900 East Market Street Master Plan Design Jan 2007

Acknowledgements

900 East Market Street Master Design Plan

East Market Street Development Corporation Mac Sims, Executive Director Jim Donnelly Robert Davis Carolyn Allen Claudette Burroughs-White George Durham Derek L. Ellington Fannie Gilchrist Dr. Ambrous Jacobs John Harris III Sherwood McNiel Ellen Moore Miller Herman C. Platt James Mayes Dave Maner Goldie Wells

City of Greensboro Sue Schwartz AICP, Chief of Neighborhood Planning Dyan Arkin, Community Planner/Development Coordinator Yvonne Johnson, City Council

United House of Prayer for All People Bishop S. C. Madison Apostle Green Apostle A.D. Cunningham Elder Jackson Brother Larry Patterson Elder Bowden

North Carolina Agricultural & Technical State University Hap Giberson, Facilities Construction Engineer II Perry Howard FASLA, Program Coordinator Doug Speight, Director of Outreach/Technology Transfer Radha Radhakrishnan, Vice Chancellor for Research & Economic

Development Landscape Architecture Student Participants

Bennett College LaDaniel Gatling, Associate Vice President Sherill Barber, Student Angie Abraham, Basketball Coach

Community Clergy Reverend Ron Chrisp, Greensboro Urban Ministry Reverend Dr. Norman Handy, Bethel AME Church

900 East Market Street Master Design Plan

Neighborhood Associations Nancy Stewart, the Heath Park Community Homeowners

Association James Jarrell, Jonesboro Scott Park Area Marguerite Scurlock, Foxtrail Neighborhood Pat Alexander, Neighborhood Association

Merchants Gail Foy Debra Rondo

Business Development Council Gary McCrants Dextor Morgan Bob Chiles Necota Smith

Other Community Stakeholders Nate Hargett, Hargett Funeral Services Adrian Moore, Executive Director of Hayes-Taylor YMCA Gladys Robinson, Director of Sickle Cell Association of

the Piedmont Ira Sheldon, Project/Operation Manager Samet

Corporation

Kinzelman Kline Gossman Team Craig Gossman, Principal, KKG Brian Kinzelman, Principal, KKG Megan Minock, Planner/Architect, KKG Aaron Whittaker, The Whittaker Group Erik Brown, Brownstone Design

Special thanks to all citizens, area property owners and charrette participants.

Table of Contents

Our Community Background

Situation Setting

Neighborhood Investments

Community Testimonials

Opportunities Housing – Opportunities & Challenges Current Demographics Shopping – Challenges and Opportunities Shopping – Opportunities Creating Place

Guiding Design Principles Preferred Design Direction Phasing Estimated Total Projected Construction Costs Mission Based Development Plan and Economic Impact Analysis

Recommendations Best Practices

Research Appendix Site Design Options Research Process Demographics Drive Time Market Area Population & Households Race & Ethnicity Household Income Housing Supply & Demand Consumer Segmentation Additional Interview Notes

900 East Market Street Master Design Plan 1


East Greensboro is a culturally rich and diverse area. East Market Street is home to nationally recognized institutions of higher learning, churches with diverse faith, entrepreneurs and traditional neighborhoods.

Perhaps more importantly, East Market Street is people. Individuals, families and neighbors – all with their own unique history and dreams.

Their perspectives offer tangible insight into the vision for the future of the East Market Street Corridor.

Our Community

The goal of the Master Plan: To create a mixed use development concept along the East Market Street Corridor designed to serve the needs and desires of the contiguous neighborhoods, university and college interests, City of Greensboro and the United House of Prayer for All People vision.

East Market Street is

PEOPLE.

3

Background

The history of the Greensboro East Market Street neighborhood is both socially rich and civically significant.

Prior to desegregation, the East Market Street Corridor was the heart of the African-American community in Greensboro. Businesses lined its busy streets and the “uptown” life offered residents a place to eat, greet, shop and recreate.

The East Market Street Corridor has played a critical role in our Nation’s history of social change. Four courageous North Carolina A&T State University students helped wake the Country from the stupor of segregation when they staged a sit-in at the downtown Woolworth’s “white-only” lunch counter. Their actions and the subsequent community support helped cast Greensboro as a leading city in the African-American fight for equality in the 50’s and 60’s. Even today it remains an important center for social and political change.

The Palace – “Uptown” East Market Street Social Change and Community Heart


Urban Renewal of the 1960’s forced a significant upheaval onto the business community along East Market Street.


Site Map from the 1997 East Market Street Master Plan by Development Concepts Incorporated. This area still remains an important center of educational and spiritual life in East Greensboro.

The 900 East Market Street site is located in a critical location within the community. It provides a physical linkage between North Carolina A&T State University, Bennett College, the East Market Street neighborhoods and Downtown Greensboro. The 13 acre site is located directly between Bennett College and the A&T Campus. Downtown is near to the west and residential neighborhoods border the site to the north and southeast. The former United States Post Office site (“900” in this exhibit) is listed with a targeted use of Mixed Use Commercial/Research & Development based in the community’s 1997 planning study. The building has been studied by private development interests for potential renovation and adaptive new use. Findings indicated the building was not suitable for renovation. The 1997 corridor plan, almost ten years old at this publication, already reported the community’s need for commercial, entertainment, retail and a hotel/business Center. The property was purchased recently by the United House of Prayer for All People (UHOP). UHOP remains open to consider appropriate long-term reuse of the property.

Situation

5

Setting The East Market Street Corridor connects the Downtown Greensboro Area to the eastern parts of the community.

Railroad tracks separate the project site from the Downtown and Bennett College.

The post office site itself is somewhat of an “island” among non-residential uses. It is adjacent to institutional, educational and commercial uses.

It is separate from the surrounding neighborhoods but central to the corridor in both location and size.

The site is arguably the most critical piece of property along the corridor in that it has significant size (13 acres), strategic location to serve a variety of development interests and provides an opportunity to reconnect East Market Street and downtown both physically and emotionally.

Aerial view of East Market Street at Bennett and Dudley



East Market Street Streetscape United House of Prayer for All People New Church at Market and Bennett

Redeveloped Business Center

Neighborhood In

New Housing – HOPE VI – Willow Oaks

vestments Over the recent past, a number of initiatives by the public and private sector have demonstrated the community’s resolve to remake the East Market Street Corridor.

The formation of the East Market Street Development Corporation (EMSDC) in 1997 was an important step in reclaiming the corridor’s former glory. Its board is comprised of members of the local community – residents, business, institutional and government leaders. The staff of the organization is dedicated, passionate and experienced.

The EMSDC led a community planning study process in 1997-98. The results of that study led to the investment of more than $10 million for street improvements and thoroughfare enhancements along East Market Street.

Their continued efforts have resulted in the current collaboration with the new owners of the former post office site.

Additionally, there are significant on-going investments occurring elsewhere the community. Privately, the United House of Prayer built a new church at the corner of Market and Bennett. Their purchase of the former post office site across the street is further expression of their commitment to community involvement and reinvestment.

7


The community testimonials represent opinions and perspectives of fictitiouscommunity residents. The profiles presented are based on research conducted for this development study. Extensive quantitative and qualitative research was compiled to uncover the community’s needs. The findings from the research are communicated through these exampthe process for further insight.

Community Testimonials

but representative

le characters. Please refer to

900 East Market Street Master Design Plan 9 9

We live in a nice neighborhood – good, hard-working folk for the most part. I work downtown and my son attends the Washington Street School. It’s tough to find good day care for Ty and I hate to have to drive so far for groceries, the doctor and other errands. I’d like to take some classes to improve my chances for promotion at work. I’ve heard that the YMCA might move somewhere else. We’d really miss that place.

We wish there was more to do around here.

Gladys and Ty Howard Single Mother/Elementary Student


Research Findings The Howard’s situation is common in the East Market Street area. One third of the households have children. There are many single parent households.

The former Post Office site at 900 East Market Street could provide for many of the services and amenities that the community needs.

Medical clinics are not conveniently located, shopping is limited and there is a general lack of community identity since Urban Renewal forced the relocation of many black-operated businesses away from East Market Street.

The need for more civic meeting and interaction space was mentioned frequently by the community groups interviewed throughout the research process.

Quality child care delivered in a convenient location at a fair price is a significant need for families with school aged children.

While there is shopping in the area, it requires traveling by car. Having more shopping choices with increases convenience would improve the resident’s living situation. Public transportation and pedestrian accessible shopping is critical for those residents without automobiles.

Community Needs: • Medical Offices/Clinic • Community Center • Gathering Places • Shopping Alternatives • Quality Day Care • Adult Education


I worked for the Maynard Company for 7 years. The past couple of years, business just slowed down and they had to let a bunch of us go last summer.

I’m staying busy but it’s tough to make ends meet. My new job at Pick and Shop doesn’t pay as much and I’m a little behind. I’m trying to pull myself up from this – not looking for hand-outs, just a lift up.

I need a cheaper apartment – just till I get back on my feet.

I hear that Global Delivery is hiring but they’re looking for computer skills I just don’t have yet.

If I could get out of the hole, I would like to go back to school and maybe rent a barber chair in someone’s shop. My daddy had a shop on East Market back in the day. I remember him being so proud of that shop.

Willard “Willy” Johnson Recently Laid Off Worker, Single, No Children

No one’s fault – things happen I guess.

Willard “Willy” Johnson Recently Laid Off Worker, Single, No Children


Research Findings Mr. Johnson is going through a period of personal upheaval. Many families and individuals experience such a challenge sometime during their lifetime.

Affordable housing is a real need in the community. Particularly necessary is housing which carries people through a transition such as the death of a spouse, a medical situation, change in employment or marital status or another type of financial crisis.

Transitional housing and step up housing is also in demand. There is little today in the way of housing alternatives on East Market Street and the post office site could provide a way to introduce a number of different housing alternatives for the community.

The former Post Office site at 900 East Market Street could also provide for many of the services and amenities that the community needs. Retail and business incubation and job training should be included on the site. The local universities should be included in this strategy to leverage their unique ability to provide for the community’s education.

The strength of the community comes in its diversity – people living and helping one another.

Community Needs: • Affordable Housing • Job Training • Business Incubation


Our children are on their own now – it’s just Fred and me and we love it!

We love the neighborhood but we honestly don’t need all the yard work anymore. We’d like to stay close to where it’s all happening maybe in a smaller place. Our new grandbaby will visit sometimes but we just don’t need all this space anymore.

We’re starting to think about retirement but right now we’re staying active and enjoying the time we have together.

It would be great if there were more choices on East Market Street for shopping and entertainment.

Frederick and Mitsy Cooper Married Couple, Grown Children

We enjoy going out for dinner and walks.


Research Findings The aging baby boomers across the United States are creating a unique dynamic in market planning. Greensboro in no excpetion to this trend.

The needs of the maturing residents in East Greensboro must be accounted for in planning. Housing alternatives including options for more convenient living are attractive options for those done with their child raising chores. As these residents continue to age, offering options for independent, congregate and assisted living is necessary to allow for these residents to stay in the neighborhood rather than move away.

While raising children is typically not a primary task for these individuals and families, children are important to their existance. Providing the same types of amentities, services and activities that younger families enjoy is important.

Arts, culture, restaurants and other entertainment alternatives contribute to creating a rich envinronment for the pre-retired and retired residents.

Community Needs: • Housing Alternatives • Elder Care • Arts and Culture


I love school! The education and culture we get exposed to is very exciting and challenging. Its was hard to be away from home at first but I soon found a group to hang with and got real busy studying.

I live on campus but leave for shopping and fun. Right now we have to get a cab to the Mall or walk up to Summit. Cabs are expensive and frankly I hate walking that far!

I’ve got friends at A&T and it would be great if our campus were more connected. My degree will be in Education and I’ve been accepted into A&T’s grad program in Education. I’ll have to work part-time to help cover tuition.

I’ve started a grad level class over there.

I’ll be getting an apartment next year. I’d like to try to live off campus but still need to be close for class and work.

Charlene MacDonald Graduating Bennett Next Spring

Its inconvenient to walk – seems like

there could be a nicer (and safer) path.


Research Findings The younger resident within the Greensboro community could be served with affordable, convenient and unique housing alternatives. These younger student residents are perhaps finishing their education and beginning their career or going further with education and internship-type activities.

Many do not yet have families so their desire is for a living situation which stresses lifestyle, career, education and fun. Without offering appropriate housing alternatives for this segment, the community forces them to look elsewhere.

The post office site can offer a variety of housing alternatives which are presently not available in the market. These housing types might include small flats in multi-story buildings or larger townhomes. The housing could be within close proximity to restaurants/shopping and other entertainment uses. Furthermore, such housing would be close to both University campuses as well as the downtown.

Arts, culture and open-air green space and other amenities would blend to create a unique sense of place and anchore the larger community.

Community Needs: • Housing Alternatives • Connect the Campuses • Arts and Culture


I am looking for a place to live on East Market Street during my two-year professorship. Diversity – both ethnically and economically – is attractive to me.

I want to be able to walk to campus and downtown – I won’t need a car in the States.

Shopping, arts and good restaurants are important. A book seller would be nice too.

Dr. Johann Bernstrom Visiting Professor, Economics; Resident of Berlin

Frankly, it is expected in communities abroad.


Research Findings The history of ethnic community and the educational dynamic on East Market Street makes it very unique marketplace. It introduces a number of potential market supports for the post office site that should be leveraged.

The universities have short-term and long-term housing needs for staff and faculty as well as students. The housing should be affordable and must include local amenities such as services, transportation and restaurant uses.

The physical connection that is lacking between the two institutions can be bridged with effective design of the post office site. Furthermore, the connection of East Market Street to the downtown can be strengthened.

Arts, culture and certainly food services are important uses to consider for the site. The area’s rich history as a community center for such activities should be reitegrated into uses on the post office site.

The universities can offer important tenant opportunities or development partnerships. Their need for programming and office space should be explored and considered in the overall development scheme.

Community Needs: • Housing Alternatives • Connect the Campuses • Connect to Downtown • Arts and Culture • Restaurants • Business Collaboration



Opportunities


The 900 East Market Street site offers an opportunity for a development entity to create a powerful mixed-use infill development designed for the diverse interests of East Greensboro.

Weaving all of the critical design components together expressed during stakeholder interviews, the property could be organized to echo the community’s request for the following critical success elements: • Culture • Housing • Education • Retail/Food service (Market) • Hospitality (Hotel) • Spiritual • Public Space

• Cultural and/or spiritual component [civil rights interactive center, spiritual gardens, special chapel, etc.]

• Community Center [senior, family, students, youth]

• Student/Faculty/Neighborhood Housing

• Farmers Market with several permanent year round tenants [market/produce, restaurants]

• Ethnic Food Hall/Court [maybe underwritten by the city to allow start-up smaller neighborhood operators to be included]

• Outdoor gathering space [small concerts, speakers, convocations, family as well as student friendly]

• Linked to future entertainment and retail area across Pastor Anderson

• Possible Business/Research Center associated with the university and college

• Future connection to the rail line

21

Housing – Opportunities & Challenges Housing Market Trends The following section details various broad urban housing market trends and discussion of their impact to the East Market Street housing market.

Fragmentation/Diversity

After WWII, the housing market responded briskly to a number of trends both economic and demographic. The development community delivered a steady supply of single family homes in an ever increasing swath of suburban development. The nature of the demographic profile of home buyers during this period provided very stable and predictable source of buyers with very homogeneous needs.

Today’s housing market is very different – more diverse. Married couples without children and people living alone now account for the largest housing market segments nationally. In the East Market Street area, single occupant households account for the largest segment of the housing population. The housing market must respond to the demands of this increasing diversity.

There is opportunity to develop housing to address all types of needs for all types of residents. The traditional detached single family structures that dominate the neighborhoods adjacent to Market Street should be complimented by other forms of housing for young people, families, empty nesters, pre-retired and retired persons. The pricing of these units should be positioned to be affordable for East Market Street residents. Furthermore, those residents desiring new housing types and amenities should not be forced from the neighborhood. Rather, these persons should be given opportunity to find such housing in the East Market Street area at prices that are attractive relative to competing areas.

Household Type

Married-couple Family - No Related Children

Single Parent Family - No Related Children

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

EMSC North CarolinaSource: US Census

Married Couple with Children

Married Couple w/out Children

Single Parentwith Children

Single

Cohabitation


Diverse users demand diverse housing options. These images represent examples of appropriate new housing for the site.


Current Demographic The one constant is change – particularly in demographics. The following section details some important trends in the nation’s demographic profile.

Baby Boomers and Seniors

A widely discussed trend in demographics is the aging of our ‘baby boom’ population. Since WWII, this important demographic segment has shifted our nation’s economy and social fabric. Their transition into retirement from the middle age activities of family life will be an important shift for our business, social, public management and health care systems.

By 2010, just over 10 percent of the nation’s population will be older than 65. By 2030, nearly 20 percent of the population will be 65 and over.

The empting of nests and subsequent retirement of these consumers is redefining life for older consumers. Contrary to the traditional stereotype for retirement, a recent Yankelovich survey coined the term “retreaderment”.

Population Age Projection

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

Age 65+

Age 45-64

Age 20-44

Age 5-19

Age 0-4

Source: US Census Bureau, 2004, "US Interim Projections by Age, Sex, Race and Hispanic"


Housing and living amenities are crucial for adults moving beyond child rearing into the next stage of life. Such consumers may no longer make housing decisions based on schools now that their children are grown. They look for housing that provides amenities, easy maintenance, access to arts, cultural and sporting activities and housing close to work.

They do not see themselves as old and take part in leisure activities with that theme in mind and work longer – either at their primary occupation or an avocation in a second “meaningful” career.

The market for second homes is growing as baby boomers with means look to other areas for pre-retirement vacationing and retirement living. One size does not fit all for these consumers – choice in location and amenity are the keys to sustainability.

Consumers in lower income neighborhoods with more limited financial resources may not be good candidates for second retirement homes but may still desire for the reduced maintenance and easier layout of a modern housing alternative. Research has shown that baby boomers are less likely to move away from their children in retirement, so they may seek in-town alternatives to their detached single family house.

Senior care for urban communities can follow the model established in suburban retirement centers. The model for care continuum starts with independent living offering access to social, medical and maintenance services in apartment or retirement condo living arrangements. When assisted living is required, communal living arrangements with managed medical and living aid can be offered. Finally, nursing facilities are within the same neighborhood so that family, friends and neighbors remain close.


It is impracticable in an urban environment to offer the care continuum in a single campus like facility that larger suburban care centers can provide. Communities should, however, take note of the various types of housing and senior care requirements and focus developments along providing the complete continuum within their neighborhood. The process of moving along the senior care continuum is made particularly difficult if we ask our aged citizens to move out of their neighborhood away from friends and family once their needs for care change.

Characteristics and Amenities for Baby Boomers and Seniors:

• Choice of different housing types – flats, condos, mid- and high-rise, smaller detached

patio homes (condo maintenance) and communal living • Less maintenance • Home offices, sun rooms, fancy kitchens, fitness areas, mother-in-law suites • Safe and secure environment • Close to family, arts, culture and entertainment activities • Close to work • Transitional care continuum from independent, assisted and nursing care in the

neighborhood


Young Upstarts

Generation X, Generation Y – the young upstarts of our communities offer vibrant additions to the urban mix. These consumers are finishing high school and entering a trade, attending college and working or beginning their career after college graduation. While their means may be limited, their dreams and aspirations are not.

They desire a vibrant community and look for fun, fitness, arts and eatery. A 2002 Wall Street Journal survey of college grads reports that 75% identified location as more important than availability of jobs in their selection of a place to live.

This market segments is very diverse in its needs. The presence of children, either in married couple families or single parent households, drives consumer choice along directions which differ from households and individuals without children.

Single occupant households desire safety, vibrant community, meaningful social interactions, access to life’s goods and services as well as life’s icing – arts, entertainment and cultural endeavors.

Economically, there is diversity as well. Young upstarts with money will use that means to live in areas offering unique amenities and adjacencies. These consumers will pay for a chance to be in the ‘scene’ of a hip up and coming neighborhood.

Young upstarts with more limited means have many of the same desires but their expression and means of fulfilling those needs is driven by their financial options.

Characteristics and Amenities for Young Upstarts:

• Adjacency to entertainment, restaurants, bars, night life

• Outdoor recreation and sports – parks, trails and greenspace

• Smaller – less expensive – housing alternatives

• Some family needs (see next section) • Safety security • A hip, vibrant culture


Households with Children

As has been previously discussed, the presence of children now crosses many traditional housing group boundaries. Regardless of the type of household, the presence of children clearly impacts the requirement that consumers have for homes and neighborhoods.

Safety, education and recreation are three overarching areas of need.

Daycare is a concern – particularly in more economically stressed neighborhoods. Breaking the cycle of poverty in families with a single parent can be difficult. Access to quality, affordable and dependable child care is essential to allow these struggling families to improve their prospects.

Safe recreation is important. Children of all economic and ethnic backgrounds long for fun and friends. Providing for safe places for their recreation is necessary to insure our next generation’s healthy and happy growth.

Education and easy access to schools is another area of critical importance to parents of children. Neighborhood schools with passionate and caring educators are an important anchor of community activity and a strong magnet for new residents.

Characteristics and Amenities for Households with Children:

• Safety and security • Education • Daycare • Recreation • Cultural and artistic activities • Convenient shopping


Housing for the Less Fortunate

Fortunately, the idea of “warehousing the poor” in lifeless high rise housing projects has finally fallen by the wayside of public policy.

Today’s strategy for public housing stresses integration and builds neighborhood character and hope in the community.

The best designed and implemented examples of recent projects have neighbors in market-rate, near-market-rate and subsidized housing living together in one community.

Willow Oaks-HOPE VI Project, located in South-East Greensboro, is a great example of a transformation of obsolete public housing and the surrounding area into a vibrant, mixed-income community. Half of the 608 housing units at Willow Oaks are rental or for sale at market value. While the other half will be subsidized by the Greensboro Housing Authority giving opportunities for low-income residents to purchase a home at a reduced rate. See image on the lower right.

Providing innovative subsidization is critical to the project’s long term viability and impact to resident’s lives.

Live/work programs, child care, health care, down payment assistance and match and other programs help offer less fortunate residents a way up and out of poverty.

The new model of economic integration not segregation puts the community back together. The “haves” and “have less” learn from one another and do what communities do best which is move forward together with a sense of belonging and hope for the future.

Cabrini Green, Chicago’s Near North Side The Failed Model for Public Housing

South-East Greensboro Willow Oaks-HOPE VI Project Market Rate and Subsidized Units


Immigration/Ethnic Diversity

As is our history, the American demographic landscape continues to change and evolve. The ethnic diversity, or melting pot, of our population is increasing with a new influx of Hispanic ethnicity peoples from abroad. Additionally, more localized but strong trends of immigration from other cultures such as Asia and Africa is impacting the consumer makeup of our neighborhoods.

The statistics show that overall population has grown slightly from the 1990 Census. The number of persons reporting White race has declined by 11% while persons reporting Black or African American has increased by 8 percent.

The number of persons reporting Hispanic ethnicity in East Market Street area has grown by over 400% to make up four percent of the population.

Ethnic Diversity 1990-2000 - East Market 1990

Total Population 62,094

Street (5-Min Drive)% Pop 2000 % Pop Change

64,007 3.1%

Population by Race/Ethnicity White Alone 24,254 39% 21,460 34% -11.5% Black or African American Alone 35,978 58% 38,875 61% 8.1%Races Other than Black/White Asian Alone 700 1% 1,057 2% 51.0% Pacific Islander Alone 10 0% 28 0% 0.0% Some Other Race Alone 156 0% 1,293 2% 728.8% Two or More Races 680 1% 979 2% 44.0%Total Other 1,546 2% 3,357 5% 117.1%

Hispanic Population Total* 466 1% 2,531 4% 443.1%

Source: U.S. Census 2000, ESRI.*Hispanic is counted as an ethnicity by the US Census not a race.



Shopping – Challenges and Opportunities East Market Street was once the center for commercial activity in East Greensboro. While there is still significant merchant presence, the opportunity to provide some additional neighborhood and student focused retail exists.

The Food Lion grocery provides an important source of daily sustenance needs. The newer shopping centers just south of the A&T Campus have many spaces occupied but with non-retail uses and do not appear to provide the student population with retail option focused on their needs. There appears to be a high rate of turnover which may also indicate a less than ideal retail environment.

The challenges facing retail along East Market Street include the lack of significant income in the adjacent neighborhood. Retailer site selection models generally focus on the number of households within a 1 or 3-mile radius and their average disposable income.

Existing Area Shopping Center

Existing Food Lion

Additionally, competition from other retail shopping districts is stiff and increasing with the opening of Wal-Mart to the north.

The physical configuration of East Market Street is also a challenge. Retail works best if it is flanked and fronted by other retail. Consumers tend to notice stores better when they are grouped together – mall development has proved this point rather convincingly. A “single loaded corridor” or one that has retail only on a single side – presents challenges to retail tenanting.

There is very strong vehicular traffic along East Market Street – perhaps moving too fast to encourage convenient “stop-walk-and-shop”.

There is an additional opportunity along the corridor and in particular with the former Post Office site to design new projects with more urban characteristics in mind. In-fill projects along East Market Street to date have been designed with suburban retail center character with more concern for the automobile than pedestrians. Consequently, the corridor remains significantly auto oriented with less then desirable traffic speed for an urban commercial mixed use area.

While the pedestrian access has been improved, the merchants considered for the post office site must be organized in such as way to both provide exposure to the passing traffic but also be very accessible to the walking customers from the neighborhood, the parking areas and students from Bennett and A&T.

New competition for East Market Street retail

Non-retail uses along corridor

Lessons can be learned from pedestrian focused shopping mall design models


Shopping Opportunities It is the opinion of the consulting team, the real estate development community and the stakeholders that the post office site is best configured as a mixed-use project. Retail, while important in the overall mix, is not considered to be the driving use of the site. An understanding of the fundamental interrelationship between university stability and the vitaliabutting businesses can promote an innovative public-private partnership.

Retail that should be considered must be unique and positioned to meet unmet demand.

Some ideas include: • Green grocer market • Book Store

o Christian/University o Perhaps co-branded with a national bookseller o North Carolina A & T University and/or Bennett College

• Restaurant – o United House of Prayer Café o Ethnic Food Alternatives o Deli Market

• Retail Incubation Space

ty of


Creating “Place” What is “place”? Technically – it is a location. Emotionally, it is something far more compelling.

Place has memory – interactions – people – sounds – smells. Place is a sense of community. It begins with a public space as the framework around which housing, retail and commercial buildings are well integrated.

It is inevitable that place should feel authentic and original. Creating a unique identity can set the stage for visitors to perceive the authenticity. An identity should be carried throughout a variety of destinations capitalizing on a wide-range of uses and activities. The identity should be folded into activities for all seasons and should serve a variety of people from all backgrounds.

Place making and identity can be further defined by creating consistent, powerful visual themes in signage and wayfinding applications; the illustrations demonstrate conceptual examples for the East Market Street Development.



Community input has driven this design exercise. The suggested uses and product mix in the following design scenario is based on the nea rational eco

The scale of the development is driven by the size of the densities. While the site cannot be considered a downtownnear the downtown. These types of sites are transitiondensities greater than tract housing but appropriate.

The site is large and can support a number of different itself to multi-l

Sites of such size also require a significant economic investment to generate a prudent return on investment (ROI). The economic model for a not-for-profit investment such as that of the United House of Prayer may be slightly different than that of a commercial lender or for-profit developer. Notwithstanding, however, is the need to provide for a sustainable development for their mission and its inherent investment by the congregation.

Guiding Design Principles

eds of the community, the market that would be expected to support this project and nomic analysis to gauge the feasibility and sustainability of the design.

subject property and its place relative to other uses and site within the core central business district – it is

al in nature and are most appropriately designed for less than the downtown’s high-rise structures. Four to six stories is very

uses and structures. The topography of the site lends evel mixed use design scenarios to take advantage of various entry and exit locations.

Design Themes: • Mixed Use – Urban Density • Housing – Various Housing Types • Some Retail – Neighborhood Serving • Office – University Uses/Market • Connect the Site to Its Surroundings • Engage the Street – Pedestrian Friendly

The close proximity to downtown provides an opportunity to develop a transitional higher density project.

35

Preferred Design Direction The preferred design concept described below and illustrated on pages 37 and 38, introduces a street network to the property to create a variety of redevelopment sites within the overall 13 acre tract. It engages the adjacent campus at the intersection of Bennett and E. Market Street and provides significant outdoor plaza space and pedestrian thoroughfare.

The mix of uses stresses residential, office, retail and community uses.

Across from the UHOP church, a two-story mixed use structure, Building A, would house the UHOP restaurant on the ground floor with Office or Housing uses on the second floor. This space would offer an upgraded facility and seating area for the very popular UHOP restaurant currently located in the basement of the church. It would also include an outdoor seating area and provide for greater exposure to Bennett Street.

The second floor of Building A could provide additional church programming space or market housing.

Building B provides a logical place for a UHOP Community Center/Day Care with space for church programming such as band and choir rehearsal space, a computer lab and senior activities. Located in the center of the site, a secure outdoor playground facility would serve both the daycare center planned for the structure and the greater East Greensboro community during non-school hours.

Buildings C1& C2 provide independent living homes for elder residents in the area. These are smaller attached condos or apartments that are in a prime location for residents to have easy access to the site amenities.

Located right on East Market Street Building D completes the Market Commons Plaza adjacent to the Community Center and the UHOP Restaurant. This building will have retail storefront on the first floor and office or residential on the second floor. The first floor could showcase restaurants that have outside seating on the sidewalk or plaza creating an enticing atmosphere.

Building A UHOP Restaurant Office/Housing Above Building B Community Center Day Care Buildings C1 & C2 Elder Independent Living Aparments/Townhomes Building D Retail Office/Housing Above Building E Academic Building Building F Hotel Buildings G, H High Density Housing Building I Stacked Townhouses



To create further connections between the university and the site, Building E would hold academic activities. Bringing students across the street will help the restaurant and retail business on the site.

Housing is a large component of this plan with Buildings I, G & H adding to the variety of housing types to the site. The types are shown to be varied in nature – flats, stacked two-story townhomes and four-story structures. Buildings G & H are high density housing that faces the plaza above the parking garage allowing direct parking access for the residents. The rest of the housing adjacent to the railroad tracks and the high density housing is stacked townhomes. These should be market rate helping to create a diverse housing stock on the site.

Building F at the corner of East Market Street and Pastor Anderson is the foremost location for a hotel. Closest to Downtown Greensboro this hotel could have a modest 150 rooms that would cater to the academic community as well as the Downtown. This would be a perfect place to stay for a visiting professor that is lecturing at the adjacent academic building or local universities.

The remainder of the site plan includes a large underground parking facility to service office and residential users, garages for the residents in the townhomes or independent living homes, as well as on-street and surface parking to serve UHOP parishioners on Sunday and shoppers, residents and workers at other times.


F E

G

D

I

F

H B

A

C1

I

Market Street

Bennett College

Book store

Pastor Anderson C2

North Carolina A&T Preferred Design DirectionState University

I

Preferred Design Direction

Staked Townhomes High Density Housing Independent Living


UHOP Restaurant Office or Housing Above

Community Center Daycare

Homes

Seasonal Farmers Market

Hotel

Academic Building

Retail Office Above

Market Commons

Market Street Commons

View of proposed Market Street Commons from Market Street and Bennett Intersection


Phasing Phase 1

• Post Office Demolition

• Remediation

Estimated Construction Costs Phase 1


Post Office Demolition $1,100,000 Remediation $550,000 Earthwork $207,000 Phase 1 Total $1,857,000 Post

Office

Phase 2 – 4.13 Acres • UHOP Building – 28,932 sq ft • Parking Lot – 112 spaces • Plaza – Market Commons

Phase 3 – 1.18 Acres • Community Center/Day

Care – 11,300 sq ft

• Independent Living Homes – 900 sq ft per Unit – 18 Units



UHOP Building $3,501,000 Site Amenities $844,000 Phase 2 Total $4,344,000 Phase 3 Community Center/Day Care $1,367,000 Independent Living Homes $1,782,000 Site Amenities $63,000 Phase 3 Total $3,213,000

23

Phase 4 – 0.72 Acres • Independent Living Homes

– 900 sq ft per Unit – 26 Units

Phase 5 – 3.65 Acres • Hotel – 150 Rooms • Academic Building – 34,000 sq ft • High Density Housing – 70 units • Parking Structure – 485 Spaces


5

Independent Living Homes $2,574,000 Site Amenities $432,000 Phase 4 Total $3,006,000


Phase 5 Hotel $14,245,000 Academic Building $6,919,000 High Density Housing $8,458,000 Underground Parking $7,469,000 Site Amenities $474,000 Phase 5 Total $37,565,000

4

Phase 6 – 0.65 Acres • Mixed-use Building – 53,200 sq ft

Phase 7 – 3.82 Acres • Stacked Townhomes

– 1,200 sq ft per Unit – 84 Units

• Garages – 50 Cars



Mixed-Use Building $5,852,000 Site Amenities $23,000 Phase 6 Total $5,875,000 Phase 7 Stacked Townhomes $18,810,000 Site Amenities $517,000 Garages $432,000 Phase 7 Total $19,761,000

6

7

Estimate Contingency* STORIES QUNTY UNIT UNIT COST $000s $000s Phase1


Post Office Demolition** - 304,800 SF $6 $1,000 $1,100 Remediation** - 506,700 SF $3 $500 $550 Earthwork - 18,800 CY $10 $188 $207 $1,688 $1,857 Phase 2 Building A UHOP Building 2 28,932 SF $110 $3,183 $3,501 Site Amenities - - - - $767 $844 $3,950 $4,344 Phase 3 Building B Community Center/Day Care 1 11,300 SF $110 $1,243 $1,367 Building C1 Independent Living Homes 2 16,200 SF $100 $1,620 $1,782 Each unit is 900 sq ft - 18 units - - - - - - Site Amenities - - - - $58 $63 $2,921 $3,213 Phase 4 Building C2 Independent Living Homes 2 23,400 SF $100 $2,340 $2,574 Each unit is 900 sq ft - 26 units - - - - - - Site Amenities - - - - $393 $432 $2,733 $3,006 Phase 5 Building F Hotel 4 74,000 SF $175 $12,950 $14,245 Building E Academic Building 2 34,000 SF $185 $6,290 $6,919 Building G,H High Density Housing – 70 Units 3 69,900 SF $110 $7,689 $8,458 Underground Parking 2 485 EA $14,000 $6,790 $7,469 Site Amenities - - - - $431 $474 $34,150 $37,565 Phase 6 Building D Mixed-Use Building 3 53,200 SF $100 $5,320 $5,852 Site Amenities - - - - $21 $23 $5,341 $5,875 Phase 7 Building I Stacked Townhomes 3 91,200 SF $125 $11,400 $12540 Each unit is 1,200 sq ft - 76 Units - - - - - - Garages (50 Cars) 1 7,900 SF $50 $395 $435 Site Amenities - - - - $470 $517 $12,265 $13,492 PROJECT TOTAL - Phases 1-7 $63,048 $69,352 *Contingency - 10% for unexpected conditions.

Estimated Total Projected Construction Costs


Mission Based Development Plan and Economic Impact Analysis United House of Prayer for All People (UHOP) purchased the former Post Office Sorting Facility site at 900 E. Market Street for $3,650,000 in June of 2005. While a detailed assessment of the conditions of the existing structures was not within the scope of this engagement, it is assumed based on prior reviews of the site’s buildings that the site will require demolition and remediation of hazardous materials.

The development of the site from UHOP’s perspective could take many forms. UHOP reports that their history of development has been handled completely within their organization without need for outside partnering. Traditionally, a site of this size requires a significant investment on the part of the owner to maximize its economic contribution to the owner and the community. As such, we are assuming that the UHOP owners will opt for an approach which leverages their investment in purchasing the site while planning uses that support the church’s mission to serve the community’s needs.

The principles guiding this phased approach are based on the idea that the project will be judged on its mission, not its revenue. As such, care has been taken to provide an economic means for developing the key UHOP uses - restaurant, church programming space, elder-care, apartment living and community space. The cost of building and maintaining these mission-based uses is supported by careful and controlled development of the remainder of the site without sacrificing control or ownership.

Phase 1 involves the site preparation required to make the property ready for development.

Phase 2 is the development of the UHOP restaurant, parking and community plaza space on the eastern side of the property. The restaurant would be moved from the basement of the existing church building and located to a more visible location to anchor the new project. The size of the facility would be increased to allow for better service and its exposure to the vehicle traffic along Market Street and Bennett would increase its customer draw. In addition, the pedestrian traffic from the adjacent universities, offices and residential population would be better attracted to the facility.

Above the restaurant, additional church programming space is planned to accommodate needs that cannot be handled in the church’s existing building. Meeting room, choir and band space as well as other needs could be accomodated in this space.

For the purposes of economic impact analysis, it is assumed that the church will employ persons on a volunteer basis to run its restaurant and will expand its staff as this new programming space comes on line. It is further assumed that the restaurant will generate sales tax.


Phase 3 is the development of a day care and community outreach center (Building B). It is assumed that the management of the day care center would be best managed at arm’s length through an agreement with another organization that could assume liability and management of this operation. This entity would in essense lease space within the building from UHOP. The community center could be run in concert with local city, recreation department, university or YMCA organizations to share the cost of ongoing operation of the facilities.

The nearly $12,000,000 required to develop Phases 1through 4 can be offset by the careful development of the remainder of the site. One way to measure this is to consider a scenario where UHOP in essence ‘borrows’ the funds from their operations and titling to fund the development. This model makes sense in that it focuses on prudent investment and correlated economic return.

For example, assuming typical funding, a $12,000,000 commercial note on a 30-year amortization at 8% per annum would require principal and interest service of just over $1,000,000 per year. Development of the site could be effective if the project is managed to meet the financial needs of phases 1through 4 while provding responsible and mission based development of the remainder of the site relative to the community’s needs and the congregation’s commitment to the church.

Within phases 1 through 4, the realization of annual income is possible through a management contract with a thrid-party day care provider (whether that party is affiliated with UHOP or not) of $120,000 or $15 per square foot. Additional, some of the community center space might be utilized by the community, institutions or other community users to contribute additional funds. We assume this to be $56,000 or 8,000 sq. ft. at $7 per sq foot.

This phase also includes some independent living and/or subsidized housing which is based on funding recommendations listed in the next phase.

Phase 4 of the Mission-based Development Plan is the development of independent living and subsidized housing. While this development is likely not to be a purely for-profit endeavor, it will likely yield some measure of return relative to the cost of development.

The cost to develop the residential is $7,200,000. Again applying our model for economic support of this investment based on ‘standard’ terms – we find that $660,000 per year is required to service this investment. Since the Church has clearly stated their desire to provide such affordible housing it is assumed that any income from these units is calculated at a deeply discounted rate. Therefore we assume that the units generate $127,000 in subsidized income.


Phases 5 through 7 involve the build out the remainder of the site. While UHOP has stated their desire to remain in control, we feel strongly that an approach which accomplishes the Church’s goals while helping offset the cost of development through the careful collaboration is appropriate.

As such, we feel one opportunity to leverage the community’s needs including the educational institutions adjacent to the site is a land-lease partnership or tenency of Building D by either North Carolina A&T University or Bennett College (or a combination of the two).

Additionally, the hotel site and the adjacent mix of uses (Buildings E, F , G and H) require the development of under-ground parking and will likely need to be developed in concert with one another. We suggest that UHOP consider a for-profit development partnership with East Market Street Development Corporation, area business leaders, residents, universities and perhaps even other faith-based organizations. The UHOP contribution to the partnership could be the land for development while other equity partners could contribute capital to secure their stakes in the organization. This new entity could in turn develop the site for the uses specified including the recruitment of tenants such as a hotel.

Finally, the other residential in the site might be developed by UHOP at arm’s length through the use of deed-restrictions, development overlays or other control mechanism to insure the development supports their mission based vision for the site.

Property Tax Impact:

The property tax generated by the parcel today is based on the valuation from December 2003. As such, the Guilford County Appraiser’s Office places the value of the 900 E. Market Street property at nearly $5 million. While the assessor’s data is not linked to the appraiser’s data, the County Appraiser’s office has indicated that the current property tax is $62,274 per year.

Mechanisms exist for property owners to submit for reappraisal and it would be advantageous to consider filing for such evaluation. If the value of the property were based solely on the land value (assuming that the existing structures have no market value), then the annual tax bill could be cut significantly.

Furthermore, one tool that could be available for infrastructure improvement is Tax Increment Financing. This program involves legislative action which earmarks increases in property tax to fund specific site improvements such as road, infrastructure or other public areas. Although new to North Carolina, this program has proven to be an effective economic development tool to foster public private partnerships and public improvement costs.

By estimating the site’s built out value based on construction costs, we find a significant lift in property tax.

We would recommend working with the City of Greensboro to research this or other programs.

Property Tax Impact Valuation Today: $4,878,500 (based on Guilford County) Property Tax Contribution: $62,274 *Assuming a Successful Re-evaluation: Estimated Revised Valuation: $1,100,000 Estimated Tax Contribution: $14,042 Completed Development: $63,048,000 Estimated Valuation: $63,048,000 Estimated Tax Contribution: $804,808 Tax Difference: $742,534


Income and Sales Tax Impacts:

In addition to property tax impacts, any business or individuals working or living on the redeveloped site will contribution additional impacts to the public economy.

Sales from retail operations are taxed at 6.75%. The plan includes nearly 60,000 square feet of retail including the hotel, storefronts and restaurants. At a very conservative $200 of sales per square foot, the estimated sales tax from these businesses is $810,000.

Persons employed or residing within the project will also be subject to income tax. Presently, the state of North Carolina taxes its residents at 7% of income. We can estimate residential income tax by assuming conservatively that the approximately 150 units of residential are occupied by an average 1.5 persons per unit; each earning the median income. This calculates to over $5.5 million in gross wages or nearly $400,000 in annual income tax revenue.

Jobs will also be created by this project. Assuming one job per 1,000 square feet of business use (non-residential) again earning the average income yields a total of just over $4 million in wages or over $300,000 in annual income tax.

Potential Site Income Opportunities A UHOP Restaurant Site Restaurant 14,000 $20 sq. ft. $280,000 UHOP Restaurant Upper Floor Office 14,000 $15 sq. ft. $210,000 B Day Care Center Day Care 11,000 $20 sq. ft. $220,000 Community Center Office 11,000 $15 sq. ft. $165,000 C Independent Living Apts Apts (900 sq. ft.) 22 $500 per mth $132,000 Subsidized Living Units Apts (900 sq. ft.) 22 $500 per mth $132,000 F Hotel Building 74,000 $25 sq. ft. $1,850,000 E Academic Building Office 34,000 $15 sq. ft. $510,000 G, H Mkt Rate Apartments Apts (1,000 sq. ft.) 32 $800 per mth $307,200 D Mixed Use Building Office 40,000 $15 sq. ft. $600,000 Retail 13,200 $15 sq. ft. $198,000 I Stacked Townhomes Apts (1,200 sq. ft.) 76 $1,250 per mth $1,140,000

Underground Parking Parking (monthly rent) 485 $65 per mth $378,300

Annual Site Income Opportunity: $6,362,500

Maximum Supportable Debt $71,627,647

Based on simple present value of stream of total annual income. Rate 8%, 30-year amortization. Low High Funding Gap - Total Project Development Estimate Minus Supportable Debt ($2,159,371) ($9,538,073)

Low estimate does not include 10% contingency. High gap based on costs plus 10%.



As the East Market Street Development Corporation, EMSDC, considers the recommendations of this feasibility study for the former Post Office site at 900 East Market Street, considerations for the continued quest for redevelopment of the site should be finalized. Although property ownership remains with the United House of Prayer for All People, the East Market Street Development Corporation can play a critical role in the long-term redevelopment of the property.

To that end, we have outlined recommendations for EMSDC to remain involved in the development process and to provide assistance to the United House of Prayer for All People to complete this vision with a mission based approach.

Recommendations

51


Recommendations 1. Organize a 900 East Market Street Development Advisory Committee to provide support leadership to the United House of Prayer through neighborhood,

institutional and municipal representation. The committee membership should include: a. United House of Prayer b. East Market Street Development Corporation c. City of Greensboro d. North Carolina A&T State University e. Bennett College f. Neighborhood organizations

2. Confirm critical success factors from UHOP to determine level of public assistance & private enterprise commitment for project vision to progress.

3. Determine potential public sector contribution (i.e. human resources, public funding, and partnering possibilities) to present to UHOP for consideration. Local, state and federal resources should be identified.

4. Determine potential institutional role in the property development (i.e. academic/student housing, funding vehicles, etc) to present to UHOP for consideration.

5. Present to UHOP advantages of development partnering for consideration.

• Risk Reduction • Development results realized sooner • Ability to engage specialized development partners • Ability to guide the development with UHOP vision as a priority • Ability to maximize return on investment (ROI) • Ability to maximize public sector involvement • Fulfill promise of this key site as a cornerstone for East Greensboro economic revitalization


6. Identify logical phasing of project to prepare implementation schedule. The development sequence listed below is presented to facilitate discussion of development sequencing:

a. Post office demolition b. Environmental remediation & site preparation c. Street, sidewalk, surface parking, infrastructure construction d. Identify project development sites (see site plan on page 38):

o Site A – Phases 2, 3 & 6 United House of Prayer for All People Restaurant Public Plaza – Market Commons Community Center/Daycare Commercial Mixed Use Housing

o Site B – Phases 4 & 7 Housing Greenspace Buffer at Railroad Tracks

o Site C – Phases 5 Hotel High Density Housing Academic Building Underground Parking Structure Public Street Modifications

7. Allow market conditions and public/private commitments to determine logical development sequence. 8. Determine most effective and advantageous strategy for UHOP 9. Prepare development implementation schedule


Best Practice Project Examples The following examples illustrate similar contextual place making initiatives involving public, private and non profit partnerships.

South Campus Gateway Columbus, OH

Participants: Campus Partners, The Ohio State University (OSU), citizens of the University District, City of Columbus, and various University Community organizations and associations.

Partnership: Nonprofit and Public

Financing: City of Columbus and OSU through Campus Partners. $35 million in tax credit allocations under the New Markets Tax Credit (NMTC) program for seven years.

Description: Adjacent to the OSU campus, the Gateway includes 250,000 square feet of retail with many entertainment, restaurant, shopping and service venues, 88,000 square feet of office space with the majority dedicated to OSU’s Office of Human Resources, 190 studio, loft-style, one and two bedroom apartments and a parking garage with approximately 1,200 spaces. Completed in 2005.

Resource: http://campuspartners.osu.edu/gateway/index.html


Trinity Station Cincinnati, OH

Participants: Xavier University and Koll Development

Partnership: Private & Institutional

Financing: $134 million in tax exempt bonds, conventional financing supported by retail credit and pre-leased housing, and equity investment through the developer.

Description: Design for the integration of history, lore, village/living, convenience and education of a 30 acre site strategically located next to a private university. A prospective corporate use for job creation and co-op with Xavier with encouragement of a pedestrian friendly environment with on street parking, gathering areas for Students, Faculty & Patrons, appealing retail uses and design. As well as an integration of the existing campus plan & architecture with continuity of design and place.

City West Cincinnati, OH

Participants: Cincinnati Metropolitan Housing Authority, City of Cincinnati, The Community Builders, Inc.

Partnership: Public and Private

Financing: $180 million, two HOPE VI grants & $15 million in City's funds

Description: Replacement of dilapidated public housing with a mix of housing types that consists of new housing units in a traditional neighborhood setting. Housing units include home ownership units, market rate units, and public housing units.

Resource: http://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/cdap/pages/-3850-/



Ruston University Tech Plan Ruston, LA

Participants: City of Ruston and Louisiana Tech University

Partnership: Public & Institutional

Description: Encompassing 25 city blocks, this Strategic Planning initiative identified organizational alliances, real estate development opportunities and physical beautification projects for implementation. The City of Ruston is located in the Parish of Lincoln in Northern Louisiana approximately 60 miles east of Shreveport and 40 miles west of Monroe. Ruston is connected to Texas and Mississippi via the Interstate Highway-20 corridor. The initiative also proposed a new entertainment district as well as a new primary entrance into downtown Ruston. Also several University uses were taken out of the University proper and placed within the new district to further connect the University with the downtown. The jewel of the district is the Chautauqua Green which will provide a key public space for downtown and the University.

Chautauqua Green

Covington Infill Housing Covington, KY

Participants: Department of Housing Development, City of Covington Kentucky, PDevelopment Interests

Partnership: Private & Public

Financing: Private housing development initiative with favorable interest rates and terms

Description: Affordable infill housing development concepts for Covington’s East Side and West Side Neighborhoods. As contextually sensitive design solutions, these homes meet the needs for modern affordable housing while replacing outdated public housing. The goal is to be a catalyst for new investment by recruiting & give incentives to interested housing developers/builders.

rivate


Lincoln Heights Steffens Avenue Corridor Cincinnati, OH

Participants: Lincoln Heights Community Improvement Corporation

Partnership: Non Profit & Public

Description: The Village of Lincoln Heights is currently faced with a lack of adequate housing, limited tax base and the problems of crime, drug enforcement and urban blight. The Steffens Avenue Corridor was a part of an Urban Redevelopment Plan for the primary commercial corridor of a low income and predominantly African-American community located 12 miles north of downtown Cincinnati. Specific recommendations were made for the development within the corridor while addressing important community-wide physical and social factors influencing redevelopment. Physical and social factors included the displacement of existing residents, low-income housing, transportation, environmental quality, civic amenities and services. The community planning process included a “Real Estate Round-Table” forum to develop sound development strategies that met neighborhood objectives, and engaged stakeholder\consensus and buy-in.



900 East Market Street Master Design Plan 61 61

Research Appendix

• Site Design Options

• Research Process

• Demographics o Drive Time Market Area o Population & Households o Race & Ethnicity o Household Income

• Housing Supply & Demand

• Consumer Segmentation

• Additional Interview Notes


Design Options

The following site plans and three dimensional studies illustrate optional design scenarios that were explored by the consultants during the master planning process. Although a preferred plan was selected as presented on page 36, several of the following scenarios offer optional design/development directions worthy of consideration as the project development process unfolds.

Design Option A


H G

I

D K

F

E

J

C

A

B

K

K

Market Street

Bennett College

Bookstore

Building A Community Center Day Care Building B UHOP Restaurant Office / Housing Above Buildings C, D, E Retail Office / Housing Above Building F Retail Office Above Building G Academic Building Building H Retail Incubator Housing Above Buildings I, J Medical-Housing Services Housing Above Building K Stacked Townhouses

Design Option A



E

C D

F

F G

F

B

F

A

G

Pastor Anderson

Market Street

Design Option B

Building A Community Center Day Care Building B UHOP Restaurant Office / Housing Above Buildings C Academic Building Building D Retail Office Above Building E Retail Office Above Building F Townhouses Buildings G Stacked Townhouses

Design Option B



F E

G

D

I

F

H A

B I

I

Market Street

Pastor Anderson

Bennett College

Book store

D

Design Option C

Building A Community Center Day Care Building B UHOP Restaurant Office / Housing Above Buildings C Retail Office / Housing Above Building D Retail Office Above Building E Academic Building Building F Hotel Buildings G, H Medical-Housing Services Housing Above Building I Stacked Townhouses

Design Option C



North Carolina A&T State University Design Charrette

Research Process The Design process that the consulting team undertook involved a great deal of community interaction as well as traditional research and design activities.

Extensive interviewing and focus group research was used to solicit feedback from the community. The business, municipal leadership and real estate community were also involved in providing feedback on the site, the corridor and the larger context of the project.

• Interviews

• Primary and Secondary Field Research

• Stakeholder Focus Groups

• Best Practices

• North Carolina A&T State University Landscape Architecture Student Design Week

Design Week

In addition, the consulting team worked with nearly 50 North Carolina A&T State University Landscape Architecture students and faculty during a three day design charrette focused on the East Market Street Corridor, the project site and its physical connections to the adjacent community.

The charrette was concluded as a part of the Landscape Architecture Program’s annual “Design Week” activity.

Program Chairman, Perry Howard, FASLA is commended for seeking out ways in which his talented landscape architecture students can provide affective community service to Greater Greensboro through research and creative design solutions.

Student Work Interactive work session

Updated Demographics The traditional market definition of the East Market Street Corridor included the local US Census Tracts along Market Street from downtown to English Street.


Drive Time Market Areas

5-Minutes

10-Minutes

15-Minutes

Drive Time Market Area To fully understand the relationship of the East Market Street Corridor to the surrounding community, a more realistic market definition is useful. Defining a marketplace based on how consumers travel is more accurate than a simple ring study.

In the analysis, three drive time market areas were compiled.

Summary Demographics: • 7,000 persons/1,700 households in East Market

Street Corridor o Stable population 25,000 households within

5-minute drive o 75,000 households within a

10-minute drive • Population skews to single households

o 1/3 have children • Low Homeownership – High Renter Population

o More than students – single family rental • Lower median income – strong income growth • 90+% African-American in EMSC

o 60% with 5-minute market area


Population and Household Growth

EMSC 5-Min Drive 10-Min DriveGreensboro

City, NC North Carolina USA2000 Total Population 7,345 64,007 169,782 223,891 8,049,313 281,421,9062005 Total Population 7,380 65,648 177,417 237,814 8,732,955 298,727,8982010 Total Population 7,571 68,771 187,812 253,490 9,408,689 317,430,845 2005 - 2010 Annual Rate 0.51% 0.93% 1.15% 1.28% 1.5% 1.22%

2000 Households 1,743 24,135 67,979 92,394 3,132,013 105,480,1012005 Households 1,745 25,084 72,062 99,814 3,449,221 112,448,9012010 Households 1,837 26,589 76,903 107,300 3,743,609 119,777,029 2005 - 2010 Annual Rate 1.03% 1.17% 1.31% 1.46% 1.65% 1.27% 2005 Average Family Size 3.1 3.01 2.95 2.93 2.97 3.14Source: U.S. Census 2000, ESRI.

Households by Type


City, NC North Carolina USATotal 1,742 24,135 67,978 92,394 3,132,013 105,480,101 Family Households 50.3% 53.5% 60.3% 58.4% 68.9% 68.1% Married-couple Family 20.7% 26.5% 39.1% 39.8% 52.5% 51.7% With Related Children 9.2% 11.5% 17.0% 17.8% 23.9% 24.8% Other Family (No Spouse) 29.7% 27.0% 21.2% 18.5% 16.4% 16.4% With Related Children 19.2% 17.9% 13.9% 12.1% 10.8% 10.7% Nonfamily Households 49.7% 46.5% 39.7% 41.6% 31.1% 31.9% Householder Living Alone 38.6% 35.8% 31.1% 32.6% 25.4% 25.8% Householder Not Living Alone 11.0% 10.7% 8.6% 9.0% 5.7% 6.1%

Households with Related Children 28.4% 29.4% 30.9% 30.0% 34.7% 35.5%Households with Persons 65+ 24.8% 21.8% 21.7% 19.9% 21.8% 23.4%Source: U.S. Census 2000, ESRI.


Median income is the amount which divides the income distribution into two equal groups, half having income above that amount, and half having income below that amount.

Race and Ethnicity - 2005 Estimates


City, NC North Carolina USATotal 7,379 65,648 177,416 237,814 8,732,955 298,727,898 White Alone 2.8% 32.4% 46.9% 54.9% 70.9% 73.3% Black Alone 94.0% 60.7% 44.5% 36.7% 21.5% 12.5% American Indian Alone 0.2% 0.5% 0.6% 0.5% 1.2% 0.9% Asian or Pacific Islander Alone 0.4% 2.0% 3.1% 3.5% 1.8% 4.3% Some Other Race Alone 1.6% 2.6% 3.0% 2.6% 3.0% 6.3% Two or More Races 1.0% 1.7% 2.0% 1.9% 1.5% 2.7%Hispanic Origin 3.1% 4.7% 5.5% 5.1% 5.8% 14.5%Source: U.S. Census 2000, ESRI.

Median Household Income - 2005 Estimates


City, NC North Carolina USAHousehold Income Base 1,745 25,085 72,062 99,813 3,449,218 112,447,605 < $15,000 30.8% 22.6% 14.9% 12.7% 14.4% 13.0% $15,000 - $24,999 18.5% 17.6% 13.4% 11.9% 12.0% 10.8% $25,000 - $34,999 16.7% 14.9% 13.3% 12.7% 12.0% 11.0% $35,000 - $49,999 15.2% 16.7% 17.7% 17.2% 17.3% 15.5% $50,000 - $74,999 11.3% 14.4% 18.2% 19.4% 19.8% 19.4% $75,000 - $99,999 3.8% 6.2% 9.3% 10.4% 10.6% 11.8% $100,000 - $149,999 3.3% 4.6% 7.8% 9.5% 9.1% 11.5% $150,000 - $199,999 0.2% 1.3% 2.1% 2.6% 2.3% 3.3% $200,000 + 0.2% 1.5% 3.4% 3.6% 2.6% 3.8%Average Household Income $31,961 $44,442 $60,447 $64,770 $60,038 $68,694

Median Household Income2000 Census $21,858 $26,981 $36,379 $39,674 $39,190 $42,1642005 Estimate $25,257 $30,820 $41,536 $45,774 $44,845 $49,747Growth 2000-2005 16% 14% 14% 15% 14% 18%2008 Projection $28,619 $35,399 $47,894 $52,524 $51,350 $58,384Growth 2005-2008 13% 15% 15% 15% 15% 17%Source: U.S. Census 2000, ESRI.


U.S. Census Housing Statistics


City, NC North Carolina USA2005 Housing Units 1,973 27,656 77,710 107,402 3,922,809 124,387,331 Owner Occupied Housing Units 23.9% 38.2% 51.3% 50.9% 61.8% 61.5% Renter Occupied Housing Units 64.5% 52.5% 41.4% 42.0% 26.1% 28.9% Vacant Housing Units 11.6% 9.3% 7.3% 7.1% 12.1% 9.6%

Median Home Value 2000 $67,417 $77,736 $94,982 $104,675 $95,839 $111,833 2005 $77,589 $89,869 $112,484 $123,725 $119,818 $163,247 2010 $95,833 $110,523 $134,580 $148,866 $146,650 $211,450Growth 2000-2008 42% 42% 42% 42% 53% 89%

Occupied Housing Units by ValueTotal 429 9,943 37,085 48,759 2,172,270 69,816,513 < $50,000 21.2% 11.7% 7.6% 5.2% 18.0% 14.9% $50,000 - $99,999 65.0% 61.4% 47.7% 42.1% 35.1% 29.6% $100,000 - $149,999 8.9% 12.2% 20.8% 24.5% 22.2% 21.8% $150,000 - $199,999 2.1% 6.6% 9.6% 12.3% 11.5% 13.4% $200,000 - $299,999 1.4% 4.6% 7.6% 9.0% 8.2% 11.2% $300,000 - $499,999 1.4% 2.0% 4.5% 4.5% 3.6% 6.1% $500,000 - $999,999 0.0% 1.1% 1.8% 2.0% 1.2% 2.3% $1,000,000+ 0.0% 0.3% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.6%Average Home Value $78,700 $106,361 $135,012 $143,444 $124,557 $151,910

Rent RatesMedian Rent $340 $402 $468 $519 $431 $519Average Rent $350 $407 $471 $533 $459 $565Source: U.S. Census 2000, ESRI.



Housing Supply and Demand Homeowners and renters tend to occupy housing units in relation to their income. The US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) estimates that households generally spend approximately one quarter of their income on housing expenses. And while each individual makes their own decision on how much of their income they are willing to apply to purchase a home or pay rent, this debt-to-income ratio concept is at the center of mortgage lending decisions.

We therefore have modeled both supply and demand around this principal. A house priced at a certain level requires a buyer who has at least a minimum income to ‘qualify’ for mortgage lending – generally, lenders require that the mortgage payment, taxes and real estate insurance are less than 28% of an applicants gross monthly income. For the purposes of this analysis, we have conservatively set the budgeting figure at 25% - meaning that a household will spend one-quarter of their monthly gross income on mortgage payments (principal and interest), real estate taxes and insurance. In the case of renters, the entire 25% is assumed to be applied to rent. Insurance of contents (renter’s insurance), since not required by law, is not factored into the analysis.

For example, a household with a total income of $50,000 per year would budget $1,042 per month toward housing expenses. This would equate to a home priced right around $125,000 after factoring in a 30-year mortgage based on a 5% down payment, 8% interest rate with taxes and insurance of 15% of the payment.

Supply is based on the census audit of housing stock for both owner-occupied and renter occupied units. The census reports the number of owner-occupied and renter-occupied units by price range. The “Approximate Monthly Housing Costs” are calculated based on the assumptions above.

The following table depicts the Housing Supply by Monthly Housing costs for owner occupied and renter occupied units.


Housing Supply 5-minute Drive from 900 E Market StreetHousing Available Approximiate Monthly Owner Occupied Renter OccupiedBy Cost of Residence Number Percent Number Percent

Low High Low High 10,561 100% 2,534 100%$0 $10,000 $0 $84 14 0% 0 0%

$10,000 $14,999 $84 $127 20 0% 0 0%$15,000 $19,999 $127 $169 22 0% 754 30%$20,000 $24,999 $169 $211 27 0% 389 15%$25,000 $29,999 $211 $253 27 0% 433 17%$30,000 $34,999 $253 $295 28 0% 432 17%$35,000 $39,999 $295 $338 134 1% 1,146 45%$40,000 $49,999 $338 $422 408 4% 3,636 143%$50,000 $59,999 $422 $506 676 6% 1,863 74%$60,000 $69,999 $506 $591 1,251 12% 2,511 99%$70,000 $79,999 $591 $675 1,352 13% 1,368 54%$80,000 $89,999 $675 $759 1,339 13% 465 18%$90,000 $99,999 $759 $844 1,069 10% 353 14%

$100,000 $124,999 $844 $1,055 1,658 16% 139 5%$125,000 $149,999 $1,055 $1,266 534 5% 96 4%$150,000 $174,999 $1,266 $1,477 489 5% 55 2%$175,000 $199,999 $1,477 $1,688 383 4% 27 1%$200,000 $249,999 $1,688 $2,110 432 4% 22 1%$250,000 $299,999 $2,110 $2,531 218 2% 0 0%$300,000 $399,999 $2,531 $3,375 184 2% 0 0%$400,000 $499,999 $3,375 $4,219 103 1% 0 0%$500,000 $749,999 $4,219 $6,329 90 1% 0 0%$750,000 $999,999 $6,329 $8,438 48 0% 0 0%

$1,000,000 HIGHER $8,438 HIGHER 55 1% 0 0%*Assumptions: 30-year mortgage, 95% loan to value, 8% Interest Rate, Taxes/Insurance 15% of payment.

Summary of Available Housing Supply:Units available for less than $675 per month: 3959 37% 12532 92% 16,491 68%Units available for between $675 and $844 per month: 2408 23% 818 6% 3,226 13%Units available for between $844 and $1,266 per month: 2192 21% 235 2% 2,427 10%Units available for between $1,266 and $1,688 per month: 872 8% 82 1% 954 4%Units available for between $1,688 and $2,531 per month: 650 6% 22 0% 672 3%Units available for between $2,531 and $3,375 per month: 184 2% 0 0% 184 1%Units available for between $3,375 and $6,329 per month: 193 2% 0 0% 193 1%Units available for more than $6,329 per month: 103 1% 0 0% 103 0%Total Units Available: 10,561 13,689 24,250Source: U.S. Census 2000, ESRI 2005 Estimates. The Whittaker Group, Inc.

Housing Costs*

Owner Occupied Renter Total

Demand is based on the census’s distribution of households based on income. The reverse calculation of housing affordability as applied to determine what each income range could theoretically ‘afford’. This resulting distribution sets the demand side of the analysis.

Housing Demand 5-minute Drive from 900 E Market StreetHouseholds by Income

Number Percent Number Percent Number PercentLow High Low High 24,182 100% 25,085 100% 26,588 100%$0 $9,999 $0 $208 4,167 17% 3,861 15% 3,585 13%

$10,000 $14,999 $208 $312 2,158 9% 1,809 7% 1,709 6%$15,000 $19,999 $313 $417 2,442 10% 2,206 9% 1,826 7%$20,000 $24,999 $417 $521 2,469 10% 2,216 9% 2,044 8%$25,000 $29,999 $521 $625 1,951 8% 2,159 9% 2,108 8%$30,000 $34,999 $625 $729 1,697 7% 1,580 6% 1,909 7%$35,000 $39,999 $729 $833 1,547 6% 1,617 6% 1,273 5%$40,000 $44,999 $833 $937 1,261 5% 1,451 6% 1,549 6%$45,000 $49,999 $938 $1,042 970 4% 1,131 5% 1,447 5%$50,000 $59,999 $1,042 $1,250 1,618 7% 1,783 7% 2,038 8%$60,000 $74,999 $1,250 $1,562 1,459 6% 1,827 7% 2,102 8%$75,000 $99,999 $1,563 $2,083 1,245 5% 1,560 6% 2,088 8%

$100,000 $124,999 $2,083 $2,604 433 2% 829 3% 1,193 4%$125,000 $149,999 $2,604 $3,125 275 1% 332 1% 662 2%$150,000 $199,999 $3,125 $4,167 237 1% 337 1% 448 2%$200,000 $249,999 $4,167 $5,208 253 1% 154 1% 240 1%$250,000 $499,999 $5,208 $10,417 0 0% 182 1% 255 1%$500,000 HIGHER $10,417 HIGHER 0 0% 51 0% 112 0%

Median Household Income $26,981 $41,254 $46,971Average Household Income $38,006 $51,526 $59,171*This conservative estimate assumes that household budget 25% of gross income toward housing expenses (rent/mtg payment, interest and insurance). ** The 2000 U.S. Census reported income at an upper range of $200,000 or higher.Summary of Housing Demand:Units needed for less than $625 per month: 11,236 46% 10092 40% 9164 34%Units needed for between $625 and $875 per month: 3,648 15% 3739 15% 4017 15%Units needed for between $875 and $1,250 per month: 3,778 16% 4199 17% 4269 16%Units needed for between $1,250 and $1,875 per month: 3,077 13% 3610 14% 4140 16%Units needed for between $1,875 and $2,500 per month: 1,245 5% 1560 6% 2088 8%Units needed for between $2,500 and $3,125 per month: 433 2% 829 3% 1193 4%Units needed for between $3,125 and $5,000 per month: 512 2% 669 3% 1110 4%Units needed for more than $5,000 per month: 253 1% 387 2% 607 2%Total Units Needed: 24,182 25,085 26,588Source: U.S. Census 2000, ESRI 2005 Estimates. The Whittaker Group, Inc.

Census 2000 2005 Estimate 2008 Forecast

Affordability*Census 2000 2005 Estimate 2008 ForecastMaximum Monthly


Demand

<$80,000 (<$675)

$80,000 - $100,000 ($625-$875)

$100,000 - $150,000 ($875-$1,250)

$150,000 - $200,000 ($1,250-$1,875)

$200,000 - $300,000 ($1,875-$2,500)

$300,000 - $400,000 ($2,500 - $3,375)

$400,000 - $750,000 ($3,375-$6,000)

>$750,000 ($6,000+)

0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 16,000 18,000

Supply

Housing Supply and Demand - 5-minute Drive from 900 E Market Street

Sale Price (Monthly Rent)

Units Absorption Estimate

Source: U.S. Census 2000, ESRI 2005 Estimates. The Whittaker Group, Inc.


East Market Street Corridor Consumer Segments

Metro City Edge, 33%

Modest Income Homes, 24%

City Commons, 22%College Towns, 14%

Social Security Set, 8%

Consumer Segmentation



Metro City Edge 1/3 of the Households in EMSC • Older Suburban Neighborhoods of Metropolitan Areas • Singles and Single Parent Families – Median Age of 29 • Half own their homes – half rent – median home value

of $73K • Varied labor force – service sector – median income of

$30K • Budget conscience – concerned for their children’s well-

being • Use internet at work or library – walk for exercise • Play community sports such as football or basketball • Shop groceries and superstores for their needs

Modest Income Homes One Quarter of the Households in EMSC • Modest Income Residents • Singles and Single Parent Families – Median Age of 34 • Half own their homes – half rent – median home value of $51K • Television is important – watch daytime and primetime – Lifetime, TNT and

USA Network • Less frequent movie theater attendees • Enjoy watching sports on TV • Shop at discount stores and tend to drive used sedans • Limit their long distance phone use and do not pay for internet access

City Commons Nearly One Quarter of the Households in EMSC • Youngest segment classified in Tapestry • Median age of 24 • Single person and single parent households –

children are common • Homes located in mid-rise buildings – renters

predominate • Below average labor force participation – part-

time work is common • Children’s products drive purchase behavior • Baseball is a favorite spectator sporting activity • Watching TV is an important leisure activity

College Towns Fourteen Percent of the Households in EMSC • On and off campus living • Strong presence of college students – over forty percent in school • One third live on campus • Median age of 25 – high concentration of 18-24 year olds • Mix of low-income, multi unit housing units as well as detached

single family • Median income of $119,000 • Convenience drives food purchase – frequently eat out or

purchase ready to eat meals at conveniently located groceries • Computer and internet usage very high • Enjoy playing sports in free time, attending rock concerts and

college sporting events, movies and bars • MTV and Comedy Central are favorite channels

Social Security Set Nearly Ten Percent of the Households in EMSC • Elderly residents who live alone • Very low household income relative to other segments • Most live in low rent, high-rise apartment buildings in large cities • Limited resource hinder purchase and leisure activities • Shopping centers on discount stores • Groceries come from the nearest supermarket • Rely on Medicare and Medicaid for healthcare • Prefer cash or credit cards for payment • Many subscribe to cable since watching TV is important –

particularly enjoy watching sporting events


United House of Prayer • Primary Impetus for Purchase – Parking • Desire for Community’s Input – Needs Driven • Other Needs or Interests for Site:

o Provide Affordable Housing o Space for Additional Programming Needs o Day Care o Business Incubation o Community Center o Hotel/Conference Center

• Do not typically partner or borrow • Would not consider a “night club” type use • Focused on needs of residents

Interview Notes Community Focus Group Themes

• University housing needs – 11,000 students, 3,500 beds on campus • Job training/job creation • Housing – appropriate type, pricing and scale • Community center – multi-purpose center • Educational linkage • Retail should be included but limited • Parking was primary issue for UHOP • Railroad still physical and psychological barrier to downtown

revitalization • East Market Street used to be cultural center of community • Safety, security must be considered in plan • Need for community/student gathering space • Universities are not linked physically • YMCA has limited future on present site • Must create a ‘place’ with this site


900 East Market Street Master Plan Design Jan 2007

Technology

nationally

east market

high density

post office

min drivegreensboro

significant

housing alternatives

single parent