Show me the money apa presentation 9-17-10

SHOW ME THE MONEY:BRINGING REALITY TO REDEVELOPMENT

APA Florida ConferenceSeptember 17, 2010

James G. LaRue, AICP

Sharon Jenkins-Owen, AICP

Stephen A. David, Director

• City of South Miami & CRA Location • Existing Land Uses•Area Amenities• Area Demographics• Past, Present Conditions • Agency Establishment (Madison Square Project)• Madison Square – Historical Significance• Local Political Concerns• Need for Re-Evaluation of Current Market • Preparation and Approval of Scope of Services

South Miami Community Redevelopment Agency

City of South Miami & CRA Location

City and Community Redevelopment Area Amenities

South Miami Location Map (Miami Beach, South Miami, Coral Gables, Coconut Grove, Pinecrest )

City of South Miami Land Uses

City of South Miami Future Land-Use Map (Prior to 1997)

Land-Use Categories (Prior to 1997)

1. General Retail

2. Neighborhood Retail

3. Auto Service

4. Public & Semi Public

5. Special Retail Residential

City of South Miami 1997 Future Land-Use Map(Citizen Participation and Dover, Kohl Influence)

CRA Area Land Uses

South Miami Community Redevelopment Area Map

City/CRA Area Demographics

Total Acres 1,552 185 12%Population

BlackWhite

Hispanic

10,741

26%74%

34%

1,951

66%34%

19%

18.6%

Income $42,488 $22,296 52.5%Housing $170,000 $98,000 58%

City / Community Redevelopment Area Profile

South Miami SMCRA % of City


Miami-Dade County Metro-Rail Station

(Sunset Drive)

Transit-Oriented District

City and Community Redevelopment Area AmenitiesShops of Sunset Mixed-Use Redevelopment (Old Bakery Center)

Completed Infrastructure & Streetscape ImprovementsCity and Community Redevelopment Area Amenities

Sunset Drive Improvements Church Street Improvements

Sunset Drive ImprovementsSW 66th Street Improvements

Red Road Commons

The Valencia

Shops of Sunset

Mixed-Use Redevelopment Projects


State of the Art Community Center

Park Improvements


South Miami CRA Redevelopment Plan

SMCRA

(2005 Redevelopment Plan Update)

Madison Square

(Dover, Kohl )

Madison Square

(2003 Corradino Study)

Madison Square Project - Historical Significance

Marshall Williamson• City of South Miami Pioneer

• Born in Madison Florida (1890)

• African American

• Large Landowner

• Donated Large Tracts of Land for Community Development Purposes

(St. John’s AME Church, JRE Lee Elementary School, South Miami Senior Center)

Local Area Politics

Constituent Concerns & Electoral Platforms

Maintain “Small Town” Atmosphere

Regulate and Encourage Sustainable Development

Minimize Project Densities and Building Heights

Need for Re-Evaluation of Current Market

Constituent Concerns & Subsequent Electoral Platforms

Will Electoral Platforms = Financially Feasible Redevelopment ?

Will Reduced Project Heights & Densities = Affordable Housing ?

Will Developers Bid on Proposed Redevelopment Project ?

$SHOW ME THE MONEY$

Development of Consultant Scope of Services

1. Formulate Most Appropriate Project Densities and Future Building Heights Based on Compatibility with Surrounding Area;

2. Will the Above Referenced Density & Height Determinations Result in an Economically Viable Redevelopment Project?

3. What would be the Minimum Project Height & Density Threshold Which Will Allow for and Economically Viable Project?

4. Given the Current Economic Conditions, What Would Be the Most Appropriate Commercial Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R.) for the Proposed Project?

5. Develop a Framework for a Regulatory Approach which will facilitate development of the project as a unique situation not generally transferable to other properties or situations in the community.

Reality Ideal

GapBecomes Target

• Diagnostic Concept• Best Practices• Regulations

• Madison Square Needs Viable Development• Realistic for Developer• Neighborhood Compatibility• Acceptance by Government Entities• Housing Must Be Affordable

• Planning vs Reality• Visual – Design• Alternate Scenarios• Specific Planning Recommendations

Team

• SMCRA• SMCRA Community• LaRue Team

• Different Skill Requirements for Project Analysis• Public Planning and Government Skills• Architect / Builder Expertise• Affordable Housing Knowledge• Zoning / Regulatory Expertise• Urban Design Skills

• Changing Market Conditions• Highest and Best Use• Compatible• Feasible• Marketable

• Existing Land Use• Surrounding Neighborhood Character:

Height, Size, Scale, Land Use Mix, Features• Infrastructure• Distance to Services & Transit• Existing Entitlements • Regulatory Constraints• Proforma: Current Market, Sales & Rentals

• Planning Research Skills• Design Concepts• Planning Solutions

GOALS

• SUSTAINABLE• VIABLE• LIVEABLE

• Conditions• Land Uses (Housing mix)• Infrastructure• Drainage • Densities• Distance to Schools, Commercial & Civic• Transit Access• Entitlements• Regulatory Constraints• R-O-W Widths -Easements

• Coastal• Wetlands• Protected Species • Wildlife Corridors / Crossings• Historic Flow-ways• Canals• Brownfields• Greyfields

• Economic Attractors• Community Themes• Ports

• Neighborhood• Existing Land Uses / Mixture of Uses• Size, Mass, Height, FAR, Design Features• Connecting People & Places• Multi-Modal Transportation• Access, Footpaths• Interconnecting Uses

• Comprehensive Plan / EAR• Land Development Code• Plat, Ordinances, Resolutions• Restrictions• Property Appraiser• GIS• Meeting Minutes• 2010 Census• Florida Statistical Abstract

• Abandoned• Foreclosures• Reuse Opportunities• Forgotten Easements• Platted R-O-W Improvements

• Madison Square EAR Based Amendments• Mixed Use Commercial / Residential 4 Story• Single-family Residential• Proposed Neighborhood Center / Mixed Use 4 Story• Existing Non-Conforming Lots

• Neighborhood Retail NR• Small Lot Single-family Residential RS-4• Planned Unit Development• Community Service Overlay• Historic Preservation Overlay• Transit-Oriented Development District

• “Tight-knit” African American Community• 66% African American; 19% Hispanic• Low Incomes• High Poverty• Young (56% of the population under age 35)• 1,951 Population (± 365 residents since 1990)• 1999 Incomes under $25,000 Annually• Renter• 2000: 754 Units / 40 Vacant

• Very Low, Low and Moderate Income Housing• Affordability• Income Limits

Housing sales between January 2009 and November 2009 indicate very little availability for Very Low Income families. Most of the sales would accommodate Low Income families. There are very few rentals available in the subject area.

• Subject Property• Platted-Undeveloped• Mixed Use Commercial /Residential 4 story FLUM• Zoned NR, Neighborhood Retail• 5 Lots: Single-family Residential 2 story FLUM• 4 Lots: Single-family RS-4

• Combined 1.92 Acres• Frontage

350 ft: SW 60th Avenue200 ft: SW 59th Place360 ft: SW 64th Street

• Current Comprehensive Plan FLUMMix Residential, Retail, Office Land Uses24 du/ac Maximum1.6 FAR Intensity4 Story Maximum

• Proposed Amendment to Neighborhood Center / Mixed Use 4 Story

Density Increase to 60 du/ac2.0 FAR Intensity

• Parcel Does Not Meet PUD-R / PUD-M Size Standard• If PUD Zoning:

Amend Current PUD-R Zoning District Regulations• Create New PUD District

Non-Conforming Lots• A Lot of Record = 1 SF Unit/Lot (Conditions)• SMCRA Ownership = Less Than 1 Unit / Lot Allowed if

Redeveloped• NR Zoning District Does Not Permit Single-family Uses• Limited to Commercial (Unless Rezoned)

Surrounding Neighborhood• Single-family 1 Story• Multi-family 2 Story • Scattered Nonresidential • Small Platted Lots• Paved, 2-Lane Undivided Local Roadways• 1 Mile Proximity to Metro Rail Station

• Basic Go, No-Go Analysis for Developers• Does Development Work in Dollars and Cents?

Proformas for Planners• Educate Us• Keep Us Realistic• Point to Logical Decision Making• Prevent Unrealistic Alternatives

Proforma Summary

Proforma 101Getting Familiar with a Basic Tool of Real Estate Analysis

by Wayne A Lemmon

Proforma - Architects Project “Program”

• Balances Density, Intensity• Measures Height with Feasibility• Allows Incentives as “Sweetener”

Madison Square Proforma

Preliminary Scenario IHigh Density

Land Cost Incentive

Preliminary Scenario IHigh Density

Secondary Scenario 1High Density

Land Cost Incentive

Secondary Scenario 2Medium Density

Land Cost Incentive

Report Exhibit 1

Recapping Purpose of Study• Analyze 19 lots of Madison Square• As Assembled Project• Highest Best Use Accepted• Compatible with Neighborhood• Best Regulatory Approach• Marketability

Current Market Climate• Condos “not in”• Neighborhood Commercial Desired• Low Income Housing / Rentals

Three Scenario Approach

To Gauge:• Desired Density / Intensity• Compatibility• Feasibility

Subject Area

Building Inventory

Residential Count Sq. Ft./Unit Total Cost/Sq. Ft. Building Cost

Walk-upApartments

35 units 500 sq. ft. 17,500 sq. ft. $175.00 $3,062,500.00

GardenApartments

39 units 600 sq. ft. 23,400 sq. ft. $160.00 $3,744,000.00

Townhouses 4 units 1,200 sq. ft. 4,800 sq. ft. $120.00 $576,000.00

Commercial 7,000 sq. ft. $100.00 $700,000.00

Totals 78 52,700 sq. ft. $8,082,500.00

Building Inventory


Walk-upApartments

35 units 500 sq. ft. 17,500 sq. ft. $175.00 $3,062,500.00

GardenApartments

26 units 600 sq. ft. 15,600 sq. ft. $160.00 $2,496,000.00


Commercial 7,000 sq. ft. $100.00 $700,000.00

Totals 65 44,900 sq. ft. $6,834,500.00

Building Inventory


Walk-upApartments

18 units 500 sq. ft. 9,000 sq. ft. $175.00 $1,575,000.00

GardenApartments

24 units 600 sq. ft. 14,400 sq. ft. $160.00 $2,304,000.00


Commercial 7,000 sq. ft. $100.00 $700,000.00

Totals 46 35,200 sq. ft. $5,155,000.00

Building Inventory


1 BRUnits 21 units 453 sq.ft. 9,513 sq.ft. $175.00 $1,664,775.00



TownhouseUnits 4 units 1,600 sq.ft. 6,400 sq.ft. $150.00 $960,000.00

TotalResidential 61 units 45,019 sq.ft.

Commercial 7,000 sq. ft. $100.00 $700,000.00

Totals 52,019 sq. ft. $7,981,735.00

Building Inventory







Commercial 7,000 sq. ft. $100.00 $700,000.00

Totals 52,019 sq. ft. $7,981,735.00

Building Inventory







Commercial 7,000 sq. ft. $100.00 $700,000.00

Totals 52,019 sq. ft. $7,981,735.00

• Neighborhood Compatibility• Services demand – FAR, Intensity• Housing Types – Multi-family, Affordable• Seeking Balance Between

Community, Government & Developer

• High Density • 32 du/ac• $7,981,735

• Medium Density• 26.5 du/ac• $6,653,415

• Low Density• 22 du/ac • $5,874,490

• Neighborhood Center/Mixed Use 4-Story• Mixed Use/Commercial Residential/PUD-R• Mixed Use/Commercial Residential/New PD or

Zoning Category

Maximum Units Commercial MaximumFloors Pros Cons

Option 1 115 dwelling units as currently proposed

Preliminary Scenario 1

Secondary Scenario 1

PreliminaryScenario 1

SecondaryScenario 2

2.0 FAR 4 Allows more units and Commercial; PUD allows site specific conditions to address constraints and compatibility; reducing allowable density to 41 du/ac would be somewhat compatible with the neighborhood; Providing 78 units on the subject parcels allow for more economic diversity within the development; The revised high density scenario becomes 61 total units; Projects with more units have a competitive advantage in obtaining and leveraging funds. The proposed NC/MU density would be further reduced to 34 dwelling units per acre for a total of 65 units. The revised medium density scenario becomes 51 total units or 26.5 du/ac.

Units would be small to accommodate 115 units;


Option 2 46




1.6 FAR 4 Only 5 lots need to undergo the Comprehensive Plan amendment process and would qualify as a small scale amendment; PUD allows site specific conditions to address constraints and compatibility;Modifying existing PUD-R category is typically easier than devising a new category; 46 maximum number of units more compatible with surrounding neighborhood; The revised low density scenario becomes 42 total units; Smaller number of units would attract larger pool of developers specializing in affordable housing.

Limited to 46 units


Option 3 46



1.6 FAR 4 Only 5 lots need to undergo the Comprehensive Plan amendment process and would qualify as a small scale amendment; PUD regulation can be created specifically tailored to the project; New PUD could be used to encourage additional affordable housing on redevelopment sites; 46 and revised as 42 maximum number of units more compatible with surrounding neighborhood; Smaller number of units would attract larger pool of developers specializing in affordable housing.

Limited to 46 units

• Employment and Apprenticeship Job Training Programs • Business Start-up Assistance Program • Commercial Rehabilitation Program • Consumer Credit Counseling • Multi-family Rehabilitation Program for Developments • Multi-family Rehabilitation Program for Individual Property Owners • Single-family Home Rehabilitation Program • Home Ownership Program • Bowman Scholarship Program • Specific Financial and Regulatory Incentives

• Provide Land To Developer At No Cost• Provide Infrastructure Contributions, Including

Sidewalks/Bikeways, Landscaping, Drainage Improvements

• Allow Joint Use And Street Parking

• Increasing Density / Intensity

NOT A GOOD OPTION

• Create new Land Development Regulations expediting the permitting process to encourage affordable housing projects.

• The SMCRA could assist the Developer with finding and qualifying renters.

• The City could offer a property tax discount similar to the State’s “Homestead Exemption” Program.

• The SMCRA could offer assistance with locating and completing grant applications that would help finance the development of affordable housing on the property.

STEPHEN DAVID, [email protected]

305-668-7230

JAMES G. LARUE, [email protected]

239-334-3366

SHARON JENKINS-OWEN, [email protected]

239-849-0656

Show me the money apa presentation 9-17-10

Documents

attract larger pool

building cost walk

unit total cost sq

unit total cost sq

family rehabilitation program

south miami

madison square project

madison square