HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-87-0093J-81-91
1/22/87
RESOLUTION NO. 8 7 - 9 3
A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING CODEC, INC., A NOT
FOR PROFIT CORPORATION OR ORGANIZATION, TO
UNDERTAKE THE DEVELOPMENT OF A LOW -DENSITY
SALES TOWNHOME COMPLEX ON THE CIVIC CENTER
SITE AFFORDABLE TO FAMILIES AND INDIVIDUALS
OF LOW AND MODERATE INCOME; AND FURTHER
DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO REQUEST
METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY TO CONVEY TITLE TO
THE SITE TO THE DESIGNATED SPONSOR/DEVELOPER
SUBJECT TO CERTAIN TERMS AND CONDITIONS.
WHEREAS, there exists, in the City of Miami, a severe
shortage of homes within the affordability range of families and
individuals of low and moderate income; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission recognizes that participation
of both the public and private sector is necessary to foster the
development of sales housing within the affordability limits and
purchasing power of families and individuals of low and moderate
income; and
WHEREAS, on February 4, 1976, the City Commission passed
and adopted Ordinance No. 6515, which provided for the holding of
a special bond election on March 9, 1976, for submitting to the
qualified electors of the City the following question:
"Shall bonds of the City of Miami in an amount not
exceeding $25,000,000 be issued under Ordinance
No. 8514, to provide housing in the City of Miami for
families and persons of low or moderate income
qualifying therefor under the then applicable law, by
using the proceeds of the bonds to assist Dade
County in financing such housing in the City of
Miami, or to increase the security of any Dade County
obligations issued for such housing in the City of
Miami, such bonds to mature in annual installments
not exceeding thirty (30) years from their respective
dates, to bear interest at a rate or rates not
exceeding the maximum lawful rate, at the time of
sale, and to be payable from ad valorem taxes?"; and
CITY COMMISSION
MEETING OF.
JAN �2�,1987�
f
WHEREAS, on March 28, 1976, the City Commission canvassed
the returns of said special bond election, passed Resolution No.
76-339, which declared that a majority of the votes cast in such
election were in favor of issuance of said bonds, and
WHEREAS, the foregoing bond issue has been authorized and
approved by law, and these bonds have been duly validated, issued
and sold; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the foregoing laws, the City and
Metropolitan Dade County, have subsequently entered into various
agreements to provide City assistance and involvement to Dade
County, for the provision of housing for low or moderate income
families and persons; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to the above referenced laws and
agreements, Dade County filed a Petition in County Eminent Domain
proceedings, more particularly identified as Circuit Court Case
No. 84-2738 (CA 14), instituted and maintained in the Circuit
Court in and for Dade County, by which title to the Civic Center
site as particularly described therein, was vested in the
petitioner Dade County; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission has determined that the
publicly owned Civic Center site is locationally suited for
development of sales housing; and
WHEREAS, in September of 1986, the City Commission
designated the Civic Center site for the development of a low -
density townhome complex within the purchasing and affordability
limits of low and moderate income families; and
WHEREAS, on December 11, 1986, the City Commission received
preliminary proposals from two organizations interested in
developing such housing on the site; and
WHEREAS, CODEC, Inc. has presented a development proposal
most consistent with the City's development objectives for the
site, as reflected in the attached memorandum from the City
Manager; and
-2-
87-9 3 }
WHEREAS, pursuant to applicable laws and agreements,
Metropolitan Dade County holds legal title to the Civic Center
site; and,
WHEREAS, 125.38, Florida Statutes, provides, in part, that
any real or personal property owned by a county may be conveyed
by the Board of County Commissioners to a corporation or
organization not for profit upon any terms and conditions set by
the Board of County Commissioners, which foster and promote the
community interest and welfare;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE
CITY MIAMI, FLORIDA:
Section 1. CODEC, Inc., a not for profit corporation or
organization, is hereby selected to sponsor the development of a
low -density, affordable townhome development on the Civic Center
site subject to evidence of a firm construction financing
commitment and conditional commitments for home purchase
financing within the affordability limits of qualified low and
moderate income families.
Section 2. CODEC, Inc. is hereby directed to prepare and
finalize project plans and specifications, construction and home
purchase financing, unit prices, construction schedules and
marketing plans which shall be submitted within 90 days of the
date of this action for final consideration and approval by the
City Commission.
Section 3. Subject to receipt by the City of an
affirmative opinion from bond counsel for the bonds issued,
pursuant to Ordinance No. 8514, Brown, Wood, Ivey, Mitchell and
Petty; and, further subject to compliance with Sections 1, 2
and 3 herein, the City Manager is directed to request
Metropolitan Dade County to convey the Civic Center site in fee
simple to the herein selected sponsor subject to certain terms
and conditions, as set forth herein and as set forth in the
attached City Manager's memorandum and as prescribed by the
Metropolitan Dade County Board of County Commissioners.
-3-
87-9 3
f
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 22
ATT
ktw
MAT Y HIRAI
CITY CLERK
PREPARED AND APPROVED BY:
ROBERT F. CLARK
CHIEF DEPUTY -CITY ATTORNEY
tad day of , 1
AND CORRECTNESS:
LXCIA A. DOUGHERTY \
CITY ATTORNEY
RFC/yv/bss/M322
Attachment
XAVIER L. StZ
MAYOR
-4-
8 ) - 9
0 i
CItY OF MIAMI. FLONICA
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM 23
TO Honorable Mayor and Members DATE' January 16, 1987 FILE:
of the City Commission
subJECT. Recommendations On Selec-
tion of Sponsor For Affor-
dable Housing Development:
FRow: Cesar H. Odio REFERENCES! Civic Center Parcel
City Manager
ENCLOSURES: City Commission Agenda
Item: January 22, 1987
RECOMMENDATION:
It is respectfully recommended that the City Commission adopt the
attached resolution conditionally designating CODEC, INC., a not
for profit community development corporation, to undertake the
development, marketing, and sale of homes within the
affordability range of low and moderate income families and
individuals on the Civic Center site, substantially in accordance
with the proposal presented for City Commission consideration on
January 8, 1987, with such final designation predicated upon
submission within 90 calendar days from the date of this
conditional award for the Administration's verification and the
City Commission's review and approval:
1) A final site plan addressing, to the extent
feasible within the City's objectives for development
of the Civic Center site, the site planning concerns
outlined in the Department of Planning's site plan
analysis attached hereto as Exhibit A.
2) Final project/unit plans and specifications.
3) Verifiable evidence of firm commitment(s) for
construction, and first and second mortgage home
purchase financing in accordance with that proposed and
presented to the City Commission on January 8, 1987.
4) A firm project development and marketing
schedule, including a plan for insuring that all ethnic
groups in Miami have equal access to information on the
availability of, and the opportunity to, make
application for the homes to be developed.
5) A project development cost analysis.
6) Certification of not for profit corporate
legal status.
87-93
It is further recommended that upon final approval by the City
Commission of the foregoing, and subject to agreement between the
City of Miami and CODEC, Inc., on selling price and terms of
conveyance, as ratified by the City Commission, Metropolitan Dade
County be requested to convey the Civic Center site to CODEC,
INC.
BACKGROUND:
On December 11, 1986, the City Commission was asked to approve a
resolution designating the publicly owned Civic Center site for
the development of low -density sales housing within the
affordability range of low and moderate income purchasers, and
further authorizing publication of a request for proposals from
the building industry for the development of marketing of such
housing.
At that time, both CODEC, Inc. and the Allapattah Business
Development Authority, with private sector co -developers Armando
Cazo and Hector Pages, indicated interest in sponsoring the
development of affordable sales housing on the Civic Center site.
The sponsors of the two proposals were referred to staff for
evaluation of site planning and conformance with zoning
requirements.
On January 8, 1987, the City Commission was asked to designate
one of the two competing proposers to sponsor the development of
affordable low -density sales housing on the site.
Following presentations by both proposers, the City Commission
directed the Administration to evaluate the proposals, as
presented, and return to the Commission in two weeks with a
recommendation.
A comparative analysis of the two proposals has been undertaken
by the Department of Planning with emphasis on site planning and
zoning considerations, and by the Housing Conservation and
Development Agency, with emphasis on project financing, dwelling
unit characteristics, and housing affordability. The exhibits
accompanying the attached resolution provide a detailed
comparison of the major aspects of the two proposals.
SITE PLAN:
The Department of Planning has reviewed the preliminary site
plans submitted by CUDEC, Inc., and the Allapattah Business
Development Authority Joint Venture. The Department of
Planning's analysis concludes that both site plans can be
substantially improved, but that the site plan proposed by CODEC,
Inc., is superior. The Department of Planning's site plan
evaluation is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
2
87-93
GENERAL DEVELOPMENT CONCEPTS
The proposal submitted by CODEC, Inc., calls for the development
of a 96 unit garden apartment complex composed of three, three
story structures, consisting of 24 two bedroom, and 72 three
bedroom dwellings. The proposal submitted by the Allapattah
Business Development Authority Joint Venture, calls for the
development of 88 dwellings configured as two story townhomes
over one story garden apartments, consisting of 24 one bedroom,
40 two bedroom, and 24 three bedroom dwellings. Both development
proposals include recreation areas, internal vehicular
circulation systems, and adequate on -site vehicular parking.
In general development concept, the major differences between the
two proposals are:
- The CODEC, Inc. proposal offers more and
larger dwellings configured as three story
garden apartments in three individual
buildings.
- The Allapattah Business Development
Authority Joint Venture proposal offers
fewer and smaller dwellings, on the
average, configured as two story townhomes
over one story garden apartments.
DWELLING UNIT CHARACTERISTICS:
The CODEC, Inc. proposal offers the buyer homes that are slightly
larger, on average, than those offered by the Allapattah Business
Development Authority Joint Venture. On average, the homes
offered by CODEC, Inc., are 14% larger that those offered by the
competing proposer. The dwelling units offered by both proposers
exceed minimum required livable space guidelines, and both
contain standard appliances and central cooling/heating
equipment.
DWELLING UNIT SALES PRICE:
The selling prices of the homes offered by CODEC, Inc., are, on
average 40% lower than those offered by the Allapattah Business
Development. Authority Joint Venture, but, on average, they are
also 14% larger. On a per square foot basis, the CODEC, Inc.
proposal offers the consumer the best value. On average, the
'roves offered by CODEC, Inc. are proposed to sell for $34.69 per
square foot, while those offered by the competing proposer are
proposed to sell for $48.35 per square foot.
Exhibit B, provides a comparison of the key elements of the two
proposals under consideration.
3
87-93
n
AFFORDABILITY FACTOR:
•
Both CODEC, Inc. and the Allapattah Business Development
Authority Joint Venture address the housing affordability factor
by proposing tandem home purchase mortgages, with first mortgages
provided through a private lender, and second mortgages provided
through the Metropolitan Dade County Documentary Surtax Program.
Using this tandem mortgage home purchase financing method, both
proposers are able to offer affordable homeownership
opportunities to families and individuals earning less than 80%
of median income. Exhibit C provides an affordability analysis
of the two proposals.
PROJECT FINANCING:
Both CODEC, Inc. and the Allapattah Business Development
Authority Joint Venture, have provided either letters of intent
or conditional commitments for project construction and first
mortgage purchase financing. CODEC, Inc. is proposing to secure
project construction financing through lst American Bank and/or
Intercontinental Bank, local financial institutions. The
Allapattah Business Development Authority Joint Venture, is
proposing to secure construction financing through Matthews and
Wright, a New York based firm and/or Bayamon Federal, a Puerto
Rico based savings and loan. In both cases, construction
financing is conditioned on home purchase mortgage financing.
CODEC, Inc. proposes to secure first mortgage home purchase
financing through M Bank, a local private financial institution.
The Allapattah Business Development Authority Joint Venture,
proposes to secure first mortgage home purchase financing through
Matthews and Wright and Bayamon Federal. The first mortgage home
purchase financing proposed by both groups is conditioned upon
second mortgage home purchase financing through the Dade County
Documentary Surtax Program.
While both CODEC, Inc. and the Allapattah Business Development
Authority Joint Venture propose to employ surtax financed second
mortgage financing, neither group has a commitment for such
financing.
EMPLOYMENT DURING CONSTRUCTION:
CODEC, Inc. intends to use conventional construction in the
development of the garden apartment complex proposed, which,
according to the proposer will create employment opportunities
for approximately 50 workers. The tunnel form system
construction proposed by the Allapattah Business Development
:authority Joint Venture, will create 100 employment
opportunities, according to the proposers.
0
R 7 - 9 3 -��^
CONCLUSION:
The CODEC, Inc. proposal is recommended for the following
reasons:
.. The homes proposed by CODEC, Inc., offer a
lower purchase price per square foot to the
consumer.
- CODEC, Inc. has proposed local
participation both in construction and
mortgage financing.
S
87-93
0 0 EXHIBIT A
CITY OP MIAMI, PLORiDA
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
to Jerry Gereaux, Director OATE: January 15, 1987 PILE:
Housing Conservation and Development Agency SUBJECT: Melrose and Civic Center Sites
FROM. REFERENCES:
Rodriguez, Director
1 ann in g Department ENCLOSURES:
Following instructions of the City Commission issued during
their meeting of January 8, I am enclosing analysis of and
recommendations . for housing projects for the Melrose and
Civic Center area sites.
SR/GEO/td
td87/010
S 7 - 9 3 -ai
PROJECT: Civic Center Site
ZONING DISTRICT: RG-3/6
ZONING REQUIREMENTS/PROPOSALS:
REQUIRED MTH ABDA
Floor Area
1.21
.75
.75
Open Space
.67
N/A
N/A
Living Space
.41
N/A
N/A
Recreation Space
.10
N/A
N/A
Car Ratio
1.1
1.46
N/A
Both projects meet
the toning
requirements that
can be evaluated with the
informat on submitted.
MWER AND TYPE OF UNITS:
TYPE
BEDROOMS
BATHROOMS
SQ.FOOTAGE
CODEC
ABDA
CODEC ABDA
CODEC ABDA
CODEC ABOA
A
1
1
620
A
B
2 2
1 2
900 910
C
2
2
940
B
D
3 3
1 3
1176 1120
Total
SITE DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS:
Type of Units
Orientation of units
Location on site
Use relationship
amenities.
Landscaping
Tree Survey
Park ing
CODEC
Apartments
Acceptable; except
for building on 17th
Street.
Poor relationship with
recreation area.
Needs improvement.
Shows improved
recreation area.
Not submitted
Not submitted
Distribution needs
improvement. Number
of spaces needs
improvement.
# OF
UNITS
CODEC
ABDA
24
72
20
20
24
24
96 88
ABDA
Townhouses and Apartments
Needs improvement. ,
Deficient. Buildings are
very long.
Slightly better.
Does not show recreation
area.
Not submitted
Not submitted
Number of spaces cannot
be evaluated. Relationship
of parking area to
Building B needs improvement.
Number of units Acceptable Acceptable
87-93
•
•
REEOM RATIONS s
The Planning Department recommends the plans submitted by CODCC, Inc. because
the overall site plan is better than the one submitted by the Allapattah
Business Development Authority. The former shows an improved recreation area
and a better relationship of the parking area to the dwelling units. It
should be made subject to the following conditions:
1/ •Design buildings in groups
2/ Avoid long facades
3/ Avoid continuous parking area
4/ Avoid east -west exposure
5/ Include landscape plans
6/ Include site plan review by Planning Department
87-9 3 .4.
• CITY OF MIAMI ExttEii�
CIVIC CENTER SITE: HOUSING PROPOSAL FACT SHEET
PROPOSAL A
PROPOSAL B
PROPOSAL SPONSOR
JOINT VENTURE: ALLAPATTAH
BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, INC-,
A NOT -FOR -PROFIT CHO AND PRIVATE
DEVELOPERS ARMANDO CAZO AND HECTOR PAGES
CODEC, INC.
A NOT -FOR -PROFIT (OMIOBITT
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
I)
Project Configuration
2 Story Townhomes over Garden Apartments
3 (3 Story Garden Apartment Building)
2)
Construction Type/Method
Tunnel Form System
Concrete Block System
3)
Number of Dwelling Units
88
96
4)
Unit Mix
1 Bedroom
24 (1 Bedroom - 1 Bath)
2 Bedroom
20 (2 Bedroom - 2 Bath)
2 Bedroom
20 (2 Bedroom - 2 Bath)
24 (2 Bedroom - 1 Bath),
3 Bedroom
24 (3 Bedroom - 2 Bath)
72 (3 Bedroom - 2 Bath) !
S)
aD
Unit Size:
1 Bedroom
620 square Feet
`4
2 Bedroom
910 Square Feet
2 Bedroom
940 Square Feet
900 Square Feet
4t
3 Bedroom
1,170 Square Feet
1,I76 Square Feet
M
D
0
EXHIBIT B
f J %W ON
JOINT VBNTURB: ALLAPATYAH
PROPOSAL SPONSOR
BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, INC.
CODEC, INC.
A NOT -FOR -PROFIT CHO AND PRIVATE
A NOT -FOR -PROFIT CtMUNITY
DEVELOPERS ARMANDO CAZO AND HECTOR PAGES
DEVELOPMENT, CORPORATION
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
6)
Unit Amenities
Refrigerator, Electric Range,
Refrigerator, Electric Range, /
Dishwasher, Garbage Disposal,
Central Air, Washer -Dryer
Central Air, Washer -Dr er Hook-U
Hook-U
7)
Project Amenities
Swimming Pool, Clubhouse, Tot Lot
Swimming Pool, Pool Pavilion:,
Clubhouse, Barbecue Area, Tot Lot
8)
Parking Spaces (per unit)
Information Not Available
1.4 Spaces Per Unit
9)
Base Unit Sales Price
1 Bedroom
$29,995
2 Bedroom
$43,995
2 Bedroom
$46, 995
$31, 900 'r
3 Bedroom
$54,995
$39,900
IO) Base Unit Sales Price
Per Sq. Pt. (average)
$48.35
$34.69
40
VA
I EXHIBIT B
CITY OF Mimi
CIVIC CENTER SITE: HOUSING PROPOSAL REVIEW
PFAU]= Flamm
]PROPOSAL A
PROPOSAL B
11)
Construction Financing
Matthews & Wright, Inc. (Conditional Commitment)
First American Bank (Statement
Bayamon Federal Savings & Loan Association of
of Intent)
Puerto Rico (Statement of Intent)
Intercontinental Bank (Statement
of Intent)
12)
Mortgage Financing
Matthews & Wright, Inc. (Conditional Commitment)
M Bank (Statement of Intent)
Financial Research Services (statement of Intent)
First mortgage Financing
Bayamon Federal Savings & Loan Association
of Puerto Rico (Statement of Intent)
Second Mortgage Financing
Documentary Surtax (Proposed)
Documentary Surtax (Proposed)
1)
CIVIC CENTER SITE
AFFORDABILITY ANALYSIS
NO LAND COST REIMBURSEMENT
A - JOINT VENTURE: ALLAPATTAH BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY, INC., A NOT -FOR -PROFIT CBO AND
PRIVATE DEVELOPERS ARMANDp CAZO AND HECTOR PAGES
B - CODEC, INC. A NOT -FOR -PROFIT DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION
A A B
ONE BEDROOM
Base Sales Price 29,995.00
Cost Per Square Foot 48.38
First Mortgage 13,497.75
Second Mortgage 14,997.50
First Mortgage P & I 118.45
Second Mortgage Interest 25.00
Association Fees 49.00
Insurance 20.00
Taxes 72.21
TOTAL MONTHLY COST 284.66
INCOME REQUIRED TO SUPPORT
DEBT 10,351.00
TWO BEDROOM
Base Sales Price
43,995.00
46,995.00
31,900.00
Cost Per Square Foot
48.35
49.99
33.93
First Mortgage
15,398.25
17,145.25
11,165.00
Second Mortgage
26,397.00
27,500.00
19,140.00
First Mortgage P & I
135.13
150.46
93.88
Second Mortgage Interest
25.00
25.00
25.00
Association Fees
49.00
49.00
28.00
Insurance
20.00
20.00
20.00
Taxes
105.91
113.13
76.80
TOTAL MONTHLY COST
335.04
357.59
243.68
INCOME REQUIRED TO SUPPORT
DEBT
12,183.00
13,003.00
8,861.00
THREE BEDROOM
Base Sales Price
54,995.00
39,900.00
Cost Per Square Foot
47.00
33.93
First Mortgage
19,245.25
11,970.00
Second Mortgage
33,000.00
25,935.00
First Mortgage P & I
100.65
Second Mortgage Inter -sip
25.00
Association Fser,
49.00
43.00
Insurance
20,00
20.00
Taxes
132.39
96.05
TOTAL MONTHLY COST
395.28
284.70
INCOME REQUIRED TO SUPPORT
DEBT
14,374.00
10,353.00