Janesville partners with housing group to rehab houses
Photo
Photo
Photo
JANESVILLE The sweet little house at 627 Rockport Road had a grand view of the Rock River, but it had been carved into an illegal duplex.
A makeshift closet jutted onto the front porch littered with junk. The staircase, electrical service and other parts of the house fell short of city codes.
The vacant house in one of Janesville's challenged neighborhoods screamed to be saved, said Katherine Kamp, deputy director of the Wisconsin Partnership for Housing Development.
Kamp liked the home's cute porch, attractive roofline, arched doorways, original floors and rear deck offering an amazing view of the river.
It was a keeper, she decided.
The group is converting the Rockport Road house back into a single-family home. When they're finished, it will be put up for sale.
The home is among dozens the city has rehabbed with the goals of fighting blight, improving neighborhoods and providing affordable housing.
In 2009, Janesville began getting federal stimulus grants to improve housing. But the myriad of tasks involved in rehabbing homes—buying the structure, acting as general contractor or finding one, designing the fixes and then finally selling the home—strained city staff time.
After getting a third federal grant, the city in June 2011 contracted with the Wisconsin Partnership for Housing Development for help. It has since given the non-profit agency $709,622 in federal money to rehab six homes and to build a new, two-story home on Lincoln Street. The partnership bought four of the homes, while the city transferred ownership of two homes and the vacant lot.
The partnership, a national organization headquartered in Madison, has been around for about 25 years, Kamp said.
The group has more flexibility than the city to buy homes and solicit proposals from contractors, said Jennifer Petruzzello, Janesville's director of neighborhood services. The partnership can use a contractor for multiple projects without going through a formal bidding process, for example. An offer to purchase doesn't have to be approved by the city council.
"It is less bureaucratic for us to do it, and it's a little bit quicker," Kamp said.
Workers are paid the prevailing wage, which is a federal requirement.
The partnership gets a developer's fee, which is up to 10 percent of the construction costs, depending on whether the rehab has stayed within budget, Kamp said. Other costs that go into the final price include utilities, property taxes, inspections, snow removal, yard maintenance and appraisals. Both total about 12.5 percent of the construction cost, although that is an estimate until the homes sell, Petruzzello said.
The home at 270 S. Franklin St., for example, was appraised at $30,000 and purchased by the partnership for $27,000. Construction was $99,973. Total costs to put the house back on the market were about $112,470. The house is newly appraised for $72,500.
The home has fresh paint, polished floors and new appliances. Design changes on the second floor make the space more livable. The front porch was shored up. The mechanicals were replaced.
Homes targeted by the city usually are in the inner city neighborhoods and are vacant, often because they are in foreclosure or the owner did not pay taxes. Some homes cannot be rehabbed and are demolished, with the property redeveloped or sold to neighbors to reduce density.
The homes are sold to low- to moderate-income people. The proceeds are returned to the city for use again for housing purposes.
Three of the Janesville home rehabilitated by the partnership are for sale.
Not for profit
Because cost of rehab often is more than the eventual sale price, some might say the program doesn't make financial sense.
Kamp responded that tearing down a structure and starting over usually costs more. The new home the group is building on the empty lot will cost about $150,000, she said.
The total doesn't include $24,000 the city spent in October 2010 to buy the lot, Petruzzello said.
"From an environmental perspective, it's clearly better to take what's here and use it," she said.
Rehabs tackle major problems that a private investor would not spend money to fix, Petruzzello said.
Profit is not the motive, Petruzzello and Kamp said.
The goals, they said, are to:
-- Provide affordable, quality housing for moderate- to low-income families. The rehabs usually include new roofs, plumbing, electrical, heating and appliances, so the new owners would have no major outlays after moving in. The rehabbed homes are energy efficient and lead free.
"These home are here for another 50 more years, 60 more years," Kamp said. "People will be able to live in it and call it home."
The hope is to make the homes affordable so mortgage payments are about what people might otherwise pay in rent.
"What we try to do is look at the family and their situation and income level and ensure that the monthly mortgage is affordable," Kamp said.
A home that sells for $70,000 to $80,000 is roughly what a family of four could afford, according to income guidelines.
-- Hire local workers. Kamp estimated 10 to 15 people are employed full-time in Janesville because of the program. The stimulus money was not meant to only rehab houses but to create jobs, she said.
"It has been really successful in doing that in every community we've worked in," Kamp said.
-- Stabilize property values.
-- Eliminate blight. The city wants to avoid private investors buying foreclosed properties at a low cost and renting them out without major improvements.
-- Reduce housing density.
The partnership has had good responses to its homes when they go up for sale. Houses have been on the market for only about a week before offers start arriving, Kamp said.
"We price the houses to be consistent with the neighbors and also to be affordable for families and to provide the incentive for someone to move back into this neighborhood," she said.
The partnership has offers for two of the three homes up for sale.
Neighborhoods benefit when homes are owner occupied, Kamp said.
When homes are improved in a neighborhood, other residents often start working on their own home, Kamp said.
"It has an important side benefit," she said.
The homes that are improved make "huge differences" in the immediate area, she said.
"Janesville has been really smart in that. (The city has) focused on a few neighborhoods and focused a lot of resources on those neighborhoods to try to turn them around.
"I have looked at a lot of houses in these neighborhoods," she said. "There's some beautiful, historic homes, and people like to live in older homes that have character that they can make their own."
HOUSING PARTNERSHIP
The Wisconsin Partnership for Housing Development has signed two city contracts since June 2011 to rehab six homes and build a new home with a goal of improving housing in the inner city neighborhoods. Three of the seven are now for sale.
1.
270 S. Franklin St.
Size: 1,472 square feet
Pre-rehab appraisal: $30,000
Purchase price: $27,000
Estimated rehab cost and fees: $112,470
Post construction appraisal: $72,500
Sale price: $72,500
2.
410 Johnson St.
Size: 1,628 square feet
Purchase price: $25,740
Pre-rehab appraisal: $26,000
Estimated rehab cost and fees: $109,609
Post-rehab appraisal: $73,000.
Sale price: $73,000
3.
275 Rockport Road (under construction)
Size: 1,391 square feet
Purchase price: $37,500
Pre-rehab appraisal: $49,000
Rehab cost and fees: Not yet available
4.
627 Rockport Road (under construction)
Size: 1,600 square feet
Purchase price: $12,977.
Pre-rehab appraisal: $25,000
Rehab cost and fees: Not yet available
5.
378 Wilson Ave.
Size: 916 square feet
Purchase price: $34,000
Pre-rehab appraisal: $41,500
Estimated rehab cost and fees: $76,928
Post-rehab appraisal: $67,000
Sale price: $64,900
6.
403 Lincoln St. (under construction)
Size: 1,748 square feet
Purchase price: Donated
Pre-rehab appraisal: $54,000
Rehab cost and fees: Not yet available
7.
176 Lincoln St. (new construction)
Size: About 1,600 square feet
Estimated cost and fees: $150,000 for construction plus $24,000 for the lot


Aug 18, 2012 at 10:43 a.m.
Suggest removal
Noy sure who would buy a home in that area for $150k. Seems VERY hight and this is NOT moderate pricing. They are STILL empty. Grass and weeds grow out of control very fast.
The one on a home tour from a couple years ago was shown in the paper not to long ago. STILL on market at that time. Unless you fix ALL of them and get the neighbor to fix their and the slum lords to fix theirs too people wont buy these homes in that area for 150k- yikes!!!
BYW- NEW construction is garbage compared to the old homes construction. Cheap thin drywall and untrue 2x4!
Aug 17, 2012 at 9:37 p.m.
Suggest removal
This is a win-win situation. We put people to work rehabbing homes that for lack of money sit idle and neglected becoming a blight on the surrounding neighborhood. Suppliers of building materials benefit. Don't you think the neighborhoods benefit as well? Those pictures paint a thousand words--nice, affordable homes for people of modest means to buy. This city needs more innovative programs like this!
Aug 17, 2012 at 12:30 p.m.
Suggest removal
Ummmm..."they" (the city) won't lose money - but where do you think Federal grant money comes from? If you happen to pay City of Janesville property tax, but no Federal income tax, this is a sweet deal for you.
Aug 17, 2012 at 10:45 a.m.
Suggest removal
"
veedo
Aug 16, 2012 at 7:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
Frogger, it is people of your ilk that is wrong with society today. Such generalizations are prejudicial and highly insulting."
Are you telling me there aren't TONS of foreclosures now?
ALl of a sudden people will start to care for their properties and lawns and pick up the trash?
IT would be great though!
Where does grant money come from????? TAX payer! duh!
Aug 17, 2012 at 10:33 a.m.
Suggest removal
WHO approved paying $24000 for an inner-city lot?????
Try about $3000 at best.
Aug 17, 2012 at 8:43 a.m.
Suggest removal
frogger - How can they (the city) lose money when it is from a $709,622 federal grant?
Aug 17, 2012 at 8:09 a.m.
Suggest removal
Should have looked at the results Beloit had from doing this. People that can afford to buy them won't spend that kind of money to live in them neighborhoods. Have fun getting stuck with a handful of houses.
Aug 16, 2012 at 10:59 p.m.
Suggest removal
this feelgood nonsense serves no function other than to create jobs @ the taxpayer expense for otherwise unemployable people..this is the sad truth..
the most likely "customer" of these newly remodeled homes will be people that should be renting anyway.. they will get a fha loan have no money down, bring their 3 rottweilers in the place and in 5yrs the city will be back to square one..because the gov. fha loan required them to have no skin in the game they will just leave..this is WHY the housing mkt is in the mess it is in .. "Every american should own their own home"...NO that is stupid many people should just rent...
Aug 16, 2012 at 10:48 p.m.
Suggest removal
What a ridiculous waste of tax payer dollars! Would any of these individuals making and implementing these policies choose these sorts of decisions if they themselves had to pay these bills? Who in their right mind would consider blowing $174,000. to live on Lincoln St. in new construction? Clearly this home will never appraise out for what has been spent to build it. Tear them down if they're in that bad of shape, and the community as a whole will be ahead on finances and green space while accomplishing their objectives of eliminating blight, stabilizing property values, putting people to work, and decreasing density. There is plenty of other housing out there for qualified buyers to choose from without putting the bill in the tax payer's lap.
Aug 16, 2012 at 8:34 p.m.
Suggest removal
How about the city start slapping these slumlords with huge fines for failing to maintain their property. And if that wont work maybe some jail time will
Aug 16, 2012 at 7:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
Frogger, it is people of your ilk that is wrong with society today. Such generalizations are prejudicial and highly insulting.
Aug 16, 2012 at 7:06 p.m.
Suggest removal
How are they ahead when it is a loss of $30+.
Sure you get somebody else new in there that wont pay for mortgage or taxes and forcloses too. How does this help?
Aug 16, 2012 at 6:51 p.m.
Suggest removal
whz_bng - How would the taxpayer be ahead if the city gets no property tax from the vacant land?
I'm just sayin'...
Aug 16, 2012 at 4:48 p.m.
Suggest removal
If they had just bought and demolished the houses the taxpayer would be further ahead.
What a waste.
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.