Minutes - 19830307 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

SUMMARY OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NEEDS CHART ie'ti PURPOSE The community development needs chart was constructed in order to rank the potential target areas according to the magnitude of their community development needs and the de- gree of deteriorated dwelling units. This chart i,s used to quantify factors which may be highly subjective or qu4l.itative in nature. It has three primary functions: 1) to rank the target areas by using the set of factors. 2) to classify and categorize the set of factors which affects the target areas. 3) to indicate the degree one factor exceeds another on a specified basis of comparison. METHODS OF USE The general procedure for constructing this chart is as follows: 1) Determine the attributes or factors to be rated. 2) Determine the best scale for rating the factors. 3) Place data on chart. 4) Rate the attributes on factors. 5) Verify the consistency of the ratings. The first step in constructing this chart was to identify the dependent and inde- pendent variables. In this chart, the dependent variables are the target areas listed in column 1 from Byrdsville to Rogers Road, and -the independent variables are the factors listed in row i from percentage of units needing housing assistance to the number of outdoor bathroom facilities. In the second step, a scale from 1 to 3 was determined as the best means of rating (listed in row 11). This scale rated the factors on three different levels of magnitude: 1 as low, 2 as medium, and 3 as high. Afterward, each factor was given a rating. The rational behind the rating is factors with a 3 rating have direct impact to the health and safety of the community; factors with a 2 rating have a possibility of affecting the health and safety of the community; and factors with 1 rating do not have a major impact to the community because of alternative methods currently being used- such as wells, septic tanks and unpaved roads. Also, a majority of the dilapidated units are vacant, and the dilapidated units that are occupied by residents must be relocated. This process gives the occupied dilapidated units a higher rating because of the over- lapping effect. The third step was to place the information on the chart. All information on the target areas were collected by a windshield survey. In the fourth step, the information was given a quantitative value. If the infor- mation is not in numerical form it must be changed to a quantitative value. Once this process was done, the magnitude scale rating .in the column,of the factor being rated was multiplied by the quantitative value of that same factor. For example, no number in this chart needed to be changed but in order-to simplify the procedure all numbers were changed into percentages. This procedure reduced the size of the number in the rating. A good example is Byrdsville which has a magnitude scale rating of 3 in column 2 and in the same column 54% of the units needs housing assistance, so the calculation will be 3 X 54% = 1.6 rating. A different procedure was used for the "Yes" and "No" answers. This information was given a quantitative value. For example, in the Cheeks/Miles Area there is water service, but no sewer service. For water service a quantitative value of 0% was given, and for sewer service a quantitative value of 100% was given. Since each factor has a magnitude rating of 1 , the magnitude rating was multiplied by either 0% or 100% which gave a product of.0 or 1. After each factor in each target area was rated, each factor rating was added together for every target area (shown in column 11). Column 11 gives an overall rating of the target areas. The areas were ranked by giving the highest rating a 1 ranking, the next highest rating a 2 ranking, and so on (shown in column 12). The fifth step was checking the chart for consistency-making sure each column utilizes the same calculation procedures and making sure that each number has an equal amount of value whey it was changed to a percentage.