mortgage credit assistance from Citywide Development Corporation. The program consists of a credit review, mortgage readiness plan, and homebuyer classes.
Referrals to lenders are made for those successfully completing all the requirements of the program. Program graduates are tracked until they either purchase a home in the city or indicate no interest in buying a home in the city.
Mortgage Counseling
Page 1
FROC Priority Board
Housing Quality of Life Indicators
Table 1.1 shows the number of people purchasing homes in FROC Priority Board area after mortgage counseling. For example, in 1991, 5 people purchased homes after completing the program.
- With the exception of 1995, the program has consistently helped around 50 people per year purchase homes.
Caution:Program graduates are tracked until they either purchase a home in the city or indicate no interest buying a home in the city.
Table 1.1
Number of People Purchasing Home
After Mortgage Counseling
Year / Number1991 / 5
1992 / 25
1993 / 50
1994 / 50
1995 / 94
1996 / 46
1997 / 40
1998 / 50
1999 / 63
2000 / 71
2001 / 46
Total / 540
Percent of Homes Impacted / 10.2%
Source: Citywide Development Corporation
FROC
Page 1
FROC Priority Board
Housing Quality of Life Indicators
Subsidized Home Improvement Investments
Subsidized Home Improvement Loans are available through:
- The Home Improvement Loan Program, which offers low interest loans up to $15,000 to residents with incomes at or below 80% of the median income level. The program is currently operating on revolving fund receipts;
- REACH, which offers rental rehab loans to landlords for major repairs;
- LELA,which offers emergency grants up to $5,000 to repair code violations on homes owned by very low income people; and
- Fix-up, offers grants of $2,000 for repairs to homes for the elderly and very low income.
Subsidized Home Improvement Loans
Page 1
FROC Priority Board
Housing Quality of Life Indicators
Table 1.2 shows the number of housing units receiving subsidized loans or grants, the aggregate value of those investments, and the average value of the investments.
- There has been a significant increase in the aggregate dollar value of investments since 1994.
Note:In 1997, The Hawthorne School conversion made 20 apartments for $1,240,000. Because of the large dollar value, it was not included in the table.
Table 1.2
Number of Subsidized Home
Improvement Investments 1996-2000
1997 / 1998 / 1999 / 2000 / 2001Number of Units / 20 / 14 / 16 / 9 / 19
Aggregate $ Value / 214,743 / 278,338 / 202,036 / 133,971 / 69,693
Average $ Value / 10,737 / 19,881 / 12,627 / 14,886 / 3,668
Source: Citywide Development Corporation
Subsidized Home Improvement Loans
Page 1
FROC Priority Board
Housing Quality of Life Indicators
Home Mortgage Loan Indicators
Home Mortgage Loans
Page 1
FROC Priority Board
Housing Quality of Life Indicators
Table 1.3 shows the number of home mortgage loans in the years of 1996, 1998, and 2000 by neighborhood. For example, reading the first line of the table, in the Five Oaks neighborhood, there were 59 home mortgage loans in 1996, 51 in 1998, and 68 in 2000.
- After remaining relatively stable from 1996 to 1998, activity in the FROC home mortgage loan market has increased significantly since then.
Table 1.3
Number of Home Mortgage Loans
1996-2000
Neighborhood / 1996 / 1998 / 2000Five Oaks / 59 / 51 / 68
Grafton Hill / 5 / 4 / 5
McPhersonTown / 6 / 5 / 10
Mt. Vernon/St. Clara/ Hillcrest / 121 / 143 / 196
North Riverdale / 88 / 105 / 111
Riverdale / 12 / 17 / 25
FROC Total / 291 / 325 / 415
Source: Human Relations Council
Home Mortgage Loans
Page 1
FROC Priority Board
Housing Quality of Life Indicators
Table 1.4 shows the average value of home mortgage loans by neighborhood in the years of 1996, 1998, and 2000 by neighborhood, along with the average percentage annual change from 1996 to 2000. Reading the first line of the table, the average value of home mortgage loans in the Five Oaks neighborhood was $53,390 in 1996, $59,235 in 1998, and $57,044 in 2000, for an average annual percentage change of 1.7%
- The average value of home mortgage loans in FROC is growing at a slower rate (2.2%) than MontgomeryCounty as a whole.
Caution:The mean value of home purchase loans provides one indicator of the direction of home values, but it is not a direct measure.
Table 1.4
Average Value of Home Mortgage Loans
1996-2000 (In Nominal Dollars)
Neighborhood / 1996 / 1998 / 2000 / Average % Annual ChangeFive Oaks / 53,390 / 59,235 / 57,044 / 1.7%
Grafton Hill / 109,800 / 70,750 / 72,400 / -9.9%
McPhersonTown / 63,667 / 129,400 / 90,400 / 9.2%
Mt. Vernon/St. Clara/ Hillcrest / 54,669 / 62,804 / 60,724 / 2.7%
North Riverdale / 51,557 / 58,038 / 54,784 / 1.5%
Riverdale / 35,083 / 46,294 / 48,880 / 8.6%
FROC Average / 53,794 / 60,963 / 58,675 / 2.2%
MontgomeryCounty / 2.5%
Source: Human Relations Council
Home Mortgage Loans
Page 1
FROC Priority Board
Housing Quality of Life Indicators
Table 1.5 shows the aggregate value of home mortgage loans in the years of 1996, 1998, and 2000 by neighborhood. For example, reading the first line of the table, the aggregate value of home mortgage loans in the Five Oaks Neighborhood was $3,150,000 in 1996, $3,021,000 in 1998, and $3,879,000 in 2000.
- Tied to the increase in average value of home mortgage loans, all FROC neighborhoods have seen significant increases in the aggregate nominal value of home mortgage loans.
Table 1.5
Aggregate Value of Home Mortgage Loans
1996-2000 (In Nominal Dollars)
Neighborhood / 1996 / 1998 / 2000Five Oaks / 3,150,000 / 3,021,000 / 3,879,000
Grafton Hill / 549,000 / 283,000 / 362,000
McPhersonTown / 382,000 / 647,000 / 904,000
Mt. Vernon/St. Clara/ Hillcrest / 6,615,000 / 8,981,000 / 11,902,000
North Riverdale / 4,537,000 / 6,094,000 / 6,081,000
Riverdale / 421,000 / 787,000 / 1,222,000
FROC Total / 15,654,000 / 19,813,000 / 24,350,000
Source: Human Relations Council
Home Mortgage Loans
Page 1
FROC Priority Board
Housing Quality of Life Indicators
Note: The Human Relations Council report: An Analysis of Loan Application Register Data for Dayton and MontgomeryCounty, 2000, contains annual data.
Home Mortgage Loans
Page 1
FROC Priority Board
Housing Quality of Life Indicators
Home Improvement Loan Indicators
Home Improvement Loans
Page 1
FROC Priority Board
Housing Quality of Life Indicators
Table 1.6 shows the number of home improvement loans in the years 1996, 1998, and 2000 by neighborhood. For example, reading the first line of the table, there were 20 home improvement loans made to Five Oaks residents in 1996, 27 in 1998, and 23 in 2000.
- The number of home improvement loans made declined significantly from 1998 to 2000.
- The Mt.Vernon/St. Clara/Hillcrest and North Riverdale saw the largest declines in home improvement loans.
Table 1.6
Number of Home Improvement Loans
1996-2000
Neighborhood / 1996 / 1998 / 2000Five Oaks / 20 / 27 / 23
Grafton Hill / 5 / 1 / 3
McPhersonTown / 4 / 2 / 1
Mt. Vernon/St. Clara/ Hillcrest / 57 / 63 / 39
North Riverdale / 51 / 47 / 20
Riverdale / 5 / 15 / 6
FROC Total / 142 / 155 / 92
Source: Human Relations Council
FROC
Page 1
FROC Priority Board
Housing Quality of Life Indicators
Table 1.7 shows the average value of home improvement loans in the years 1996, 1998, and 2000 by neighborhood. For example, reading the first line of the table, the average home improvement loan in Five Oaks was $7,750 in 1996, $8,481 in 1998, and $17,217 in 2000.
- There was a significant increase in the average value of home improvement loans from 1996 to 2000.
- The small number of loans made in the Grafton Hill and McPhersonTown neighborhoods makes the average value data in those neighborhoods relatively meaningless.
Table 1.7
Average Value of Home Improvement Loans
1996-2000 (In Nominal Dollars)
Neighborhood / 1996 / 1998 / 2000Five Oaks / 7,750 / 8,481 / 17,217
Grafton Hill / 5,800 / 20,000 / 32,333
McPhersonTown / 7,250 / 18,000 / 5,000
Mt. Vernon/St. Clara/ Hillcrest / 7,281 / 9,984 / 16,923
North Riverdale / 6,098 / 11,255 / 13,800
Riverdale / 9,400 / 11,000 / 28,833
FROC Average / 6,944 / 10,374 / 17,467
Source: Human Relations Council
FROC
Page 1
FROC Priority Board
Housing Quality of Life Indicators
Table 1.8 shows the aggregate value of home improvement loans in the years 1996, 1998, and 2000 by neighborhood. For example, reading the first line of the table, the aggregate value of home improvement loans in the Five Oaks neighborhood was $155,000 in 1996, $229,000 in 1998, and $396,000 in 2000.
- The aggregate value of home improvement loans is now greater in the Five Oaks neighborhood than in the North Riverdale neighborhood.
Table 1.8
Aggregate Value of Home Improvement Loans
1996-2000 (In Nominal Dollars)
Neighborhood / 1996 / 1998 / 2000Five Oaks / 155,000 / 229,000 / 396,000
Grafton Hill / 29,000 / 20,000 / 97,000
McPhersonTown / 29,000 / 36,000 / 5,000
Mt. Vernon/St. Clara/ Hillcrest / 415,000 / 629,000 / 660,000
North Riverdale / 311,000 / 529,000 / 276,000
Riverdale / 47,000 / 165,000 / 173,000
FROC Total / 986,000 / 1,608,000 / 1,607,000
Source: Human Relations Council
FROC
Page 1
FROC Priority Board
Housing Quality of Life Indicators
Note: The Human Relations Council report: An Analysis of Loan Application Register Data for Dayton and MontgomeryCounty, 2000, contains annual data.
FROC
Page 1
FROC Priority Board
Housing Quality of Life Indicators
Owner Occupancy Data
Owner Occupancy
Page 1
FROC Priority Board
Housing Quality of Life Indicators
Table 1.9 shows home mortgage loans as a percentage of owner-occupied housing in the years of 1994, 1996, 1998, and 2000 by neighborhood. For example, reading the first line of the table, in the Five Oaks neighborhood, home mortgage loans were made to 7.7% of owner-occupied housing in 1994, 8.6% in 1996, 7.4% in 1998, and 9.9% in 2000.
- The number of loans as a percentage of owner-occupied housing has decreased from 12.0% in 1994 to 9.6% in 2000.
- The FROC average is considerably higher than the city average; this implies greater than normal loan activity in the Priority Board area.
- Loan activity in the Mt. Vernon/Santa Clara/Hillcrest neighborhood has dropped, but loan activity in the McPhersonTown neighborhood has increased.
Table 1.9
Loans as a % of Owner-Occupied Housing
Home Mortgage Loans 1994-2000
Neighborhood / 1994 / 1996 / 1998 / 2000Five Oaks / 7.7% / 8.6% / 7.4% / 9.9%
Grafton Hill / 13.5% / 6.8% / 5.4% / 6.8%
McPhersonTown / 17.0% / 12.8% / 10.6% / 21.3%
Mt. Vernon/St. Clara/ Hillcrest / 30.2% / 26.2% / 31.0% / 10.5%
North Riverdale / 8.8% / 6.6% / 7.9% / 8.3%
Riverdale / 7.0% / 4.2% / 6.0% / 8.8%
FROC Average / 12.0% / 10.1% / 11.3% / 9.6%
Dayton Average / 5.3% / 4.9% / 5.1% / 6.6%
Source: Human Relations Council
Owner Occupancy
Page 1
FROC Priority Board
Housing Quality of Life Indicators
Table 1.10 shows home improvement loans as a percentage of owner-occupied housing in the years of 1994, 1996, 1998, and 2000 by neighborhood. For example, reading the first line of the table, in the Five Oaks neighborhood, home improvement loans were made to 3.2% of owner-occupied housing in 1994, 2.9% in 1996, 3.9% in 1998 and 3.3% in 2000.
- Home improvement loans as a percentage of owner-occupied housing has dropped in most neighborhoods since 1998.
- The FROC average is similar to the Dayton average.
Table 1.10
Loans as a % of Owner-Occupied Housing
Home Improvement Loans 1994-2000
Neighborhood / 1994 / 1996 / 1998 / 2000Five Oaks / 3.2% / 2.9% / 3.9% / 3.3%
Grafton Hill / 6.8% / 6.8% / 1.4% / 4.1%
McPhersonTown / 17.0% / 8.5% / 4.3% / 2.1%
Mt. Vernon/St. Clara/ Hillcrest / 3.6% / 3.0% / 3.4% / 2.1%
North Riverdale / 3.7% / 3.8% / 3.5% / 1.5%
Riverdale / 3.5% / 1.8% / 5.3% / 2.1%
FROC Average / 3.8% / 3.3% / 3.6% / 2.1%
Dayton Average / 4.1% / 3.5% / 3.0% / 1.8%
Source: Human Relations Council
Owner Occupancy
Page 1
FROC Priority Board
Housing Quality of Life Indicators
Note: The Human Relations Council report: An Analysis of Loan Application Register Data for Dayton and MontgomeryCounty, 2000, contains annual data.
Notes For Tables 1.3-1.10
- Data is based on census block group boundaries and therefore not strictly comparable to neighborhood planning district boundaries. As a result, Fairview is combined with Dayton View Triangle and included in the Northwest Priority Board area.
- All Home Improvement and Home Mortgage Loans are from Financial Institutions.
Owner Occupancy
Page 1
FROC Priority Board
Housing Quality of Life Indicators
GOAL: Preserve Significant and Historic Structures in the Priority Board area
Count of Significant Historic Structures
Historic Structures
Page 1
FROC Priority Board
Housing Quality of Life Indicators
Table 1.11 is a count of significant historic structures in the Priority Board area. The FROC Priority Board decided which structures were historic and significant.
Table 1.11
Count of Significant and Historic Structures
2000
1. / Shawen Acres, 3304 N Main St.2. / Corpus ChristiChurch, 200 Homewood Ave.
3. / Dayton View Library, 1515 Salem Ave.
4. / The Steele House, 40 Central Ave.
5. / NorthminsterChurch, 301 Forest Ave.
6. / DaleBuilding, (1 Santa Clara and 1921 N. Main St. to 1943 N. Main St.)
7. / Carrigan & Main Funeral Home
8. / FROC Priority Board Site Office, 903 W. Fairview Ave.
9. / EJ Brown, school
10. / Van Cleve, school
11. / Riverdale Ice House, 3513 N. Main St.
12. / PointBuilding, 828 W. Fairview Ave.
13. / The Dayton Art Institute, 456 Belmonte Park North
14. / Family Inn, 2025 N. Main St.
15. / HawthorneSchool, 226 McDaniel
16. / 240 Central Ave.
17. / 33 Stoddard Ave.
18. / 205 Belmonte Park East
19. / 2069 Ravenwood
20. / 1012 Fairview
21. / 1024 Fairview
22. / 1216 Fairview
23. / 1300 Fairview
24. / 253 E. Hillcrest
25. / 3103 Riverside, old original farm house
26. / 63 E. Hudson, original farm house in area
27. / 137 E Hudson, old original school house
28. / 5 Santa Clara, Point house at entrance of neighborhood
29. / MemorialBaptistChurch, 1222 N. Main
30. / Dayton Canoe Club, Riverside Dr.
31. / Old Fire Station, N. Main
32. / Cummings Moving and Storage, Geyer St. (old candy factory)
33. / New Covenant Christian Church, N. Main and Warder
Source: FROC Priority Board