Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-79-0808RESOLUTION NO. 79 808 A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING IN PRINCIPLE THE BISCAYNE BOULEVARD NORTH: ECONOMIC PLANNING STUDY, AS SHOWN ON THE ATTACHED MAP, WHICH STUDY ISIN CONFORMNITY WITH THE MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN. WHEREAS, the Miami Planning Advisory Board, at its meeting of October 3, 1979, Item No. 1, following an advertised hearing, adopted Resolution No. PAI3 57-59 by a 6-1 vote recommending in principle the Biscayne Boulevard North: Economic Planning Study; and WHEREAS, the City Commission, at its meeting of October 30, 1979, Item No. , adopted Resolution No. 79-719 recommending in principle. the Biscayne Boule- vard North: Economic Planning Study excluding the area between N.E. 50th Terrace and N.E. 55th Terrace; and WHEREAS, the City Commission at its meeting of October 30, 1979, directed the Planning Department to meet exclusively with Morningside Homeowners re- garding the recommended zoning change for Biscayne Boule- vard between N.E. 50th Terrace and N.E. 55th Terrace; and WHEREAS, said meeting was held November 7, 1979 where the Morningside Homeowners Association voted in favor of the Study's recommended zoning change for Bis- cayne Boulevard between N.E. 50th Terrace and N.E. 55th Terrace; and dtOCUMCIY DCX WHEREAS, the City Commission deeft0t P1 and in the best interest of the general welfare of the city of Miami and its inhabitants to recommend said study; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA; Section 1. The Biscayne Boulevard North Eco- nomic Planning Study, as shown on the attached map, which study is in conformity with the Miami Comprehensive Neigh- borhood Plan, be and the same is hereby approved in principle. "SUPPORTIVE IV:VE DOCUPV EN*I-3 FOLLOW„ PASSED AND ADOPTED this 26th day of November 1979. Maurice A. Ferre MAURICE A. FERRE MAYO R PREPARED AND APPROVED BY: j7Q_ J. MICHAEL HAYGOOD/ ASSISTANT CITY ATT`O'RNEY APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: GEOE F. KNO CI ATTORN I((1 L. FOLLOW" 79-808 "SU PORTI y'E DOCUMENTS FOLLOW" APPLICANT: PETITION: 9 PLANNING FACT SHEET. City of Miami Planning Department: September 21, 1979 1. Consideration of recommending approval of the Biscayne Boulevard North Economic Planning Study pertaining to the area fronting on. and adjacent to Biscayne Boulevard,between NE 36th Street and NE 87th Street the muni- cipal limit; which study recommends street beautification, selective re -zoning, office and residential development, commercial re- vitalization and marketing strategies, which study is in conformity with the Miami Compre- hensive.Plan. REQUEST: To approve the Biscayne Boulevard North Econ- omic Planning Study. BACKGROUND: On February 22, 1979, the City Commission passed a motion directing the Planning Department to conduct an analysis of the Biscayne Boulevard corridor between NE 36th Street and NE 87th Street, with the economic revitalization of that arterial landmark as the prime objective. In preparing this economic planning study, meetings were held with the Biscayne Boulevard" Task Force, representatives from local citizen• groups and the Biscayne Shopping Plaza Merchants Association. ANALYSIS: The objective of the Biscayne Boulevard Economic Planning Study is three -fold: 1) To document the existing physical and environmental conditions in the study area which detract from the normal working of economic growth, including an analysis of existing zoning patterns;2) To perform a de- tailed land use analysis of the study area to determine the land use program which might serve as the redevelopment impetus for revitalizing the Boulevard; and 3) To prepare a realistic imple- mentation program formeetingredevelopment ob- jectives which includes a marketing strategy to attract compatible development.' Economic analysis included: office and residen- tial projections, comparative analysis of exist- ing land values, economic analysis of "Motel Row", market study of the Biscayne Shopping Plaza and consumer and merchant surveys. The study proposes the following public actions: Rezoning the eastside of Biscayne Boulevard, between NE 50th Terrace and NE 55th Terrace, from R-4 to R-C. RECOMMENDATION PLANNING DEPARTMENT PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD CITY COMMISSION Establishing a Special Zoning Overlay District covering the C-1 zoning district of the Boulevard between NE 60th Street and Little River (between NE 77th and NE 78th Streets) - Rezoning Biscayne Boulevard, between NE 80th Street and NE 87th Street, from C-2 to C-1, subsequently establishing the above -mentioned Special District to cover this district; and - Initiating a street beautificatiofl program for the Boulevard between NE 54th and NE 87th Streets. In order to encourage economic revitalization, the Study proposes the following private actions: - Encouraging the development of 500,000 square feet of office space by 1985 on the Boulevard; - Encouraging the development of 405 new market - rate housing units on Biscayne Boulevard •between NE 36th and NE 62nd Streets; - Encouraging early acquisition of marginal motel properties along the Boulevard; Revitalizing the Biscayne Shopping Plaza. A joint public -private marketing strategy for the revitalization of the Boulevard is also recommended. Rezone the R-4 Zoning District just west of the C-1 District on Biscayne Boulevard between NE 62 St -NE 69St to R-C. Rezone the Biscayne Shopping Center from C-2 to C-1A. Approval. Recommended Approval, October 3, 1979, by 6 to 1 vote. APPROVED in principle, October 30, 1979., excluding the Morningside area: NE 54th Street to NW 60th 'Street, from Biscayne Boulevard to Biscayne Bay. EICAYNE BOULEVARD NORTH ECONOMIC PLANNING STUDY CITY OF MIAMI PLANNING DEPARTMENT OCT 1979 TABLE OF CONTENTS. S. BISCAYNE BOULEVARD NORTH: OVERALL OBJECTIVE l II. BISCAYNE BOULEVARD NORTH STUDY DESIGN 2-3 III. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS 4-5 IV. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS 6-9 V. BISCAYNE BOULEVARD NORTH OFFICE SPACE PROJECTIONS 10-22 - Office Employee Projections 10-15 ▪ Analysis: Office Space Projectls 15-16 VI. BISCAYNE BOULEVARD NORTH RESIDENTIAL PROJECTIONS 23-26 - Demand 23 - Supply 23-25 ▪ Discussion 25 VII. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS. OF EXISTING LAND VALUES: 1978 ............. 27-32. ▪ Analysis 27 Comparative Land Values Illustrated 28 • Discussion 27-32 VIII. BISCAYNE BOULEVARD NORTH: ANALYSIS OF "MOTEL ROW" 33-49 - Tourism: Trends Affecting "Motel Row" 33-35 ▪ "Motel Row": Existing Conditions 35-37 Economic Impact of Adult Congregate Living Facilities 37-39 Economic Impact of Zoning District Change: Biscayne Boulevard East between N.E. 50 Terr. N.E. 55 Terrace 39-45 • Special Transfer of Development Rights as a Redevelopment Incentive 46-49 Targeted Deepening of Commercial District 50 IX. BISCAYNE SHOPPING PLAZA 52-71 • Existing Conditions 52-56 Consumer Survey Results 58-60 Residential Survey Results 60-61 Summary 61-62 • Area Retail/Eating and Drinking Space Demand 62763 Recommendations 63-72 X. APPENDIX Biscayne Boulevard North Special Planning District Zoning Overlay . ... .............. ... ........ 73-76 Illustration of Special Transfer of Development Rights 77 Proposed Alterations in Use Regulations 78 -i- 73-78 .RC N"-. �' •; pv. v v i Iull1 l�l t nL:�' � !I'�T .vu W1 I I' ., t. ��Ll�Y*IIj•i�1'I"tII�_✓'�t ;LJ! Mv Cj 7LSs 1 '1 I �I JI Y _ �° L�'▪ ' '�� F• ��1 y^ -U4Jt C7 _;�-� _-1'n,�iFf+HFi" . _1..�.� � fit •=1'Zr _:�� �i i `. '�-�• I '�' H S ▪ VJ • � IZ ' 1 1 � --t }-f � A. -`i OI I � 1 L C..i'71 �LI • N.w. •• .T1 •..A. N.W. •i •T ""1 II lil �r�r° i Z. .• w49ft i, L 1JI. 1 ! " �� • ,• rl t i-'mac t• 1n nr"er. I�f. �^, - l J ^I : -'' . r ..wad t ri1( l.l.- n, l rr t6e:.•,M -11 s. i uL ran- pii ""' FFf 7L��=.y z4!'71 -14 G1 F 1 •-1.r.-H . x J E14LIL - t_ ,..i: i....3� y7. K^^-' — 2.�,T'17. 1,r]r_p'j, �•r_•`1 C1 ;pr--=aad'S'�'� =mac -mac,- I1.a!incyJ\�'r•>;' V' ram_.=eL7r-..,. : .yr.,__;_-z^ ,`:(: t ,r1',•CS`` `-, ' _�s�sa.r �`;-.am�,10� \�{C-,% i✓ <_•..71..7E''.:L:=• 7_ _-�' ;tom— :==-'-:1,`:' ,f :/"*.n •F f tip NW ]• CT,. �sy A0111.......47±_il l ,�I I _.: -- ,� ao�cx �1 ee3ea • N.W. •• •t.' PALM. •W0.0 • • moo • N.W. •4 j. Z rflYi ?Y IN'� i�'l .. •' �c +� C' -si_a1 nrf ,_��•-� , Cii tip �1{. PY �Jr�:��—�11�-dsol :. _SC-�3. u iI =c--'.-'Ii.J7 ii ::- !!^ )fJfO L._�I ,,icififti M tTLDDY A CAN, N.E. 87'i H ST. N.E. 36TH ST. JULIA TLTTV CMJAMNAII HIGH VALUE DOWNTOWN Mts.. MAC A/TM1A• CAYMM A, -1- I BISCAYNE BOULEVARD NORTH ECONOMIC PLANNING STUDY OVERALL OBJECTIVE Responding to the failing economic health of Biscayne Boulevard, residents of the northeast community came to the Planning Depart- ment with an idea for its revitalization. Often it is difficult to stimulate interest in an idea without specific information with which to sell the idea. In this sense, the technical, economic planning input can function as a market- ing tool. Adhering to this viewpoint, the City of Miami Planning Department has prepared this "Biscayne Boulevard North Economic Planning Study" with the intent that it will serve as the preliminary redevelopment impetus for Biscayne Boulevard, north of N.E. 36th St. .2. II BISCAYNE BOULEVARD NORTH STUDY DESIGN Objectives Four principal objectives noted in connection with this task are: A. Document the existing environmental and physical conditions in the study area which detract from the normal working of economic growth, including an analysis of the existing zoning pattern. B. Perform a detailed economic analysis of the study area to determine the land use program which might serve as the redevelopment impetus for revitalizing Biscayne Boulevard C. Prepare a realistic implementation program for meeting redevelopment objections. D. Produce a Biscayne Boulevard information base that can be utilized by the Office of Trade and Commerce Development and Community Groups as a marketing tool to attract compatible business development. II.Work Effort To achieve these objectives, the following specific actions are proposed A. Office Space Projections (1985) for the City of Miami in general, the Downtown area, and the Biscayne Boulevard Corridor above NE 36th Street (Biscayne Boulevard North) . B. Analysis of existing office space and planned office construction as it relatesto the Biscayne Boulevard North Study Area's office space projections. C. Residential projections for the Biscayne Boulevard. North Area as a function of office employment within the general downtown area. Analysis of existing residential occupancy rates and planned residential construction as it relates to the sales and rental projections for the Biscayne Boulevard North Area. E. Perform detailed Land Use Analysis for the Biscayne Boule- vard North Area. F. Conduct a Comparative Analysis of Existing Land Values: 1978. Assess the economic implications of specific land use and reuse for parcels situated within the study area. H. Biscayne Boulevard: Economic Analyst, of "Motel Row." t Assess the economic implications of specific land reuse f with recommendations as to the zoning districts that. may be the most compatible with the specific land reuses. 1. An existing conditions statement with respect to the Biscayne Shopping Plaza and, subsequent, policy implications. J. Consumer survey (conducted in the Biscayne Shopping Plaza) and resident survey (telephone survey of northeast community residents) Survey to assess the demand side of the local retail market, especially ho•v it relates to the Biscayne Shopping Plaza. K. Prepare a realistic implementation plan which addresses the policy implications of the study's findings. -4- III SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Office Space Projections: 1985 Between 1975 and 1985,.Biscayne Boulevard North can be expected to capture approximately 500,000 square feet of office construction, given existing vacancies within the same area. Biscayne Boulevard may increase its share of new office space vis-a-vis other areas in and around Miami by way of an aggressive marketing approach, zoning changes and community improvements. Residential Projections: 1985 Between 1975 and 1985, one can expect an increase in demand for housing within a 15 minute commuting distance (by car) from the Central Business District equal to 1,325 units, at least. Projects currently under construction and/or on the drawing board, totalling 1105 units of which 300 will be for rental purposes, will not address middle/upper-middle income households for the most part. Biscayne Boulevard North, between NE 36th Street and NE 62nd Street has the potential to capture at least 30% of the residential demand generated by the additional.1350 households wishing to live within a 10-12 minute commute from the CBD by 1985. Sales prices for the 210 additional sales units projected should range from $55,000-$85,000 (1979 dollars). Rental units, an additional 195 projected for this segment of the Boulevard, should range in monthly receipts. from $400-$750. The income category being catered to is the $18,000-$35,000 (1979 dollars) one. Comparative Analysis of Land Values 1978 The 1978 fair market value of land along Brickell Avenue is two times the fair market value of land along Biscayne Boulevard between NE 36th Street and NE 61st Street, $30 as opposed to $15 per square foot of land. Vacant land along Biscayne. Boulevard north of NE 72nd Street is valued at approxi- mately $9 per square foot A modest size condominium will sell for at least $16,000 more in a Brickell residential project than in an identical project built on Biscayne Boulevard, simply a reflection of the difference in land values. Assuming the exact same office building is built on both the Brickell site and the Biscayne Boulevard site (cash on cash returns equal) 5,000 square feet of office space would cost a customer roughly $25,000 less in the Biscayne Project per year, a major savings. Vacant land is a scarce commodity within the study area. The most inefficient and obsolete use of land are the 18-32 unit motels that line the Boulevard within the study area (objectively criticized in the next section). This prime redevelopment property can be acquired for a maximum cost of $8,000 per room which translates into $12-$15 per square foot of land (inclusive of existing improvements). -4- III SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Office Space Projections: 1985 Between 1975 and 1985, Biscayne Boulevard North can be expected to capture approximately 500,000 square feet of office construction, given existing vacancies within the same area. Biscayne Boulevard may increase its share of new office space vis-a-vis. other areas in and around Miami by way of an aggressive marketing approach, zoning changes and community improvements. Residential Projections: 1985 Between 1975 and 1985, one can expect an increase in demand for housing within a 15 minute commuting distance (by car) from the Central Business District equal to 1,325 units, at least. Projects currently under construction and/or on the drawing board, totalling 1105 units of which 300 will be for rental purposes, will. not address middle/upper-middle income households for the most part. Biscayne Boulevard North, between NE 36th Street and NE 62nd Street has the potential to capture at least 30% of the residential demand generated by the additional 1350 households wishing to live within a 10-12 minute commute from the CBD by 1985. Sales prices for the 210 additional sales units projected should range from $55,000-$85,000 (1979 dollars). Rental units, an additional 195 projected for this segment of the Boulevard, should range in monthly receipts from $400-$750. The income category being catered to is the $18,000-$35,000 (1979 dollars) one. Comparative Analysis of Land Values: 1978 The 1978 fair market value of land along Brickell Avenue is two times the fair market value of land, along Biscayne Boulevard between NE 36th Street and NE 61st Street, $30 as opposed to $15 per square foot of land. Vacant land along Biscayne Boulevard north of NE 72nd Street is valued. at approxi- mately $9 per square foot. A modest size condominium will sell for at least $16,000 more in a Brickell- residential project than in an identical project built on Biscayne Boulevard, simply a reflection of the difference in land values. Assuming the exact same office building is built on both the Brickell site and the Biscayne Boulevard site (cash on cash returns equal) 5,000 square feet of office space would cost a customer roughly $25,000 less in the Biscayne Project per year, a major savings. Vacant land is a scarce commodity within the study area. The most inefficient and obsolete use of land are the 18-32 unit motels that line the Boulevard within the study area (objectively criticized in the next section). This prime redevelopment property can be acquired for a maximum cost of $8,000 per room which translates into $12-$15 per square foot of land (inclusive of existing improvements). Economic Analysis of "Motel Row" Although tourism is increasing in South Florida, .0., nvmbei: of tourists coming here by automobile continues to decline. Consegurztly,;the demand for motel accomodationS along the Boulevard. above NE 36 St. has decreased dignificantly. Escalating operating costs in the face of this demand decrease have together worked to remove the profit from this area's small motel establishments. Encouraging Adult Congregate Living Facilities as alternative, interim uses for these motels (the present trend) may function to makeinfeasible the kinds of development this study has recommended for Biscayne Boulevard. The financial feasibility of these projects (office, retail -commercial, residential) rests on the premise that C.:ese motels can be acquired for .$12»$15 per square foot. Because the.; ACLF's are more profitable operations than the motel operations for the same structure, the sales value of the property will jump to $20 and beyond. Financing (developers interests, too) will probably be difficult to acquire as a result. (The Planning Department is conducting a study of the equitable geographical distribution of these facilities). The existing R-4 Zoning District along Biscayne Boulevard's east side, between NE 50th Terrace and NE 55th Terrace will not allow for the land use program which may serve as the redevelopment impetus for revitalizing this stretch of the Boulevard. Ten marginal motels presently occupy this zoning district. Residential and mixed use construction, similar to the Falls apartments is deemed appropriate for this area. The existing C-1 Zoning District which.defines Biscayne Boulevard between NE 60th Street and Little River does not: provide adequate redevelopment incentives to builders; encourage the kinds of structural uses deemed appropriate for this arterial landmark. Biscayne Shopping Plaza` A combination of forces have detrimentally impacted the plaza during the last several years. The catalyst of decline was managerial and financial difficulties internal to the anchor stores within the plaza., These vacancies were not caused by changes in the area's major demand determinants, such as incomes and population. However, many of these initial vacancies, allowed to persist by the management, effectively diminished the variety of good supplied which decreased consumer's preference for shopping here. More vacancies resulted as a consequence. An analysis of the gross warranted retail floor area within the trading' area, based on total ,sales potential, discloses that the 300,000 sq. ft. of retail space in the plaza represents only 13% of this warranted retiil floor area. Ample sales potential exists to support the plaza. The consumer survey indicates that local residents are returning to i.he plaza. 81% of those interviewed were there primarily to shop because of the convenience to their -homes. Consumers are not coming, however, due to good variety and quality of the merchandise offered. The resident survey indicates that consumers' shop at stores closest to them along the Boulevard for groceries. Pantry PrideAttractedmany of the; residents. Groceries were found to be bought in the plaza, but very little clothing or other goods. • -6- IV SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS Initiate a beautification program with the private sector between NE 54th Street and NE 87th Street on the Boulevard. The program will include the planting of approximately 200 trees to enhance efforts currently underway for the economic revitalization of the Biscayne Boulevard corridor. Encourage the development of 500,000 square feet of office construction by 1985 on Biscayne Boulevard between NE 36th Street. and NE 87th Street by the private sector. Biscayne Boulevard can increase it,- share of projected development away from other office markets in and around Miami by an aggressive marketing approach emphasizing its relatively less costly land values, zoning changes, lower rents and community improvements. - Encourage residential development along Biscayne Boulevard between NE 36th Street and NE 62nd Street for 405 new housing units - 210 units for sale plus 195 units for rent. This will be private sector, market rate housing. The residential projections for 1985 indicate that this area can capture 30% of the total residential demand within a 10-12 minute commute from the Central Business District, catering to the $18,000- $35,000 family income category. - Rezone the eastside of Biscayne Boulevard between NE 50th Terrace to NE 55th Terrace from R-4 to R-C. This zoning change will permit desirable mixed-usedrental development plus a maximum FAR of 1.5 with no height limitations. Based on proforma financial feasibility projections, the benefits accrued to both the consumer (lower cost for residential units) and developer (lower fair market value thus making financing easier to obtain), due to the zoning change, will serve as a redevelopment impetus for revitalizing this stretnh of the Boulevard. - Encourage early acquisition of marginal motel properties along. Biscayne Boulevard by the private sector. Prime redevelopment property presently occupied by motels. of marginal economic and physical status should be acquired as soon as possible. The motels, especially those characterized by 12-32 rooms, represent an inefficient and obsolete use of land along the Boulevard which can now be obtained for $12-$15/sq. ft: The financial feasibility of recommended office,'commercial and residential redevelopment projects rests on the premise that this property will be obtained for the $12-$15/sq. ft. cost. -7- Several of the motels have recently become Adult Congregate Living Facilities as an alternative and more profitable use. As a consequence, sales values of the property can be expected to rise to $20 and up/sq. ft. If this pattern continues, the increased land costs will make infeasible the kinds of development this study has recommended. Therefore, immediate action should be taken to acquire the property. Establish a Special Planning District `fr ning Overlay for the Boulevard's C-1 Zoning District between NE 60th Street and the Little River (between NE 77th Street and NE 78th Street). The area between NE 60th Street and the Little River represents a viable location for mixed use redevelopment on existing motel properties and underutilized lots. The zoning overlay will limit the Boulevard to the kinds of C-1 uses that public and private interests believe are appropriate for this arterial landmark. Furthermore, a special Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) is proposed within this zoning overlay. This TDR will allow the floor area of an R-2 (given FAR bonus of..9), R-3 or R-4 Transitional Use Lot, to be transferred over to the SPD building site which must exhibit at least 120' of street frontage on Biscayne Boulevard. Briefly, this TDR strikes an equilibrium in the sense that it: allows. the developer, relatively speaking, to maximize. his cashon equity return, and; insures appropriate physical development and redevelopment by subjecting projects taking advantage of the TDR to site and. development plan reviews by the Planning Department. Rezone the R-4 Zoning District on the west side of Biscayne Boulevard between NE 62nd Street and NE 69th Street to R-C. The commercial lots abutting, the Boulevard are too small to take advantage of the proposed transfer of Development Rights. Consequently, developers will not build along this otherwise, excellent location for residential and/or commercial development. Deepening of the commercial district (270-280') is essential for this particular stretch of the Boulevard. Revitalize the Biscayne Shopping. Plaza to provide the redevelopment impetus at Biscayne Boulevard and NE 79th Street. Revitalization of the Biscayne Shopping Plaza will assist the redevelopment process in the northern portion of Biscayne Boulevard. Upgrading of the shopping center will provide the redevelopment impetus at NE 79th Street. f Some of the recommended actions to be :t. l ade of <_. Bide beautification effort'; strengthening c.f '..:,<: plaza's ML.riUutAit Association; a more aggressive market;ine eampai..gn intended to attract tenants and shoppers; and extensive landscepin7 at the key intersection of NE 79th Street and Biscayne Boulevard see~vinj c.o demarcate the shopping plaza as well as est&i].i,1h a pusitive identity for the Boulevard as the '!Gateway to Miami". Rezone the Biscayne Shopping Plaza from C-2 to C--1A. If improvements are made to the ,?1 < the City wi7.1 become directly involved, in controlling the de,.i.g.. heilding p1..es access: and circula- tion within the plaza. Efficie e functioning of the shopping area is the major objective. Rezone Biscayne Boulevard, north of N1 d(H h Street Allow SPD-3 Zoning Overlay to apply to t.hi_e new C- i on C-2 to C. 1. D. st rict The general .character. of the 13oo3.c,•.r_ .<+. ine ndecl :o be that of quality office and retail development. Uses permitted within C-2 Districts .. eeh as rja sol::ene- etatians, second hand stores, and auto repair shops: : z.. not appropriate along ehis entryway portion of the Bout..,e Develop an aggressive marketing st.,. �Cr. Biscayne Boulevard. It is suggested that a Biscayne i ..a l.eee.'.41 comprised of area business and t::o:ems. oit Y, .'. .- revitalization activities. 'x:fi. of sponsoring a promotional cempa3ge ee e ek . T'he Chamber of Commerce, The Miam.. 1:c,r_.;_;.i, Lt. stations should be contacted for th,._:ir support will offer promotional assi.':,tare_c ,ay to further the positive image of ehe re .,,.; ev,u: AC{.iji i-t.11El.tt:eC'. ? t'.o1:m' to coordinate ,ve :*-*e responsibility ff...nOings of this study leeel radio and TV el the efforts. The... City a etr..?•mt & th.l brochure It is recommended that the Action ,waitt..ue sponr or c joint meeting with realtors and developers with le.teeeets in the psi sc tyne Bou].e•>'ard Area. A concerted effort to promote the po it.i. 7e ii:age of the ' orridor is required. It is equally imp: rtant to convince eri: ting property owners in the area that any invol verc..nt on theie part will contribute to the revitalization of the Boulevard and affect them beneficelly. They should be encouraged to eetzoeaee and rehabilitate their property, if need be, in an effort to upgrade the eurr:ounding residential areas and supplement the efforts underway along the Boulevard. • N.E. 79 STC r D© �) I� 00oC' CI ow moor)or; CD MI CD �O O O p f CRCCD N. E. 62 ST. o0 N. E. 36 ST. C7 CI MIIII imm 1 //.l lC_—.7.1O) Ez OO ❑CJt `r s• � G�J t' ❑ 11 CI7 ST. MAJOR RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Change zoning from R-4 to R-C (NE 50 Terr NE 55 Terr.) a. Allow mixed use construction. b. Increase building density. 2. Beautification Program (NE 54 St - NE 87 St.): Tree Planting. 3. Change zoning from R-4 to R-C (NE 62 St. - NE 69 St.) a. Deepen commercial zoning to 270-280 feet. b. Provide for maximum density of 120,000 sq. ft. building.' 4. Special Planning Distri..t Zoning Overlay (NE 60 St. - NE 78 St.) a. Development bonus b. Use regulation restrictions. 5. Economic Revitalization of Bis- cayne Shopping Plaza a. Private initiated Tree Planting b. Aggressive marketing campaign c. Public improvements (signage, bus shelters, traffic). 6. Change zoning -of Biscayne Shopping Plaza from C-2 to C-1A a. Improve quality control of physical improvements b. Mandatory parking and traffic circulation improvements if physical improvements made. 7. Change zoning from C-2 to C-1 (NE 80 St. NE 87 St.). SPD will cover this new C-1 District (#4.) a. Use regulation restrictions b. Visual improvements to Gateway. o DMMcrn A: UVIM 2� LTV � Study Area includes Biscayne Shopping Plaza UVOA l TTEffJ -10- BISCAYNE BOULEVARD NORTH OFFICE PROJECTIONS -1985- Introduction This analysis seeks to quantify 1985 office space projections for the Biscayne Boulevard corridor•. The end product is 1985 office employment and office space floor areas for the areas north and south of 62nd Street. Office. Employee Projections Office space needs for 1985 in the. Biscayne Boulevard corridor are calculated from office employee estimates. Table I estimates Miami's total office space. employment as of 1975 using figures supplied by Gladstone Associates The percentage of total employment by industry type that is office employment, was estimated. In 1975 nearly 62,000 office workers were estimated in the City of Miami or about one-third of total employment. Next, Miami's total office employment was estimated for 1985. This assumes that Miami's percentage share of total employment will remain the same and that the distribution of office employment to total employment will also remain constant. Table 2 estimates 87,000 office employees in. Miami during 1985 or 40 percent higher than in 1975. Table 3 summarizes the distribution of gross office floor areas among Miami's CBD and the two subareas in the Biscayne corridor. Note that the Biscayne corridor has approximately 7 percent of Miami's total office space compared to 30 percent for the Central Business District or CBD. Table 4 compares 1975 office employment estimates with actual gross office floor areas leading to a ratio of 336 gross office square feet per office 1 The Biscayne Boulevard Corridor is defined as Biscayne Blvd. between N.E. 36 St. and N.E. 87 St. Industry TABLE V-1 NON-AGRICULTURAL EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY. CITY OF MIAMI - DADE COUNTY -1975- Percent of City of Miami Total City of Miami Dade As Percent of Employment Estimated County Dade County City of In Office Employment In (1) Total (2) Miami Space (2) Office Space Contract Con- 37,400 30% 11,220 25% 2,805 struction Manufacturing 85,500 25% 21,375 10% 2,138 Transportation, 59 400 35% 20,790 40% 8,316 Communications i and Public 1-. Utilities Trade 150,700 30% 45,210 15% 6,782 45,900 31% 14,229 72% 10,245 Finance, Insurance and Real Estate Services Government 137,800 30% 41,340 47% 19,430 76,700 40% 30,680 40% 12,272 Total 593,400 184,844 61,988 (1) Dade County Labor Market Trends, State of Florida Department of Commerce Sept.1975, No.357 (2) Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan, 1976-1986 Economic Technical Appendix Table E-1, Page. 235 j Industry TABLE V-2 NON-AGRICULTURAL EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY • CITY OF MIAMI - DADE COUNTY -1985- Percent of City of Miami Total City of Miami Dade As Percent of Employment Estimated County Dade County City of In Office Employment In (1). Total (2) Miami Space (2) Office Space Contract Con- struction 35,203. Manufacturing 96,524 Transportation, 89,564 Communications and Public Utilities 30% . 10,560 25% 2,640 25% 24,131 10% 2,413 35% 31,347 40% 12,539 Trade 148,317 30% 44,495 '15% Finance, 58,866 31% 18,248 72% Insurance and Real Estate Services 294,305 Government 51,234 40% 6,674 13,139 30% 88,292 47% 41,497 20,494 40% 8,198 - Total 774,013 (1) Derived from Employment In The Miami M21.E201112.n. Area 19701990 Metropolitan Dade County Planning Department, See Table 6, Page 25. (2) See Table I. 237,566 87,100 TABLE V- 3 CITY OF MIAMI -1975 - DISTRIBUTION OF EXISTING GROSS OFFICE FLOOR AREA (1) Gross Floor Area High Value Downtown Area 9,947,000 Central Business District 6,279,000 Biscayne Boulevard North 1,484,000 North of 62nd Street South of 62nd :Street City of Miami, 961,000 523,000 20,830,000 (1) City of Miami Planning Department Urban Information System Percent of Total 47.75% 30.14% 7.122 4.61% 2.51% 100.00% TABLE V-4 CITY OF MIAMI OFFICE SPACE PROJECTIONS -1985- (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Total Total Gross Total Projected Employment In Gross Office ,Office Floor Employment In Gross Office Office Space Floor Area Area Per Office Office Space Floor Area -1975- -1975- Employee -1985- -1985- 61,988 20,830,000 336 87,100 29,265,600 (1) Table I (2) Table III (3) (2) 71'• (1) (4) Table II (5) (3) x (4) lf -15- employee. This ratio applied to Miami's 1985 office employment estimate yields a projected 29.2 million square feet of office space needed,'for 1985. Table 5 takes the citywide projection -and distributes it to the High Value District, the CBD (contained within the High Value District) and the Biscayne Boulevard Corridor. Between 1975 and 1985, the Corridor can be expected to capture about 600,000 square feet of new office construction. Analysis The estimated 600,000 square feet of office projection assumes the status quo concerning the continued present distribution of office space among Miami's office markets. Generally, one neighborhood might capture office growth to the detriment of other areas because of a change in amenities, transportation systems, perceptual attitudes and/or marketing approaches. The rapid transit system, emergence of the City as a financial center for the Caribbean and Latin America, the generally renewed interest in central business districts throughout the U.S., are factors which are functioning to increase the:.High'Value District's share of office growth. This will be accomplished by intercepting office growth now destined for outlying areas or other Miami areas. Office space presently under construction and/or on the drawing boards for the High Value District exceeds the area's projection by 970,000 square feet. If the citywide total projection proves to be reasonably accurate, the High Value District will have captured at least 10% of the growth in office space destined for other areas within the City by 1985, see Table 6. } High Value Downtown Area CBD Biscayne Boulevard North North of 62nd Street South of 62nd Street City of Miami (1) Table III (2) (1) x 29,265,600 ft2 (3) Table III (4) (2) - (3) TABLE .V-5 -1985- GROSS OFFICE PROJECTIONS DISTRIBUTED TO BISCAYNE CORRIDOR AND HIGH VALUE DISTRICT (1) Percent of 1975 Gross Office Floor. Area 47.75% 30.14% 7.12% 4.61% 2.51% 100.00% (2) Estimated Gross. Office Floor Area 13,974,300 8,820,700 2,083,700 1,349,100 734,600 29,265,600. (3) Existing 1975 Gross Office Floor Area 9,947,000 6,279,000 1,484,000 961,000 523,000 20,830,000 Projected Growth in Gross Office Floor Area 1975-1985 4,027,300 2,541,700 599,700 388,100 211,600 8,435,600 -17- There are 103,000 sq.ft. of office floor area now vacant in seven majoroffice buildings along the Biscayne Boulevard Corridor. Three of these seven build- ings surveyed are completely vacant, accounting for nearly 40% of this total. However, the balance of office building space along Biscayne Boulevard (roughly 1 million sq. ft.) appears, based on our field survey, to be at least 90% occupied (average percentage). One implication of these vacancies is that Biscayne Boulevard will have to capture projected development away from other office markets within the City if the 600,000 sq. ft. of new office space is to be realized (see Table 7). Biscayne Boulevard might increase its share of new office space vis-a-vis other areas in and around Miami by an aggressive marketing approach (emphasizing cheap land values relative to distance from the High Value District), zoning changes and community improvements. -17- There are'103,000 sq.ft. of office floor area now vacant in seven major office buildings ,along the Biscayne Boulevard Corridor. Three of these seven build- ings surveyed are completely vacant, accounting for nearly 40% of this total. However, the balance of office building space along Biscayne Boulevard (roughly 1 million sq. ft.) appears, based on our field survey, to be at least 90% occupied (average percentage). One implication of these vacancies is that Biscayne Boulevard will have to capture projected development away from other office markets within the City if the 600,000 sq. ft. of new office space is to be realized (see Table 7). Biscayne Boulevard might increase its share of new office space vis-a-vis other areas in and around Miami by an aggressive marketing approach (emphasizing cheap land values relative to distance from the High Value District), zoning changes and community improvements. PROJECT NAME Plaza Venetia Nev Town -In -Town LOCATION Along Biscayne Bay just North of Venetian Causeway 65 acres between Biscayne Blvd. & N.W. 1st Ave.. east -west spur of FECRR and I-395 Freedom Tower Biscayne Blvd. is N.V. 6th (Existing) Street Education Complex Blocks North, South Northwest of present Miami Dade Community College Bldg. at N.E. 1st Ave. & N.E. 3rd St. TABLE 1/-6 NEW OFFICE DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT -DOWNTOWN MIAMI- ESTIMATED cOST ANTICIPATED USE BEGIN CONSTRUCTION A) Phase I: A) Phase I: 299 residential units, A) Phase I: under $23 million 40 hotel rooms, 30,000 sq. ft. of const. B) Phase II: quality shops. 50,000 sq. ft. health ) Phase II: Unknown $64 million club, 2 restaurants, a disco, 6 a Phase private club, 200 slip marina. Unknown B) Phase II. 810 residential units, 120 hotel rooms. Phase III. Office/shopping complex Unknown Majorresidential new town,- including hotels -and Other commercial development. COMPLETE CONSTRUCTION A) Phase /: Mid 1979 11) Phase II: Unknown Phase III: Unknown One year feasibility study to be done $700,000 land Nb anticipated use as of yet. 60,000 sq.ft. Unknown cost usable space $16 million for North and South blocks A) North Block: 120,000 sq.ft. of class- A) August 1979 rooms & labs, 10.000 sq.ft. bookstore, g) Unknown faculty offices, 150 unit senior citizen C) Unknown housing tower. B) South Block: small theater, gymnasium, other student facilities C) Northwest: Fla. Int'l University Unknown A) North block by 1981 B) Unknown C) Unknown co sir TABLE V-6 continued... PROJECT NAME Federal Court Miami World Trade Center LOCATION ESTIMATED COST N. Miami Ave. between N.E. $13.5 million 3rd St. b N.E. 4th Str. 0n air rights above the 1,000 car parking garage to be constructed as part of convention center James L: Knight 0n Miami River just vest International of Brickell Ave. bridge Center Sports Arena Government Center. 7-acre tract facing Miami River, just vest of. Bauder Fashion College 30-acre tract to the West and North of Dade County Courthouse $26 million $60 million $35 million $300 •illion- $12'million. land cost ANTICIPATED USE BEGIN CONSTRUCTION An ll--story 190,000 sq.ft. tower,for Federal March 31, 1978 courts and related offices. Plan includes (groundbreaking) renovation of old post offices. 250,000 350,000 sq.ft. bldg. providing common meeting place for locals and for- eigners engaged in international trade and commerce 5,000 seat auditorium. 607 room hotel. 30,000 sq.ft. shopping complex,10,000 sq.ft. of meeting rooms. restaurants, 1,000 car parking garage. 18,000 seat indoor arean that could be used for professional basketball, hockey and ,tennis Includes: A) B) C) D) E) F) G) H) I) City of Miami Police Building Parking Garages State of Fla. Regional Service Center City of Miami Adm. Buildings Dade County Adm. Buildings Cultural Center Utilities Plant Dade County School Board Park Late 1979 COMPLETE CONSTRUCTION Early 1982 Feasibility Study completed. Financing being sought Design Phase A) -- B) Unknown C) -- D) Under Constr. E) Design Phase F) Design Phase G) Design Phase H) Unknown Early 1982 A) August 1976 B) Unknown C) First building dedicated June • 197Mid8 D) 1979- First hldg. E) Design Phase P) Design Phase G) Design Phase H) Unknown 111111111 TABLE 17-6 continued... PROJECT NAME FlagshipCenter Interra Building Claughton Island U.S. Justice Building Bali Point FEC Property LOCATION Brickell Ave. between S.E. 7th St. 6 S.E. 8th sr. ESTIMATED COST A) Unknown B) Unknown N.W. corner of Brickell Ave. $22 million 6 S.W. 13th St. 44-acre island at mouth A)$67 million of Miami River in Biscayne 8) Unknown Bay U.K. corner of S. Miami Ave. 4 S.W. 2nd St. $5 million 8.45-acre tract on north $100 million aide of the Miami River on Biscayne Bay 3-.1/2 blocks on west side of Unknown NW 1st Ave. between NW th St. and NW 1st St. ANTICIPATED USE BEGIN CONSTRUCTION A) 14-story office bldg. serving as head- A) Under Constr. quarters for Flagship Bank - 280,000 8) 2nd phase office building 20-story office bldgand shopping mall, 600 car parking garage. 192,450 sq.ft. of office, 10,000 sq.ft retail, - 17,800 sqat. penthouse A) Brickell Key -Ultimate development of 2,000 residential units plus office, - retail owned hotel space, lat-vhase 305-unit 27-story condominium. B) Claughton-400-room hotel, 650 resi- dential units, 231,000 sq.ft. office, 33,000 sq.ft. retail • A 175,000 sq.ft., 14-story office bldg. Late 1978 with prime tennants being Immigration (Ground- & Naturalization Services of the U.S. • - breaking). Department of Justice. Small restaurant located on groung floor B) Unknown 33-story, 675 room hotel, two condo- minium bldgs. totaling 500 units, 679,000 sq.ft. office space. parking for 2,565 cars. 75,000 sq.ft. retail. Property is adjacent to the pain rapid transit station:and the Government Center Complex. There is Potential for high - density office development 284,000 sq.ft. Mid 197% A) Late 1979 B) Unknown ummer 1979 CONFLETE CONSTRUCTION - A) Late 1979 8) Unknown Mid 1980 A) 6.phases over a 6 to 9 year period 8) Unknown tt, Late 1979 1981 No Plans -announced 0 TABLE V-6 completed. PROJECT NAME Hanna -Jeffers Property Family Finance Building Office Building Doran Jason loading Offic Building LOCATION 848 Brickell Ave. ESTIMATED COST Unknown East side of Brickell Unknown Ave. just south of S. l0th St. SW corner of Brickell Ave. and SE 8th St. 1/2 block west of Brickell Ave. between 7th & 8th Sta. Block between NE 8th St. and NE 7th St. frontage on Biscayne Blvd. Unknow'n Unknown $1.5 milli�fl land cost, $20 million development COMM ANTICIPATED USE Office - 2 times lot area 317,000 sq.ft. 12 story office tower, 122,128 sq.ft. of floor area and 138,000 sq.ft. park- ing garage. Addition to existing 12 story office building. 206,000 sq.ft. office building with limited ground floor retail 89,000 sq.ft. office building, 282 parking spaces Retail, parking, hotel twin towers and office. 2,000 sq.ft. site BEGIN , COMPLETE CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION Unknown 1979 Unknown Unknown Preliminary architectural design Zoning approval and building permits are being sought. Land has been acquired ts.3 TABLE V - 7 CORRIDOR OFFICE BUILDINGS WITH NOTABLE VACANCY RATES TOT. VACANT PERCENTAGE LOCATION FLOOR AREA FLOOR AREA VACANT (sq. ft.) (sq. ft.) 3883 Biscayne Blvd. 11,000 11,000 . 100% 5220 Biscayne Blvd. 22,500 22,500 100% 6660 Biscayne Blvd. 12,000 8,000 67% 7100 Biscayne Blvd. 20,000 400 2% 7101 Biscayne Blvd. 5,400 5,400 100% 7300 Biscayne Blvd. 18,000 16,000 89% 7880 Biscayne Blvd. 132,000 40,000 30% TOTAL 220,900 103,300 47% -23- VI BISCAYNE BOULEVARDNORTH RESIDENTIAL PROJECTIONS 1985 DEMAND An additional 20,500 office employees are e:Lpected to be working within the High Value Downtown Area and along the Biscayne Boulevard Corridor by 1985. An estimated 16% of these persons will want to own or rent housing that is located less than or equal to 15 minutes of driving time from their place of work. The demand for residentialunits associated with this increment of office employees is roughly 1,725 units - 55% of which will be for rental units. These same households (1,725) will be characterized by incomes ranging from $18,000-$35,000 (1979 dollars). Rentals must, therefore, range from $400-$725 per unit (1979 dollars). The demand for home ownership,roughly 780 units, will be expressed within the range of`$55,000-$85,000`per unit (1979 dollars). Generally, non -price determinants of residential demand other than distance from work, include: convenient shopping facilities; condition of the surround- ing housing stock; neighborhood aesthetics such as character of buildings and parks, close proximity to beaches, regional access and public transpor- tation. SUPPLY At present, the number of non -subsidized sale and rental residential oppor- tunities isextremely limited for middle and upper middle income households ($18,000-$35,000). Major housing projects under construction and/or on the drawing board add up to 1405 units. Approximately 78% or 1105 of these new units will be for sale, with prices starting at $85,000 per unit (see Table 1). These new multi -family condominiums will absorb a negligible percentage of this increment of office employment expected by 1985, given $35,000 of yearly income required to purchase an $85,000 unit. The occupancy rates in existing rental buildings within the High Value Down- town Area are high, 96% on the average. For example, the Parkleigh House Apartments, located at 530 Biscayne Blvd., has a vacancy rate of 5%. All of the Dupont Plaza's 148 apartments are occupied (the Plaza often receives requests for apartments renting for $400 a month). Therefore, the existing rental stock will absorb 2% of the 1985 demand, at best. CEIMQA ItNL BCOML,L ML CR© GIo tTD-O TRAVEL VELA TOME PROM ©1:80 7. GI ST; -24- .wLIA eyTtla 36ihi5min. !. O ML�lU tJ V�BOLD Vl�1 ELM RD MONTH T( AV L TOME PROM it CC B O -25- Plaza Venetia, located next to the Omni Complex,, will be completed by Sep tember of 1979. Three hundred (300) apartments will be offered at prices ranging from $400-$900 per month. Although Plaza Venetia's rentalostf ucture conforms ideally to the demand side identified in this study, 2/3 projected demand as of 1985 will not be captured by related supply. The occupancy rates in existing condominiums within and around the High Value Downtown Area is also very high. Indicative of this observation is the recent turn around of the Charter Club Condominium.,: Four years ago many of the 446 units were being marketed as rentals because they simply were not selling. Recently the sales demand has picked up enormously. Consequently, 98% of the units have been sold and are now occupied. The sales prices start at $60,000. Rentals from existing owners (speculators) start at $500. DISCUSSION The Planning Department predicts that the residential market within a 10-12 minute driving time from the CBD can support (without subsidy) as of 1985, 700 new sales units ($55,000-$85,000 per unit price) plus 650 nFw rental units ($400-$725 monthly rent). Biscayne Boulevard between N.E. 36th St. and N.E. 62nd St. has the potential to capture 30% of this market activity or 210 units for sale and 195 units for rent. Biscayne Boulevard's comparative advantage is it's central location. A 10 minute drive to Omni and downtown, regional access, convenience shopping along Biscayne Boulevard, close proximity to Miami Beach, Morningside Park, and Morningside Elementary School, make this area of the city a desirable location for the consumer. Furthermore, the price of land decreases at a relatively faster rate as you move north f downtown rather than south of downtown. Consequently, feasible than the same project would be at the same distance south, give the sales, prices and rents associated with the demand. Finally, 27% of the northeast community's population is at least 65 years residential development within 15 minutes north of downtown is more financially old, residing mostly in .single family houses. Apartment living, free of the heavy household chores and responsibilities associated with single family homes, may prove to be very attractive to many of these elderly households since they will not have to leave their neighborhood in order to obtain such housing. The opportunity for younger families, with a minimum family income of $25,000, to purchase single family homes within one of the few coastal areas that has been able to retain a single family residential environment will be increased significantly: This is a hypothesis. An analysis of existing land values along Biscayne Boulevard will be performed to determine if this assumption is accurate and to what degree. See section entitled "Comparative Land Value Analysis: 1978". -25- Plaza Venetia, located next to the Omni complex, wlll be completed by Sep tember of 1979. Three hundred (300) apartments will be offered at prices ranging from $400-$900;Per month. Although Plaza Venetia's rental structure conforms ideally to the demand side identified in this study, 2/3 of the projected demand as of 1985 will not be captured by related supply. The occupancy rates in existing condominiums within and around the High Value Downtown Area is also very high. Indicative of this observation is the recent turn around of the Charter Club Condominium. Four years ago many of the 446 units were being marketed as rentals because they:. simply' were not selling. Recently the sales a emand has picked up enormously. Consequently, 98% of the units have been scl.d and are now occupied. The sales prices start at'$80,000. Rentals from existing owners (speculators) start at $500. DISCUSSION" The Planning Department predicts that the residential market within a 10-12 minute driving time from the CBD can support (without subsidy) as of 1985, 700 new sales units ($55,000-$85,000 per unit price) plus 650 nrw rental units ($400-$725 monthly rent). Biscayne Boulevard between N.E. 36th St. and N.E. 62nd St. has the potential to capture 30% of this market activity or 210 units for sale and 195 units for rent. Biscayne Boulevard's comparative advantage is it's central location. A 10 minute drive to Omni and downtown, regional access, convenience shopping along Biscayne Boulevard, close proximity to Miami Beach, Morningside Park, and Morningside Elementary School, make this area of the city a desirable location for the consumer. Furthermore, the price of land decreases at a relatively faster rate as you move north of downtown rather than south of downtownl Consequently, residential development within 15 minutes north of downtown is more financially feasible than the same project would be at the same distance south, given the sales prices and rents associated with the demand. Finally, 27% of the northeast community's population is at least 65 years old, residing mostly in single family houses. Apartment living, free of the heavy household chores and responsibilities associated with single family homes, may prove to be very attractive to many of these elderly households since they will not have to leave their neighborhood in order to obtain such housing. The opportunity for younger families, with a minimum family income of $25,000, to purchase single family homes within one of the few coastal areas that has been, able to retain a single family residential environment will be increased significantly. This is a hypothesis. An analysis of existing, land values along Biscayne Boulevard will be performed to determine if this assumption is accurate and to what degree. See section entitled "Comparative Land Value Analysis: 1978 PROJECT TABLE VI-1 NEW MAJOR HOUSING PROJECTS -DOWNTOWN AREA - TYPE Downtown North 7700 N.E..Bayshore Ct. Condo 801 Venetian Way Condo 1866 North Bayshore Dr. Elderly Plaza Venetia (Phase I) Rental 1852 North Bay Shore Dr. Condo Downtown South 1541 Brickell Ave. Brickell Forest Brickell Point # OF - DWELLING UNITS STATUS 24 Permits issued: under construction. 88 Building permits obtained. 119 Under construction 300 Under construction 43 Proposals submitted. Needs city approval. Condo 254 New proposals submitted. Needs city approval. Condo 65 plus Under construction 7 single fam. houses Condo 99 Building permits obtained. uI1111 .._ _ ..__ ,._ _ -27- VII COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF EXISTING LAND VALUES 1978 Analysis The objective of this segment of the study is to provide the necessary tools for assessing the economic implication of specific land use and reuse, for parcels situated along Biscayne Boulevard between N.E. 36th Street and N.E. 87th Street. This is a comparative analysis of land values, focusing in on sales along Biscayne Boulevard and Brickell Avenue north of 15th Road. Specifically the six sub -areas of this, corridor are: (1) Brickell Avenue between the Miami River and 15th Road (2) Downtown or Biscayne Boulevard between Ball Point and N.E. 6th Street (3) OMNI or Biscayne Boulevard between N.E. 15th Street and N.E. 21st Street (4) Biscayne Boulevard between OMNI and 36th Street (5) Biscayne Boulevard between N.E. 36th Street and N.E. 61st Street (6) Biscayne Boulevard north of 62nd Street The analysis has drawn upon two major sources of information: (1) 1978 Sales transactions recorded in the Redi Books (2) Interviews with realtors active in the specific subject areas. The data collected on 1978 sales transactions was restricted to transactions where the value of the property was centered on commercially and residentially zoned vacant land and/or land with structures of negligible value (relative to land value) at the time of the sale. Therefore, the comparables essen- tially reflect land sales. Only in four instances were attempts made to evaluate substantially improved sales. Only when an area was devoid of sales conforming to our methodology was this step taken. Finally, the $45 S.F. sa].es price for the Ball Point property is a low -end prediction based upon recent publicity; surrounding the transaction about to take place. Land sales of approximately 720,000 square feet were observed for 1978 within the overall subject area. Sales,_ however, were not distributed equally among all six subareas. In fact, nearly 1/2 the land sales observed (measured in square feet) were along Brickell Avenue. Nonetheless, the Planning Depart- ment believes the results to be an accurate account of the land value con- figuration as of 1978 along the Biscayne -Brickell corridor. The results of the Comparative Analysis of Existing Land Values (1978) is presented in map -form on the following page. Discussion One can easily see that the 1978 fair market value of land within the Brickell sub- area is two times the fair market value of land on Biscayne Boulevard between N.E. 36th Street and N.E.> 61st Street. From a development perspective this has significant implications, especially -28- 1 z.„..lqo .. jFijJ mon 1 rzit= at. �9 ��" =■'- UuIH1� �ao3= 1 C sssinnnny�y� coo ,- O OL1a 0 a W00000 r 00000 = .mac ooC -o CCU 000i �J OC=oao' EMI a = =3 � = CEO EMIPAMA`V'OVI LAINIED VALUE N.E. 79 ST. N.E . 6g ST. ,I,, ,fir n 167 11 N.E. 36 ST. TIAN awSUW*V f rVAAO Y,M1/ YVNMMV_ euw • JESTIMATED FAIR MARKET VALUE ($) . PER SQUARE FOOT OF LAND. -27- VII COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF EXISTING LAND VALUES 1978 Analysis The objective of this segment of the study is to provide the necessary tools for assessing the economic implication of specific land use and reuse for parcels situated along Biscayne Boulevard between N.E. 36th Street and N.E. 87th Street. This is a comparative analysis of land values, focusing in on sales along Biscayne Boulevard and Brickell Avenue north of 15th Road. Specifically the six sub -areas of this corridor are: (1) Brickell Avenue between the Miami River and 15th Road (2) Downtown or Biscayne Boulevard between Ball Point and N.E. 6th Street (3) OMNI or Biscayne Boulevard between N.E. 15th Street and N.E. 21st Street (4) Biscayne Boulevard between OMNI and 36th Street (5) Biscayne Boulevard between N.E. 36th Street and N.E. 61st Street (6) Biscayne Boulevard north of 62nd Street The analysis has drawn upon two major sources of information: (1) 1978 Sales transactions recorded in the Redi Books (2) Interviews with realtors active in the specific subject areas. The data collected on 1978 sales transactions was restricted to transactions where the value of the property was centered on commercially and residentially zoned vacant land and/or land with structures of negligible value (relative to land value) at the time of the sale. Therefore, the comparables essen- tially reflect land sales. Only in four instances were attempts made to evaluate substantially improved sales. Only when an area was devoid of sales conforming to our methodology was this step taken. Finally, the $45 S.F. sales price for the Ball Point property is a low -end prediction based upon recent publicity surrounding the transaction about to take place. Land sales of approximately 720,000 square feet were observed for 1978 within the overall subject area. Sales, however, were not distributed equally among all six subareas. In fact, nearly 1/2 the land sales observed (measured: in square feet) were along Brickell Avenue. Nonetheless, the Planning Depart- ment believes the results to be an accurate account of the land value con- figuration as of 1978 along the Biscayne-Brickell corridor. The results of the Comparative Analysis of Existing Land Values (1978) is presented in map -form on the following page. Discussion One can easily see that the 1978 fair market value of land within the Brickell sub- area is two times the fair market value of land on Biscayne Boulevard between N.E. 36th Street and N.E. 61st Street. From a development perspective this has significant implications, especially -29- for residential construction. Hypothetically, assume a parcel of 30,000 square feet of land is acquired in both subareas - Brickell above 15th Road and Biscayne Boulevard between NE 36th Street and NE 61st Street. The floor area ratio for both areas is the same, 1.5 (assuming no bonuses on Brickell) and, therefore, a building of 45,000 gross square feet is constructed on both parcels of land. Construction costs are assumed to be identical for both buildings, $30 square foot. The land will be used as equity to secure a con- struction loan on both cases. The cost of money and all other costs, except land cost, are the same for both projects. Finally, assume the profit margin construction is the same in both cases, 15%. on A modest size condominium, 1100 square feet, will sell foratleast $16,000 more in the Brickell project than in the Biscayne project. The basic reasons for the significant difference in price is the initial cost of land plus the rate of land appreciation. Between 1973 and 1978, the fair market price of land in the Brickell subarea has nearly doubled, from<$16 S.F. to $30.20 S.F., an absolute change of $14 S.F. The rate of price increase for land in the Biscayne Boulevard subarea has remained relatively constant, a negligible $4 increase during the same period. Because land is appreciating at such a rapid rate along Brickell the developer will presently try and capture as much of these future earnings as possible, constrained only by the bank's perception of what the selling price of these units should be (fair market value). Demanding a larger return on his equity (the land in this case) is a common strategy to realize future earnings from the land at the present time. Between 1977-78 the price of land per square foot along Brickell Avenue increased by roughly 30%. The developer will require a return on his land of at least 15% given the market trend, when the project is completed. A return on equity (land) for the Biscayne project of 6% is assumed. From the buyers Perspective, the 1100 S.F. Brickell condominium will cost him/her $82,000 while the Biscayne condominium of equal size and quality will cost the buyer $66,000. The Biscayne project will cater to the upper middle income >`family ($26,500), precisely the demand category that will exhibit signi- ficant need within a 10 minute commuting time from downtown as of 1985. The' Brickell condominium,' on the other hand, will cater to a family income of $33,000. This income level will, for the most part, exceed the $18,000-$35,000 family income range that is associated with the increase in office employment projected for downtown by 1985 (see Exhibit VII-1). The Planning Department firmly believes that Biscayne Boulevard, between 36th Street and NE 62nd Street with its comparative advantage with regard to location is prime settlement area for middle and upper middle income families wishing to locate close to downtown. Most importantly,the'construction of housing catering to the '$18,000-$35,000 income category is financially feasible within this Biscayne Boulevard subarea. This difference in sales price is determined strictly from the supply side of the market. Once the demand forces enter the market, the price will no doubt be bid up at a faster rate in the Brickell project. Consumers' perception of what a condominium will cost on Brickell is higher than the supply side would dic- tate. The Biscayne project, on the contrary, is not in a "prestigious"area. Consumers'; perception of what a condominiumshould cost may initially be slightly lower than the supply nide'would have it. The rate of price increase will, con- sequently, beslower. i -30 Now, assume the same prototype office building and, parking structure are constructed on both the Brickell site and the Biscayne Boulevard site. Also assume the developer desires the same percentage yield on equity (13%) plus the same ratio of equity to total cost (10%) for both projects. The developer must, therefore, charge'a rental fee of-$17.65 persq. ft. in the Brickell project vs. a rental fee ,of $15 in the Biscayne project. This $2.65 per square foot difference adjusted over the economic life of the project will offset the,$2n difference in the acquisition cost (1978) of land per square foot, all other things equal (see Exhibit VZI-2). L- reality, however, the developer will receive a larger percentage return on his equity in the Brickell project as evidenced by, present market rentals of $20 per square foot. The intangibles (e.g. prestige) are, deductively, accounting for the $2.50 per square difference in rent.. From the consumers' perspective, the following rental comparisons are made for selected building occupants and corresponding square footage requirements. The rental difference implies the yearly cost savings to a firm that locates in the Biscayne Boulevard building. Type of: Firm Accounting Medical -Dental Finance Real Estate Legal Insurance Agency Architectural Brokerage TABLE VII-1' Space Requirement 1,000 S.F. 1,600-S.F. 1,800 S.F. 2,000 S.F. 2,500 S.F. 3,000 S.F. 3,500 S.F. 5,000 S.F. Source: Urban Land Institute City of Miami Planning Department Yearly Rental Difference $5,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 12,500 15,000 17,500 25,000 Clearly, any firm requesting to rent one floor in this prototype office building (assuming a lot coverage of 20%) must be prepared to spend $25,000 more each year for rent in the Brickell project than in the Biscayne project. Finally, development within the study area is notably constrained by the lack of vacant land. The most inefficient use of scarce land must, therefore give way to the kinds of development.thatare economically and socially superior. The next section of this report asserts that the 18-32 unit motels lining the Boulevard above N.E. 36th St. represent inefficient and obsolete land uses. This is prime property for redevelopment conforming to the needs previously disclosed in this report. These operations can be acquired for a maximum cost of $8,000 per room or between $12-$15 per square foot of land (inclusive of existing improvements), consistent with vacant land values in the same area. -30- Now, assume the same prototype office building and parking structure are constructed on both the Brickell site and the Biscayne Boulevard site. Also assume the developer desires the same percentage yield on equity (13%) plus the same ratio of equity to total cost (10%) for both projects. The developer must, therefore, charge'a rental fee of $17.65 per sq. ft. in the Brickell project vs. a rental fee of $15 in the Biscayne project. This $2.65 per square foot difference adjusted over the economic life of the project will offset the $2(1 difference in the acquisition cost (1978)_of land per square foot, all other things equal (sse Exhibit VII-2). In reality, however, the developer will receive a larger percentage return on his equity in the Brickell project as evidenced by present market rentals of $20 per square foot. The intangibles (e.g. prestige) are, deductively, accounting for the $2.50 per square difference in rento. From the consumers' perspective, the following rental comparisons are, made for selected building occupants and corresponding square footage requirements. The rental difference implies the yearly cost savings to a firm that locates in the Biscayne Boulevard building. TABLE VII-1 Space Yearly Rental Requirement Difference Type of Firm Accounting 1,000 S.F. $5,000 Medical -Dental 1,600 S.F. 8,000 Finance 1,800 S.F. 9,000 Real Estate 2,000 S.F. 10,000 Legal 2,500 B.F. 12,500 Insurance Agency 3,000 S.F. 15,000 Architectural 3,500 S.F. 17,500 Brokerage 5,000 S.F. 25,000 Source: Urban Land Institute City of Miami Planning_ Department Clearly, any firm requesting to rent one floor in this prototype office building (assuming a lot coverage of 20%) must be prepared to spend $25,000 more each year for rent in the Brickell project than in the Biscayne project: Finally, development within the study area is notably constrained by the lack of vacant land. The most inefficient use of scarce land must, therefore give way to the kinds of development "that are economically and socially superior. The next section of this report asserts that the 18-32 unit motels lining the Boulevard above N.E. 36th St. represent inefficient and obsolete land uses. This is prime property for redevelopment conforming to the needs previously disclosed in this report. These operations can be acquired for a maximum cost of $8,000 per room or. between $12-$15 per square foot of land (inclusive of existing improvements), consistent with vacant land values in the same area. • -31- EXHIBIT VII-1 PROFORMA FINANCIAL PROJECTIONS PROTOTYPE RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS Biscayne Brickell Project Project Zoning District: R - C R - CB Floor Area Ratio: 1.5 1.5 Size of Parcel: 30,000 S.F. 30,000 S.F. Gross Improvements: 45,000 S.F. 45,000 S.F. Efficiency Ratio: 85% 85% Improvements for Sale: 38,500 S.F. 38,500 S.F. Average Unit Size: 1,100 S.F. 1,100 S.F. Total No. of Units: 35 35 Construction Profit Margin: 15% 15% Return on Equity (Land) 6% 15% Land: $15 S.F. $30 S.F. Construction Cost: $30 S.F. $30 S.F. Surface Parking: $400/space $400/space Estimated Total Cost Land:. Building:. Non -construction: Parking: Total Cost 1 $450,000 $900,000 1,350,000 1,350,000 230,000 230,000 14,000 14,000 2,044,000 2,494,000 Estimated Total Revenue Return on Equity: 27,000 135,000 Construction Profit Margin: 239,000 239,000 Total Cost 2,030,000 2,494,000 Required Total Revenue $2,310,000 $2,868,000 Estimated Sales Price Per Unit Average Sales Price 2 (1100 S.F.) Income Affordability 66,000 82,000 ($60 S.F.) ($74.50 S.F.) 26,500 33,000 1 17% of Construction Cost 2 Actually equal to bank's assessment of the unit's value. -32- EXHIBIT VII-2 PROFORMA FINANCIAL PROJECTIONS PROTOTYPE OFFICE PROJECTS Biscayne 8rickell Project Project Zoning District: R - C R CB Floor Area Ratio : 1.5 1.5 Size of Parcel: 30,000 S.F. 30,000 S.F. Gross Improvements: 45,000 S.F. 45,000 S.F. Efficiency Ratio: 82% 82% Leasable Space: 36,900 S.F. 36,900 S.F. Land: $12 s.r. $32 S.F. Construction: $38 S.F. $38 S.F. Non -Construction: 17% of Contt. 17% of Const. Capitalization RAte: .095 .095 Debt Service Constant .11 .11 Rent: $15 S.F. $17.65 S.F. Parking (Structured): $15 S.F. $15 S.F. Parking Spaces: 150 150 Estimated Total Costs Land: $ 360,000 $ 960,000 Building: 1,710,000 1,710,000 Parking:. 560,000 560,000 Non- Contraction: 385,700 385.700 Total Cost $ 3,103,700 $ 3,615,700 Estimated Net Operating Income Annual Gross Income $ 553,500 $ 651,285 Less: Vacancy (4 •) 22,100 26,050 Effective Gross Income: 531,400 625,235 Less: Operating Expenses: 193,725 228,000 Annual Net Income: $ 337,675 $ " 397,235 Financing: Economic Value $ 3,554,475 S 4,181,420 Mortgage Obtainable: 2,665,855 3,136,065 Annual Debt Service: 293,245 344,970 Net Cash Flow Annual Net Income: $ 337,675 $ 397,235 Less: Debt Service: 293,245 344,970 Net Cash Flow $ 44,430 $ 52,265 Percentage Yield on Equity Total Cost $ 3,103,700 $ 3,615,700 Mortgage Obtainable 2,665,855 3,136,065 Equity $ 437,845 $ 479,635 t Yield on Equity: Equity as % of Total Cost: 10% 10% 144 14% -33 VIII BISCAYNE BOULEVARD: ANALYSIS OF MOTEL ROW INTRODUCTION The year 1957 witnessed the construction of the last two motels that would crop up along Biscayne Boulevard between N.E. 6th St. and N.E. 8th St. The completion ofthese two structures marked the end of this study area's motel construction boom that began in 1947 and ended in 1957. During this decade, 32 of the 36 motel structures were built, bringing the total number of marketable rooms to roughly 1,000. Nearly';70% of the motels contained 25 rooms or less, while only 14% were composed of 50 rooms or more. The average size of a motel was approx- imately 25 units. Location was the key to success for all these establishments. Vacationers driving from virtually anywhere in the U.S. were funneled into Miami and, then, across to Miami Beach via Biscayne Boulevard - "The Gateway to Miami". The motels` along the Biscayne corridor offered the traveling consumer comfortable accommodations for a fee that was approximately 20-25% less than comparable facilities on Miami Beach. Access to the beaches was so convenient by car that many, budget -minded tourists were indifferent,at least, to staying on Biscayne Boulevard rather than staying on Miami Beach, given the price difference. The following is an account of emerging trends that, cumulatively, are creating significant negative impact upon this "Motel Row" which flourished for a relatively short period of time. TOURISM:' TRENDS AFFECTING MOTEL ROW Tourism has been steadily increasing in South Florida since the early 1960's. It is not correct, however, to make the assumption that the growing number of tour- ists effect the motel' industry beneficially. The gains in the tourist industry. are, in fact, masking the deteriorating economic condition which small motels along Biscayne Boulevard now find themselves the victims of. Although more visitors are coming to Miami, they represent in a few significant ways, a different type of traveler than the typical tourist of the 1950's and 1960's. The motels lining Biscayne Boulevard, north of N.E. 36th St. once representing the ideal accommodations . for the budget _minded vacationer, are not being supported by today's tourist. The composition of Miami's tourist trade (from a socioeconomic perspective) and their mode of travel has notably shifted. These factors have had a negative impact on Biscayne Boulevard's Motel Row, making them obsolete facilities. According to the Florida Tourist Study - 1969, Miami ranked first in destination of incoming automobile tourists with 1.4 million of the 17.2 trillion total drivers traveling to Miami. The Miami Herald (Jan. 22, 1978) reports that since 1970, the number of tourists driving to South Florida has declined from 4.6 million to 2.8 million in 1974. Today, Dade County ranks sixth in capturing the tourists traveling by car with 1.3 million vacationers coming to the county. -33 VIII BISCAYNE BOULEVARD: ANALYSIS OF MOTEL ROW, INTRODUCTION The year 1957 witnessed the construction of the last two motels that would crop up along Biscayne Boulevard between N.E. 6th St. and N.E. 8th St. The completion of these two structures marked the end of this study area's motel construction boom that began in 1947 and ended in 1957. During this decade, 32 of the 36 motel structures were built, bringing the tot:T number of marketable rooms to roughly 1,000. Nearly 70% of the motels contained 25 rooms or less, while only 14% were composed of 50 rooms or more. The average size of a motel was approx- imately 25 units. Location was the key to success for all these establishments. Vacationers driving from virtually anywhere in the U.S. were funneled into Miami and, then, across to Miami Beach via Biscayne Boulevard "The Gateway to Miami". The motels along the Biscayne corridor offered the traveling consumer comfortable accommodations for a fee that was approximately 20-25% less than comparable facilities on Miami Beach. Access to the beaches was so convenient by car that many budget -minded tourists were indifferent,at least, to staying on Biscayne Boulevard rather than staying on Miami Beach, given the price difference. The following is an account of emerging trends that, cumulatively, are creating significant negative impact upon this "Motel Row" which flourished for a relatively short period of time. TOURISM: TRENDS AFFECTING MOTEL ROW Tourism has been steadily increasing in South Florida since the early 1960's. It is not correct, however, to make the assumption that the growing number of tour- ists effect the motel industry beneficially. The gains in the tourist industry are, in fact, masking the deteriorating economic; condition which small motels along Biscayne Boulevard now find themselves the victims of. Although more visitors are coming to Miami, they represent in a few significant ways, a different type of traveler than the typical tourist of the 1950's and 1960's. The motels lining Biscayne Boulevard, north of N.E. 36th St. once representing the ideal accommodations . for the budget -minded vacationer, are not being supported by today's tourist. The composition of Miami's tourist trade (from a socioeconomic perspective) and their mode of travel has notably shifted. These factors have had a negative impact, on Biscayne Boulevard's Motel Row, making them obsolete facilities. According to the Florida Tourist Study - 1969, Miami ranked first in destination of incoming automobile tourists with 1.4 million of the 17.2 million total drivers traveling to Miami. The Miami Herald (Jan. 22, 1978) reports that since 1970, the number of tourists driving to South Florida has declined from 4.6 million to 2.8 million in 1974. Today, Dade County ranks sixth, in capturing the tourists traveling by car with 1.3 million vacationers coming to the county. -34- The reasons for the decline in travel by car to Miami is due to a shift in tourist tastes and the influence of a single attraction - Disney World. Tourists are driving no farther south than the central part of the state. Orange County ranks first in destination of auto travelers with 3.4 million visitors in 1977. Disney World is the top tourist attraction. 37.8% of driving tourists visit the Magic Kingdom while on vacation,according to the Yearly Tourism Summary 1977. The Miami News (Nov. 23, 1978) reportsthat the, best thing that could happen to South Florida is for Disney World to close down. The conglomeration of attractions in that area divert driving tourists from going to South Florida. Auto travelers, once it. the vicinity of Disney World, proceed to visit Circus World and Sea World.. Busch Gardens is_then'a relatively short drive from the -Orlando area. Al]. - of these attractions are easily accessible to the tourist traveling by car. Thus, Miami` is deleted from the itinerary, much to the dismay of motel owners who depended upon family -oriented tourists arriving by' car seeking low priced accommodations. While auto travel is declining to South Florida, air arrivals are increasing. Air travel hasincreased from 4.2 million arrivals in 1970 to 8.5 million arrivals in 1977. It appears that the difference between auto and air travelers` is one of income rather than preference. This represents a shift from lesser to more affluent customers. Travelers arriving by air stay less time, but spend more money. Itis reported in Metropolitan Miami, A Demographic Overview (Jenna, 1972), that the average tourist today to Miami is older, has been to Miami. before, and flies to town. Dade County ranks first in visitors arriving by plane - 2.8 million visitors annually, as cited in Florida -Statistical; Abstract 1978. These characteristics function as detriments to the motels on Biscayne Boulevard. -'The profile of the tourist to Miami is not, one choosing to stay -on Motel Row. Those motels are not attracting the visitors. Much of the increased air travel is a result of increasing foreign visitors into Miami. The composition of the tourist is experiencing a shift. An increase in foreign tourists, primarily from Latin America, is'clearly-noticeable and has been documented in The Direct and; Indirect Impact of International Tran- sitions Upon Employment (FIU,`1975). This influx began in 1973 and has continued to inerease yearly. The rapidly developing area of the Caribbean, South and Central America provide excellent opportunities for exchange with Miami. Miami experienced an increase of 8.65% in foreign visitors during the year 1976-77 reports the Miami Herald (July 18, 1978). The Annual Summary of Foreign Visitors by Region (Dade Co. Office of Economic Dev., Oct. 1978), shows an 88% increase since 1973 in visitors from South America, up from 158,782 to 299,052 tourists. For .the year 1977, almost`300,000 South American's vacationed in Miami. The Miami; Herald (July 18, 1978) reported that during the first six months of 1978 the number of visitorsfrom foreign countries rose 29.8%. Miami's bilingualism and shopping opportunities lure Latin American's to Miami. For example, Venezuelan tourists have also increased by 37.5% from 1976 in Miami. The purpose of their trip is to shop mostly in the downtown area extending up to Omni - because prices of consumer goods in their country are staggering. The Miami News (March 22, 1979) reports that up to $350,000 of Dade County's new tourist tax revenues may be spent to lure more of this trade to Miami. Consequently, the demand for, hotel accommodations originates downtown and moves up (North) along Biscayne Boulevard. Motels just south of N.E. 36th St. capture the last of the rapidly diminishing demand due to the ample motel accommo- dations available downtown. Besides the prevalence of foreign visitors who come to shop, the tourists char- acter is becoming more residential. An article in the Miami News (Jan. 3, 1978) contends that increases in air travel cannot be compared to hotel/motel revenues. since the kinds of tourists flying in are not staying in these motels. The growth of condominium construction has taker evay from the traditional hotel/ motel` facilities. Seasonal owners of condominiums and apartments are not utilizing any other services. The residential type tourists are booking avail- able seats on early scheduled flights, actually shutting out the impulse travelers who would probably be staying in low-priced motels. Thus, the air arrival figures increase, but not the motel occupancy rates. Motel row is not benefiting from the increases in tourists coming into Miami. In conclusion, it has been found that although tourism is increasing in South Florida, the composition of the tourist has changed. There has been a great influx of foreign. tourists and a decline in auto travelers. Miami is now cater- ing to the wealthy Latin American's who generally shop and stay in the downtown area. Families driving to Florida are vacationing no farther south than the central part of the state. Other tourists from the U.S. to Miami are arriving more than ever by air and are staying in their own homes or apartments. None of the emerging characteristics found in Miami touristsappear to support the motels lining Biscayne Boulevard. MOTEL ROW: EXISTING CONDITIONS The South Pacific Motel was purchased by a husband and wife in 1973 for 4162,000. The motel has 23 units for rent and is situated at 6300 Biscayne Boulevard. This motel was sold March, 1979 for $115,000 to Hodzic Agan - a'price $47,000 less than the present sellers paid for the business six years earlier. The reason why the land and its -'existing use are presently worth $47,000 less than they were in 1973 is illustrated on the following page by way of a 1978 Operating Statement for a prototype 24 unit motel. The Operating Statement assumes that the motel was purchased by a family in 1972, a relatively active year for motel transactions along Biscayne Boulevard. Real estate taxes, plus operating expenses are the actual costs associated with one of Biscayne Boulevard's few quality, 24 unit motels. Furthermore, the gross in- come figure for this statement is that which was reported by the same operation for fiscal year 1978. The Operating Statement shows an accounting profit of $9,000. This is terribly. misleading from an economic perspective. One realizes, after careful inspection of this statement, that all managerial, bookkeeping, handiman and desk clerk responsibilities are not accounted for in operating expenses. Typically, these tasks are performed by the owner, ergo, no explicit expense is entered into the ledger. Should this person put these relevant skills on the market by seeking a job for the ssme number of hours per week, the salary he/ she would receive would,no doubt, be much greater than $9,000 (the accounting profit). Consequently, he/she is actually loosing money by holding onto the motel (save for his free but modest living accommodations. and moves up (North) along Biscayne Boulevard. Motels just south of N.E. 36th St. capture the last of the rapidly diminishing demand due to the ample motel accommo- dations available downtown. Besides the prevalence of foreign visitors who come to shop, the tourists char- acter is becoming more residential. An article in the Miami News (Jan. 3, 1978) contends that increases in air travel cannot be compared to hotel/motel revenues since the kinds of tourists flying in are not staying in these motels. The growth_ of condominium construction has taken away from the traditional hotel/ motel facilities. Seasonal owners of condominiums and apartments are not utilizing any other services. The residential type tourists are booking avail- able seats on early scheduled flights, 'actually shutting out the impulse travelers who would probably be staying in low-priced motels. Thus, the air arrival figures increase, but not the motel occupancy rates. Motel row is not benefiting from the increases in tourists coming into Miami. In conclusion, it has been found that although tourism is increasing in South Florida, the composition of the tourist has changed. There has been a great influx of foreign tourists and a decline in auto travelers. Miami is now cater- ing. to the wealthy Latin American's who generally shop and stay in the downtown area. Families driving to Florida are vacationing no farther south than the central part of the state. Other tourists from the U.S. to Miami are arriving more than ever by air and are staying in their own homes or apartments. None of the emerging characteristics found in Miami tourists appear to support the motels lining Biscayne Boulevard. MOTEL ROW: EXISTING CONDITIONS The South Pacific Motel was purchased by a husband and wife in 1973 for $162,000. The motel has 23 units for rent and is situated at 6300 Biscayne Boulevard. This motel was sold March, 1979 for $115,000 to Hodzic Agan - a price $47,000 less than the present sellers paid for the business six years earlier. The reason why the land and its existing use are presently worth $47,000 less than they were in 1973 is illustrated on the following page by way of a 1978 Operating Statement for a prototype 24 unit motel. The Operating Statement assumes that the motel was purchased by a family in 1972, a relatively active year for motel transactions along Biscayne Boulevard. Real estate taxes, plus. operating expenses are the actual costs associated with one of Biscayne Boulevard's few quality, 24 unit motels. Furthermore, the gross in- come figure for this statement is that which was reported by the same operation for fiscal year 1978. The Operating Statement shows an accounting profit of $9,000. This is terribly, misleading from an economic perspective. One realizes, after careful inspection, of this statement, that all managerial, bookkeeping, handiman and desk clerk responsibilities are not accounted for in operating expenses. Typically, these tasks are performed by the owner, ergo, no explicit expense is entered into the ledger. Should this person put these relevant skills on the market by seeking a job for the same number of hours per week, the salary he/ she would receive would, no doubt, be much greater than $9,000 (the accounting profit). Consequently, he/she is actually loosing money by holding onto the motel (save for his free but modest living accommodations. -36- EXHIBIT VIII-1 1978 OPERATING STATEMENT PROTOTYPE 24 Unit Motel Biscayne Boulevard INCOME: 2 Rooms $ 78,000 Other 500 Total 78,500 FIXED EXPENSES: Real Estate Tax 4,500 Insurance 4,000 Principle and4lnterest 3 24,000 Depreciation 10,000 Total 42,500 OPERATING EXPENSES: License and Usgr Tax 280 Payroll Costs 7,800 Utilities 10,700 Laundry 850 Kitchen and Linen Supplies 370 Car 500 Repair and Maintenance 7 8 3,500 Administration and General 3,000 27,000 Total NET PROFIT (pre-tax) 9,000 Footnotes 1 Reported 1978 gross income for the-Knoxon Motel (24 units), 7411_Biscayne Boulevard. Includes revenue from vending machines. Financing $200,000 over 15 years at 8-3/4%. Property purchased in 1972 for $250,000. 4Straight line method. Building assessed at 60% total value, $150,000. 5 50 hours of domestic labor per week @ $3.00 per hour. 6 Gas = $914; water = $785; elec. (central air) = $9,000. 7 Includes the depreciable amounts associated with tasks such as: resurfacing parking area; new asphalt, painting; trees and shrubs; carpeting; roofing. 8 Includes: advertising = $1,000; telephone = $2,000. -37- Apparently this type -of -motel owner is fastly becoming a dying breed on Bis- cayne Boulevard. The stagnation of the motel real estate market within the study area since 1975, supports this observation. In addition, four motels' along Biscayne Boulevard have been transformed into Adult Congregate Living Facilities (3) and Group Homes for Developmentally Disabled (1) because the structures were no longer viable as motels and, therefore, not capable of being sold. The Aloha Motel, for example, was recently transformed into an Adult Congregate Living Facility; unable to survive as a legitimately run motel. The existing capacity of the Aloha Retirement Residence is 150 patients. The occupancy rate as of June 22, 1979 was 98%. Each of these 147 patients pays between $300-$450 per month. Given this occupancy rate, the average gross income generated by this use is $661,500. Assume that this operation has a modest profit margin of 10% (20% being more realistic). Therefore, the pre-tax profit is $66,150 per year. As a motel, the Aloha must be able to charge an average price of $25.00 per room and main- tain a year-round average occupancy rate of 45% to match this pre-tax profit (assuming the restaurant breaks even). This is a feat that the present tourist market renders highly improbable chiefly because of the motel's poor location. Motels along Biscayne Boulevard must give way to more efficient land use. ECONOMIC IMPACT OF ADULT CONGREGATE LIVING FACILITIES Encouraging Adult Congregate Living Facilities as alternative, interim uses for these motels may, however, function to make infeasible the kinds of develop- ment this study has recommended for Biscayne Boulevard. The financial feasibility of •projects the Planning Department is encouraging, based on residential and office space projections, rests on the premises that vacant land may be acquired for $9.-$15 per square foot and that motel property, representing an obsolete land use, can be acquired for $12-$15 per square foot. There are very fewvacantlots along Biscayne Boulevard within the study area. Consequently, the success of this plan is contingent upon the acquisition and redevelopment of existing motel property. From a demand perspective, the category that residential construction is recom mended to cater to is the $18,000-$35,000 income bracket. The financial success of these Adult Congregate Living Facilities may drive the acquisition cost of a motel and its land up to $20 per square foot. The cost of a condominium con- structed on property acquired for $15 per square foot is $66,000. The same apart- ment constructed on the same property acquired for $20 per square foot will probably cost $71,000, assuming the profit margins remain constant (see Comparative,, Analysis of Existing Land Values). A family income of roughly $29,000 per year warrants the purchase of this $71,000 unit. The objective is to build a residential structure that caters to the largest percentage of the target demandwhile retnaining financially feasible At $20 per square foot land cost, a significant portion of this target demand remains unattended to, ergo, the probability offilling the building decreases. Con- struction financing becomes highly improbable under these profit margin as- sumptions stated above. -37- Apparently this type of, motel owner is fastly becoming a dying breed on Bis- cayne'Boulevard. The stagnation of the motel real estate market within the study area since 1975, supports this observation. In addition, four motels along Biscayne Boulevard have been transformed into Adult Congregate Living Facilities (3) and Group Homes for Developmentally Disabled (1) because the structures, were no longer viable as motels and, therefore, not capable of being sold. The Aloha Motel, for example, was recently transformed into an Adult Congregate Living Facility; unable to survive as a legitimately run motel. The existing capacity of`the Aloha Retirement Residence is 150 patients. The occupancy rate as of June 22, 1979 was 98%. Each of these 147 patients pays between $300-$450 per month. Given this occupancy rate, the average gross income generated by this use is $661,.500. Assume that this operation has a modest profit margin` of 10% (20% being more realistic). Therefore, the pre-tax profit is $66,150 per year. As a motel, the Aloha must be able to charge an averageprice of $25.00 per room and main- tain a year-round average occupancy rate of 45% to match this pre-tax profit (assuming the restaurant breaks even). .This is a feat that the present tourist market renders highly improbable chiefly because of the motel's poor location. Motels along Biscayne Boulevard must give way to more efficient land use. ECONOMIC IMPACT OF ADULT CONGREGATE LIVING FACILITIES' Encouraging Adult Congregate Living Facilities as alternative, interim uses for these motels may, however, function to make infeasible the kinds of develop- ment this study has recommended for Biscayne Boulevard. The financial feasibility of projects the Planning Department is encouraging, based on residential and office space projections, rests on the premises that vacant land may be acquired for $9-$15 per square foot and that motel property, representing an obsolete land use, can be acquired for $12-$15 per square foot. There are very few vacant lots along Biscayne Boulevard within the study area. Consequently, the success of thisplan is contingent upon the acquisition and redevelopment of existing motel` property. From a demand perspective, the category that residential construction is recom mended to cater to is the $18,000-$35,000 income bracket. The financial success of these Adult Congregate, Living Facilities may drive the acquisition cost of a motel and. its land up to $20 per square foot. The cost of a condominium con- structed on property acquired for $15 per square foot is $66,000. The same apart- ment constructed'on the same property acquired for $20 per square foot will probably cost $71,000, assuming the profit margins remain constant (see Comparative Analysis of Existing Land Values). A family income of roughly $29,000 per year warrants the purchase of this $71,000 unit. The objective is to build a residential structure that caters to the largest percentage of the target demand while remaining financially feasible. At $20 per square foot land cost, a significant portion of this target demand remains unattended to, ergo, the probability of filling the building decreases. Con- struction financing becomes highly improbable under these profit margin as- sumptions stated above. LJ wu� i l__J/ tI —� / 1= 0 n.._ 8FF glicocin. II Jai MI Eft= oa-OC7IUlo�� ria� -�1 E:,1 �► 1G7� N E. 79 -ST, g act i 0E1 oo00 C3 mor3C2( Panifc:____gi , 1-EL- [1[ 1 N.E. 54 Q/ / 11 1 ]I 1 IC7� o� E I-1 O I r _. opa N.E. 36? ST. 7c�caOOW c� E �' socaClodgLJ , _JLL7e� 11 �0 .1r1oo �t t / 1 C7 aF _ �_ L�t DIP4Z TA 713' '� aI / 1=1 c 1 1-1 LEGEND • Motel in Operation Motel Presently Operating as Adult Congregate Living Facility, Motel Presently Operating as Transitional Living Facility E XU TOUVCM UVUCDTt U= -39- The construction of an office building that is capable of charging rents. that. are $3-$5 cheaper per square foot than comparable facilities downtownand along Brickell is, again, contingent upon the cost of land. This $3-$5 cost saving per square foot in the Biscayne project is financially possible (given a 10% cash -on -cash return plus a 14% equity as % of total cost). if the property can be purchased at $15 per square foot. A property acquisition cost exceeding $15 per square foot will result in the projects' loss of its only competitive edge, encouraging high vacancy rate9 in the process. PUBLIC SECTOR ACTION: "MOTEL ROW" Between N.E. 50th terrace and N.E. 55th Terr. Motels lining Biscayne Boulevard between N.E. 50th Terrace and N.E. 55th Tem especially the 12-32 unit operations, represent an inefficient and obsolete use of scarce land. This land exhibits the areas best parcel assembly potential for spot redevelopment. The Planning Department believes that the best alternative use of this land is for residential (condominium) and mixed use (apartment and office rentals) development. This study has directed attention to the notable demand for dwelling units ($18,000-$35,000 income range),both ownership and rental, that will exist as of 1985 within a 10-15 minute drive from downtown. Judging from the limited existing relative supply and the acute shortage projected for 1985, Biscayne Boulevard has the potential to capitalize on this residential, market situation. A modest increase in new office space of 500,000 square feet is also projected. for 1985. There presently exists, however, two constraints ate:ding in the way of the kinds of redevelopment that will serveas the impetus fdr revitaThe lizing oBiscaBiscayne ne Boule- le- vard between N.E. 50th Street and N.E. 55 Tern small size of the parcels to be redeveloped, roughly 14,000 square feet at best. Furthermore, despite excellent parcel assembly potential, a maximum of only two parcels may be assembled before either backing onto an R-1 zoning district or crossing a street. The largest parcel capable of being assembled is, therefore, approximately 28,000 square feet. The second constraint, one that is removable, is the"existing R-4 Zoning District. which defines this target area. Office space is not allowed, so mixed use ren- tal development, similiar to the Falls Apartments located just a few blocks north, is prohibited. Also, R-4 zoning has a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 1.1. This means that the size of the building is restricted to 1.1 times the size of the lot upon which it will be built. If the FAR was increased. to 1.5, allowing an'additional two floors of construction on this lot (assuming the improvements will cover 20% of the lot), the sales price of the exact same residential unit could be $4,5 00 cheaper. This assumes of course, that the project's profit margin remains a constant percentage of the total cost. Greater consumer interest in,the project should be expected. -40- From a developer's standpoint, an FAR of 1.1 would, technically, force the unit sales price up to $62 per square foot, assuming his profit margin is fixed at a minimum of 12% . if the FAR was increased to 1.5, the developer could still realize the 12% profit'margin by asking a unit sales price of $56per square foot. No doubt, the developer and the lending institution will have an easier time coming to grips with a fair market value of $58 per square foot than with a fair market value of $62. per square foot. Con- struction financing will, consequently, be relatively easier to obtain. The Zoning District that is most compatible co this area as well as with the interests of residents and developers alike; is R-C. A change in Zoning District from R-4 to R-C will allow for office space development plus a maximum FAR of 1.5 with no height limitations. The benefits accrued to both the developer and consumer due to this change in zoning are illustrated , on pages 42-45 by way of proforma financial feasibility projections. Changing the Zoning District from R-4 to R-C along Biscayne Boulevard's east side between N.E. 50th Terr. and N.E. 55th terr. will allow for the land use program which the City believes will serve as the redevelopment. impetus for revitalizing this stretch of the Boulevard. (See Zoning District Map, page 41. -41- iR { fl 1 u IUMPRI4 At 1 R MOTEL, MCD'WH, EONIONM ooMTROCCT • -42- EXHIBIT VIII-2 PRO FORMA FINANCIAL PROJECTIONS: PROTOTYPE RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM PROJECT SITE: 5201-5215 Biscayne Boulevard (between NE 52nd St. and NE 52 Terr.) ZONING DISTRICT: R-4 FLOOR AREA RATIO: 1.1 Maximum SIZE OF ASSEMBLED PARCEL: 28,000 S.F. FAR: 1.1 GROSS IMPROVEMENTS: 30,800 S.F. EFFICIENCY RATIO: 85% IMPROVEMENTS FOR SALE: 26,200 AVG. SIZE OF UNIT: 1,190 S.F. TOTAL # OF UNITS: 22 TOTAL # of Surface PARKING SPACES: 42 ESTIMATED COSTS LAND AND EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS: BUILDING CONSTRUCTION: 2 PARKING: NON -CONSTRUCTION COSTS: 3 TOTAL COSTS ESTIMATED TOTAL REVENUE CASH -ON -CASH RETURN 6% RETURN ON CONSTRUCTION 15% TOTAL COST REQUIRED TOTAL REVENUE ESTIMATED SALES PRICE PER UNIT AVERAGE SALES PRICE 1 2 3 4 Estimated @$12 S.F. Estimated @$30 S.F. 17% of construction costs. taxes during construction, Caters to family income of 1 R-4 336,000 924,000 16,800 160,000 $1,436,800 $ 20,200 165,000 $1,436,800 $1,622,000 74,0004 north T N.E. 52 TERR. va' N.E. 52 ST. Includes financing, demolition, real estate. architectural, legal and title fees. $30,000 mm mm -43- EXFH,IBIT VIII-3 PRO FORMA FINANCIAL PROJECTIONS: PROTOTYPE RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM PROJECT SITE: 5201-5215 Biscayne Boulevard (between NE 52nd St. & NE 52 Terr.) ZONING: R-C (Changed from R-4) FLOOR AREA RATIO: 1.5 Maximum SIZE OF ASSEMBLED PARCEL:. 28,000 S.F. F.A.R.: 1.5 GROSS IMPROVEMENTS: 42,000 S.F. EFFICIENCY RATIO: 85% IMPROVEMENTS FOR SALE: 35,725 S.F. AVG. SIZE OF UNIT: 1,190 S.F. TOTAL # OF UNITS: 30 TOTAL # OF SURFACE PARKING SPACES: 58 ESTIMATED COSTS 1 LAND AND EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS: BUILDING CONSTRUCTION: 2 PARKING: NON -CONSTRUCTION COSTS: TOTAL COSTS 3 ESTIMATED TOTAL REVENUE. CASH -ON -CASH' RETURN 6% RETURN ON CONSTRUCTION 15% TOTAL COST REQUIRED TOTAL REVENUE ESTIMATED SALES PRICE PER UNIT AVERAGE SALES PRICE 1 Estimated @ $12 S.F. 2 Estimated @ $30 S.F. 3 17% of construction costs. taxes during construction, 4 Caters to family income of R-1 N.E. 52 ST. $ 336,000 1,260,000 23,200 218,000 $1,837,200 20,200 225,000 $1,837,200 $2,082,400 $ 69,5004 Includes financing, demolition, real estate. architectural, legal and title fees. $27,500 -44- EXHIBIT VIII-4 PRO FORMA FINANCIAL PROJECTIONS: PROTOTYPE RESIDENTIAL AND OFFICE PROJECT SITE: 5201-5215 Biscayne Boulevard (between NE 52nd St. and NE 52 Terr.) ZONING DISTRICT: R-C (changed from R-4) FLOOR AREA RATIO: 1.5 Maximum SIZE OF PARCEL: 28,000 S.F. FAR: 1.5 GROSS IMPROVEMENTS: 42,000 S.F. EFFICIENCY RATIO: 85% RENTABLE SPACE: 35,725 S.F. Office: 14,300 S.F. Residential: 21,245 S.I'. AVERAGE SIZE RESIDENTIAL UNIT: 1,180 S.F. PARKING: 72 spaces ESTIMATED COST LAND AND EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS: 2 BUILDING CONSTRUCTION: PARKING: 3 NON -CONSTRUCTION COSTS: TOTAL COSTS 4 1 R-C 336,000 1,260,000 153,000 240,200 1,989,200 ESTIMATED ANNUAL INCOME AND EXPENSES GROSS RENTS: OFFICE 5 $ 214,500 APARTMENTS 6 134,000 PARKING: -0- SUBTOTAL 348,500 LESS VACANCY (4%) 14,000 EFFECTIVE GROSS INCOME 334,500 LESS: OPERATING EXPENSES 117,500 NET OPERATING INCOME $ 217,500 north T O N.E. 52 TERR. 127 52a R-1 O Eg 127 N.E. 52 ST. -45- EXHIBIT VIII-4 FINANCING NET OPERATING INCOME ECONOMIC VALUE 8 LOAN TO VALUE RATIO; 75% MORTGAGE OBTAINABLE DEBT SERVICE 9 CASH FLOW NET OPERATING INCOME DEBT SERVICE CASH FLOW BEFORE INCOME TAX PERCENTAGE YIELD ON INVESTED CASH TOTAL COST MORTGAGE OBTAINABLE EQUITY % YIELD ON EQUITY 1 2 3 4 $ 217,500 2,290,000 1,718,000 189,000 217,500 189,000 28,500 1,989,200 1,718,000 271,200 10.5% Estimated @ $12 S.F. Estimated @ $30 S.F. 40 Structured spaces @'$3,500 each; 32 17% of construction costs. Includes financing, demolition, real estate taxes curing construction, architectural, legal and title fees. 5 @ $15 S.F. per year 6 @ $550 per unit/month 7 35% of Gross Income 8 Capitalization rate = 9.5% 9 Debt Service Constant = -11 surface spaces @ $400 each -46- SPECIAL TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS AS A REDEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE The''existing C-1 Zoning District which defines Biscayne Boulevard between N.E. 60th St. and Little River does not: provide adequate redevelopment or'develop- ment incentives to builders; encourage the kinds of structural uses deemed ap propriate for this arterial landmark. This segment of the report addresses the first of these assertions. Proposed is a Special Planning District — Zoning Overlay for Biscayne Boulevard's C-1 Zoning District between N.E. 60th St. and Little River This Zoning Overlay includes a section entitled, Special Transfer of Development Rights to provide building incentives, given the mechanics des- cribed in detail below and in the Appendi.:a oi: this report. The Zoning Overlay also modifies use regulations with the intention of improving upon the second shortcoming cited above (see SPD - Biscayne Boulevard North Special Zoning Over- lay in Appendix). The physical nature of existing motel development and underutilized land along the Boulevard, most notably between N.E. 71st St. and N.E. 77th St., is such that the acquisition,of more than 22,500 sq. ft: is exceedingly difficult. In light of this -constraint plus a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 2.0 for C-1 property, the return on equity associated with the final product, a mixed use structure, will not be attractive enough to warrant the initial investment. In direct response to this critical problem, the Special Transfer of Develop- ment Rights is proposed for the C-1 District, the limits of which are mentioned above. The exercise on the following two pages illustrates the rationality, from a developer's perspective, for allowing floor area ',to be transferred from an abutting R-2 Transitional Use Lot to the development site within the Special Planning District (SPD) — again, the overlay for the existing C-1 Dis- trict. Proforma financial projections for prototype mixed use buildings, with. and without the proposed Transfer of Development Rights (TDR), represent the framework for this exercise. The Special Transfer of Development Rights may function to increase the dev- eloper's return on equity from 8% to 13.5%, assuming the Transitional Use Lot is purchased. Furthermore, equity is reduced by $82,800 because the economic value.of the project has increased'relative to construction costs. The Transfer of Development Rights with respect to floor area generates an additional 11,250 square feet of gross -improvements to the _22,500 square feet of SPD assembled lots. This is equivalent to an FAR increase of .5 for the development site which translates into approximately $130,000 of ad- ditional gross income each year (assuming full occupancy). In summary, this Transfer of Development Rights strikes an equilibrium in the sense that it: allows the developer, relatively speaking, to maximize his cash on equity return, and; insures appropriate physical development and re- development by subjecting projects taking advantage of the Transfer of Dev- elopment Rights to site and development plan reviews by the Planning Depart- ment. A map showing the location of the SPD is presented on page 49. 47 EXHIBIT VIII-5 PRO FORMA FINANCIAL PROJECTIONS PROTOTYPE OFFICE AND COMMERCIAL PROJECT (Without Proposed Transfer of Development Rights) ESTIMATED COSTS Land and Existing Improvements 450,000 Building Construction Retail Level @$28 S.F.: $ 252,000 Office Levels @$38 S.F.: 1,368,000 Parking Levels @$15 S.F.: 270,000 Surface Parking @$400/space: 20,000 Subtotal 1,910,000 Non -Construction Costs 324,700 Total Costs • 2,684,700 ESTIMATED ANNUAL INCOME AND EXPENSES Gross Rents: Retail @ $9 S.F.: 60,750 Office @ $14 S.F.: 413,280 Subtotal 474,030 Less: Vacancy (5%) 23,700 Effective Gross Income 450,330 Less: Operating Expenses 165,910 Net Operating Income 284,420 FINANCING Economic Value (Cap Rate .095) 2,993,900 Mortgage Obtainable (.75) 2,245,425 Debt Service (.11) 247,000, CASH FLOW Net Operating Income 284,420 Debt Service 247,000 Cash Flow (Before Y Tax and CCA) 37,420 PERCENTAGE YIELD ON INVESTED CASH Total Cost Mortgage Obtainable Equity % Yield on Equity Return on Investment 2,684,700 • 2,245,425 439,275 8% 10.5% i 4 8 EXHIBIT VIII-6 PRO FORMA FINANCIAL PROJECTIONS PROTOTYPE OFFICE AND COMMERCIAL PROJECT (With Proposed Transfer of Development Rights) ESTIMATED COSTS Land and Existing Improvements: @ $15 S.F. 450,000 Building Construction Retail Level @ $28 S,F.: $ 262,500 Office Levels @ $38 S.F. 1,781,250 Parking Levels @ $15 S.F. 281,250 Parking Surface @ $400/space: 30,000 Subtotal 2,355,000 Non -Construction Costs 400,250 Total Costs 3,205,250 ESTIMATED ANNUAL INCOME AND EXPENSES Gross Rents: Retail @ $9 S.F.: Office @ $14 S.F.: Subtotal Less: Vacancy (5%) Effective Gross Income Less: Operating Expenses Net Operating Income FINANCING Economic Value (Cap Rate .095) Mortgage Obtainable (75%) Debt Service (Constant 11) 63,280. 538,125 CASH FLOW Net Operating. Income Debt Service Cash Flow (Before Y Tax and CCA) PERCENTAGE YIELD ON INVESTED CASH Total Cost Mortgage Obtainable Equity Yield on Equity Return on Investment 601,405 30,070 571,335 210,490 360,845 3,798,368 2,848,775 313,365 360,845 313,365 47,480 3,205,250 2,848,775 356,475 13.57 11.25% 7. LITTLE RIVER $1: pit ittail 1ir Inv. iron u 11 11 u �,',�• Ea=�� 1� 111111 111 -y,Ill�i'li 1111111. RIMIER L . MITI 74 ti TIM IIICIN ©mom MUM= IIhIII III®I1®11 mom '� II1i111 I� aim 11111111 tas Amu IIIII]IIIIIIIH I J J �tr R nalson 111111111 �laa liuiauaia. ® 11111 IIIIIAP'IIPlllill x11. s1 rani Nt MITEP■ou �■aiuiw, MITE 1 i 11:1'M111S 1111111111'�� 11NIIIIIII�11= 1 11 1111iiih COVE GQ3L G Nt tx Nt i �111 iai11r111M A1111milli PAR R-4c h 1111S h11111111�"MIIIP9C 111'IR' ! If N.E. 60 ST. ■ 50 Targeted Deepening of Commercial District: The commercial lots abutting the west side of Biscayne Boulevard between N.E. 69th St and N.E. 64th St. are too small for developers to reap the benefits provided by way of the proposed Special Planning District. See map on next page. The Special Planning District will have its minimal impact upon the commercial lots abutting the west side of Biscayne Blvd between N.E. 69th St. and N.E. 64th St. Those commercial lots are simply too shallow for the proposed transfer of DevelopmentRights to be effective. Consequently, developers will not build along this otherwise excellent location for mixed use construction. Deepening of the commercial district between NE 69th St and NE 64th St. is essential if appropriate development is to be realized. here. The existing R-4 Zoning District which separates the C-1 district from the R-2 district between NE 69th St, and NE 64th St. contains the following land uses.: rear extension of motel structures on the Boulevard; parking for motels on the Boulevard; vacant and underutilized land; shably apartment buildings; five single family homes, three of which are advertised for sale. The existing land uses within the.C-1 District which, between NE 69th Street and NE 64th Street, separate the R-4 District from the Boulevard include: two vacant retail commercial buildings; four marginal motel operations; a gas station; and vacant land. The depth of the commercial area will increase from 110 feet to an average depth of 270 feet. A minimum of 120 feet of street frontage can mean a maximum of 34,800 square feet of assembled commercial property. The acquisition of one block of Biscayne Boulevard street frontage gives the developer the, potential to acquire 69,600 square feet of commercially zoned property. 34,800 square feet of commercialland translates into 58,800 square feet of gross improvements or roughly a 6-8 story buildings. (excluding structural parking). 69,600 square feet of commercial land translates into 117,600 square feet of gross improvements or roughly an 11-13 story building. (excluding structural parking). 'non; i nn= i'1111111111111zg ..11111/1/11111 1111M 1111111 ~ = 1'11111 1111111 ffi= : = 111� 1r'i111 1111r1 1`:1111}. • Wr =-1111i 1111111 ,d:U3rJ 1111111 � 11 fT 111111111111/1G`` 1111111 II3�ii11 ... iiiiii 1111i11 IIIIWK111111111° r innY.r innI1liii1 II111 1111 �I NI UiUUUIIIUIIUUII " 111ii11IuIi _ = I lllliit M ili{. :11111111111�� ii i mumuileu 131 1111110411111111 II111i1111/1111111 11111 MinnL 111111'2Irr11 1iu11MIL IlIlI -uirramomnromuii■uul.mu111111 ■ Ias I■■■■■ ■m= 1111111111 ir'u11 11Ei Ga:EI� 52 IX BISCAYNE SHOPPING PLAZA Existing Conditions The Biscayne Shopping Plaza is located on a 20 acre site at the inter- section of N.E. 79th Street and Biscayne Boulevard. Built in 1953 at this ideal location in the city,1 the plaza is ore of the first shopping centers of Miami. High vacancy rates and a rather shabby appearance presently characterize this shopping center. Although the Biscayne Shopping Plaza Merchants Associa- tion reports that there has been an increase in sales this past year over previous years indicating improved conditions, the following is a chronological presentation of past events and forces which in conglomeration have created the existing state of the plaza. A combination of forces have detrimentally impacted the plaza during the last several years, but the catalyst of decline was managerial and financial difficulties internal to the anchor stores within the plaza. Changes in the service area's demand determinants such. as incomes and population, did not cause the vacancies. The vacancies however, caused people to shop elsewhere, traveling greater distances to do so. Within the last four years, W.T. Grants, Junior's Restaurant, and Neisners have gone out of business. These anchor stores represent a total of approxi- mately 56,000 sq.ft. (18.5% of total retail square footage) left vacant. Grants and Neisners closed down due to national bankruptcy All chain stores folded as a result. Junior's went out of business because of poor management of the once very popular restaurant. The large vacancies left by these stores closing. within a short time span of one another manifested a run-down appearance. The 1 The Department of Transportation reports that the average daily traffic count. for Biscayne Boulevard just north of N.E. 79th Street is 31,000 automobiles, Fourth highest in the City of Miami (excluding expressways). 53 vacant stores aggravated by declining appearances bE:vi to deter shoppers from the plaza. The Biscayne Shopping Plaza has also suffered from ownership problems. Sections of the shopping center are owned separately by two absentee owners: Biscayne Plaza Associates and Franklin Life Insurance Company. The manager for Biscayne Plaza Associates occupies office space on -site and manages the. southern strip of the plaza running parallel to Biscayne Boulevard (where Flagler Federal is located around to McDonaldts), the strip which extends north from and includes Pantry Pride, and the small segment where service shops are located across from the bank which also runs parallel to Biscayne Boulevard. Keyes Management Co. manages the northern strip of the plaza, owned by Franklin Life Insurance Co., extending from J.C. Penney to the vacant W.T. Grants store. The absentee ownerships and the lack of coordination be- tween them have hurt the overall marketing approach of the shopping center. A lack of aggressive promotional efforts to fill the vacant stores has hindered the plaza's ability to keep vacancy rates negligible. Presently, the Biscayne. Shopping Plaza has approximately 37,150 sq.ft. of retail/commercial space available for rent. There is an additional 18 . sq.ft. available for office occupancy. The total vacant space amounts to 55,650 sq.ft. This figure is a combination of the two owners' existing vacant square footage and is representative of the entire Biscayne Shopping Plaza. A portion of the vacant space is difficult to lease due to the awk- ward size dimensions left by the large anchor stores. W.T. Grants, Junior's Neisner's, and Slater's Shoes occupied relatively large areas. space has since been leased by a furniture store. The others still remain vacant. The empty stores are either too small to lease to discount -type department stores, i.e. Zayre, Woolco (consumer and resident surveys indicate 54 a strong desire for this kind of store) or too large for most, other kinds of operations. The management prefers not to modify store sizes, especially where additional air-conditioning units must be installed as a consequence. The costs associated with altering the air-conditioning system to cool separate store units are relatively significant, according to the manager of Biscayne Plaza Associates. These chronic vacancies and the lack of strong anchor stores have had a negative impact on consumer spending within the shopping center. The number of shoppers frequenting the plaza has declined because the number of stores and, therefore, the variety of goods and services offered in the shopping center,has declined. The other shops, whose success has been tied directly to the economies of conglomeration once prevalent, have had to go it alone. Consequently, Thom McAn Shoes, Slater's Shoes, and a few of the better dress shops have gone out of business. Table 1 shows the previous tenants of the ten vacant stores, the square footage generated by their loss, and the length of time these stores have remained vacant. Table 2 lists the remaining tenant composition of the plaza. In fact, as one drives south along Biscayne Boulevard and casually glances into the shopping center, the overall appearance from this angle suggests that the shopping center is not operational. As shoppers were discouraged from the plaza due to high vacancies, less variety, and the run-down appearance, a more undesirable clientele began frequenting the shopping center. This additionally deterred shoppers. While the level of shoppers was dropping, the presense of this unwanted element rose accordingly. These conditions served as impetus into the detrimental cycle already in motion. Although the Biscayne Shopping Plaza has experienced a decline during the last several years, it is evident that these past trends are being TABLE Ix-1 EXISTING RETAIL -COMMERCIAL VACANCIES1 Previous Tenant Sq.It. W. T. Grants Junior's Restaurant Slater's Shoes Mays Dress Shop Nelson's Womens Wear Graber's Dress Shop Ponn's Jewelers Thom McAn Shoes Cosmetic Studio 16,0002 7,0003 5 ,300 1,800. 1,800 1,550 1,500 1,500 700 37,1504 Length of Time Vacant 3 years • 3 years 3 months 2 1/2 years 2 1/2 years 2 years 3 months 'Personal communication with Manager of Biscayne Plaza Associates, July 1979. 2Eag1e Family Discount Store now occupies 8,000 sq.ft. of space once a part of Grants. 3McDonalds now occupies 5,500 sq.ft. of space once a part of'Junior's. 4 Represents 12.4% of the total 300,000 sq.ft. available for retail/commercial occupancy. . • { 56 TABLE Ix-2 TENANT COMPOSITION OF THE BISCAYNE SHOPPING PLAZA Shoppers Goods: Crystal Furniture Eagle Family Discount Edison Furniture Fayva Family Shoes Holly Discount Center J.C. Penney Kings Northeast Jewels. Lerner Shops National Shirt Shops Plaza Hearing Aid. Radio Shack Real Auto Parts Three Sisters Convenience Goods: Baskin- Robbins Ice Cream Caper Sandwich Shop Lantern Gifts -Cards McDonald's Pantry Pride Sun Up Nutritional Center Walgreens Walgreens Liquor Store Service: Aladdin's Castle Family Amusement Center Barber Shop Flagler Federal Bank Hair Fashion Salon The Insurance Place Nu -Life Shoe Repair 1-Hour Dry Cleaners Wash Bowl Coin Laundry Total number of stores in operation = 29. 57 reversed. The Biscayne Shopping Plaza Merchants Association has reported to the City of Miami Planning Department that sales have increased since the previous year. McDonalds moved in two years ago and has helped instill confidence in the shopping plaza by their choice of location. Flagler Federal is sponsoring a tree -planting project, in cooperation with the City, as an act of appreciation to the Biscayne Shopping Plaza and commemorating; the Bank's 25th Anniversary in the plaza. The recent increases in spending indicates that more shoppers are re- turning to the plaza. The incidences of crime, a major deterrant to consumer spending, are generally expected to rise with an increasing population. This is not the case, however, in the study area for all criminal offenses. Crime data provided by the City of Miami Police Department reports a 1.3% decrease in the combined totals of robberies, assaults, and breaking & entering inci- dents from 1977 to 1978 for the Biscayne Boulevard area. A decreasing crime rate is a very positive factor which will beneficially affect the Biscayne Shopping Plaza. Consumer and resident surveys recently administered indicate that local people are returning to the plaza. The consumer survey indicates that 81% of all. persons interviewed within the shopping center were there primarily to shop (as opposed to work or eat). The resident survey indicates that 53% of those living within the northeast community (defined as N.E. 36th St. to N.E. 87th St.) are also shopping at the Biscayne Shopping Plaza. The primary reason for shopping in the plaza was found to be for convenience by both consumers and residents. The majority of the shoppers lived less than five minutes away by car. More detailed survey results are presented in the next. section. These survey findings further support the premise that past trends 58 hindering the Biscayne Shopping Plazas successful operation are being overcome and reversed. Survey Results: Consumer Survej The thrust of development and redevelopment underway in Miami stems from the downtown area and is gradually moving north along Biscayne Boulevard. In an effort to hasten the process along this corridor between N.E. 36 St. and N.E. 87th St., impetus is needed at N.E. 79th St. The Planning Depart- ment believes that the Biscayne Shopping Plaza can play an integral part in stepping up the redevelopment process in the northern area of the Boulevard. Consistent with this belief, the Planning Department has conducted a consumer survey to increase staff literacy with regard to problems and opportunities within the Biscayne Shopping Plaza. The City of Miami Planning. Department administered a survey to shoppers on July 12th, 1979 between 10:30 am and 4:00 pm. Three interviewers con- ducted the face-to-face survey at different points in the center. A random sample of 100 shoppers was obtained. All shoppers in the plaza that day were free to stop and answer the survey questions. The consumer survey indicated that 81% of those interviewed did, in fact, come to the Biscayne Shopping Plaza to shop. 12% came primarily to work in the plaza but all did do some shopping once off work. The majority of the shoppers, 83%, chose the plaza for shopping because it is convenient to where they live. It was found that 46% of the shoppers lived less than five minutes away by car. A substantial percentage of shoppers was found to have walked to the shopping center--26%. These results support the assumption that local residents are again shopping attheir neighborhood shopping plaza. The Biscayne -Shopping Plaza is attracting consumers from the surrounding neighborhoods in close proximity to the shopping center. 59 The survey showed that consumers are not coming to the plaza primarily because of good variety and quality, offered by the merchants. 99% are coming because of convenience and good prices, 1% because of the variety. 35% of the shoppers expressed a desire to see more discount/outlet clothing stores move in where existing vacancies presently occur. 15% desired a large discount type store, i.e. Zayre, Woolco, K-Mart, to open up in order to provide more variety within the shopping center. The survey indicated that of the 32% of the consumers buying clothes in the plaza, all bought less than 25% of their clothing there, due to the lack of variety and styles that did not meet with their tastes and preferences. Pantry Pride attracted a large proportion of the shoppers, 68%, into the center. Some of these shoppers indicated they would shop for other items besides groceries if the vacancies were occupied by stores offering quality merchandise at discount prices_and more of a selection. The consumer survey produced evidence that the majority of shoppers would support a revitalization effort within the plaza. 21% specifically wished to see more visible security measures instituted. The "policeman on -a -horse" was a popular request. Of the 45 people who made suggestions for upgrading the shopping plaza, two-thirds recommended beautification projects such as repainting exteriors, a tree -planting program to provide much needed shade, and similar face-lifting efforts. Other requests were made in lesser frequency for better lighting facilities at night, greater enforcement of no -bikes and loitering ordinances within the plaza, and improvement of the traffic pattern in the parking area to relieve congestion and confusion. 6o 100% of the consumers surveyed who now shop in the plaza infrequently, expressed their commitment to shopping more frequently if the center was upgraded. They felt that the plaza would again attract more local residents back to this convenient shopping center if improvement measures were imple mented. Survey Results: Resident Survey A recent survey was conducted by telephone to gather data regarding shopping locations and characteristics of Biscayne Boulevard area residents. Polk's City Directory 1976 was utilized to obtain telephone numbers of per- sons residing east of the Boulevard from N.E. 50th Terr. north to N.E. 87th St. Every fifth entry in the directory was called until a random sample of 100 respondents to the questionnaire was obtained. The survey was conducted by the City of Miami Planning Department beginning June 20th through July 5th, 1979 between the hours 11:00 am and 5:00`pm daily. The resident survey results indicate that consumers shop at stores closest to them along Biscayne Boulevard, especially for groceries. 45% of the residents living in the sample area shop at the Biscayne Shopping Plaza. Pantry Pride's location in the plaza was found to be a large drawing force. 89% of the residents shopping at the plaza responded that convenience was the reason they went there to shop. Local residents shopping in the center stated they shop most frequently for groceries and not clothing in the plaza. 81% of the survey respondents was found to shop for clothing off Biscayne Boulevard. 25% of those polled shopped downtown and 15% traveled north to. Miami. Shores to buy clothes. Residents indicated the lack of variety and quality merchandise accounted for their abstention from shopping along the Boulevard and in the Biscayne Shopping Plaza. 61 28% of the residents surveyed by phone made comments regarding the Biscayne Shopping Plaza, although no question was included in the question- naire referring to the shopping center per se. 100% of these respondents stated they would like to see the Biscayne Shopping Plaza upgraded. Residents expressed a desire for physical improvements, increased quality and variety of merchandise, and vacant stores leased to tenants selling stylish goods at reasonable prices. Summary Negative changes in the service area's demand determinants such as income and population have not caused the noticeable vacancies and shabby appearance which now characterizes the Biscayne Shopping Plaza. Instead, decreases in demand have resulted from forces such as national bankruptcy and managerial problems inherent to three of the major stores. Although the Biscayne Shopping Plaza has experienced a decline during the last several years, it is evident that consumer spending is now on the upswing according to the Biscayne Shopping Plaza Merchants Association. Con- sumer and resident surveys also indicate that local residents are returning to the plaza to shop. The consumer survey points out that the majority of the shopper's are attracted to this shopping center by Pantry Pride and its convenient location. These same consumers are not coming to the plaza because of good variety and quality merchandise offered by the merchants. The findings of the resident survey are consistent with the above. Those living closer to Publix on Biscayne Boulevard prefer to do their grocery shopping there and therefore make separate trips to shop for clothing, etc. 62 Both the consumer survey and the resident survey produced strong evidence that local residents would commit themselves to more frequent trips to the shopping center if the managements' and merchants association instituted a beautification project that includes tree planting and a basic facade treatment. Furthermore, when asked what kinds of stores should replace the existing vacancies, the majority replied that they would like to see a discount store (i.e. Zayre, Woolco, K-Mart), and an outlet clothing store selling quality merchandise at discount prices. Biscayne Shopping Plaza: Area Retail/Eating and Drinking Space Demand The community shopping center trade area which is serviced by the Biscayne Shopping Plaza retail facilities is defined, for the purpose of this analysis, as the area between NE 36th Street and NE 121st Street with NW 7th Avenue and Biscayne Bay functioning as the west and east boundaries, respectively The population, households, household income and household retail expenditure potential for this trade area have been developed. The shoppers goods expenditure potential. is $77,157,356. Convenience goods expenditure potential is $96,446,695. These expenditure potentials are available to all retail facilities both within and without the defined trading area. The extend to which any store or group of stores captures a market share of the total potential depends on a combination of such factors as: 1. The type and quality level of the store/merchandise line presentations and consumer acceptance of the above; 2. store mixtures and balance of store types; 3 aggressive management and merchant association policies in promotion and marketing; 4. access; and 5. environment. • • 63 An Analysis of the gross warranted retail floor area within the trading area, based on total sales potential, discloses that the 300,000 sq. ft. of retail space characterizing the Biscayne Shopping. Plaza represents only 13% of this warranted retail floor area. Ample sales potential exists to support the Biscayne Shopping Plaza, see Table 3. Besidescommunity trade area residents, Biscayne Shopping Plaza's. retail facilities are supportable by the employees/clients associated with the 150,000 sq. ft. of office space within the shopping plaza.. Furthermore, the 7880 Biscayne Office Building and the Miami Nationl Bank Building, both a stone's throw from the shopping plaza, repre- sent 194,000 sq. ft. of office space that favorably impact the aggre- gate sales of the Plaza's retail facilities. The Biscayne Shopping Plaza office space together with these two office buildings are capable of supporting 10,000 sq. ft. of general retail activity, within the shopping plaza. TABLE ix-3. RETAIL OPPORTUNITiJ AVAILABLE FROM SP:RVICE AREA POPULATION 1979 Total SalesPotential ESL. Sales Per S.F. Warranted Gross Flr. Area Shoppers Goods General Merchandise $37,035,531 $75 493,807 S.F. 163,395 Appel 13,888,648 85 164,602 - Furniture 12,345,177 75 Other -... 13,888,000 85 163,388 985,192 S.F. Total $77,157,356 Convenience Goods $59,796,952 $135 441,273 S.F. Food 77,157 Eat/Drink 7,715,735 90 277,157 �g 22,182,7404,p, Liquor 4,822,334 100482,2332,233 Other 1,928,944 Total $96,446,695 1,272,830 S.F. (RAND SAL $173,604,051 2,258,022 S.F. 300,000 S.F. BISCAYNE SHOPPING PLAZA Percentage of Total Warranted Retail Floor Area 13% City of Miami Planning Department 1 65 Recommendations Based on the findings of the surveys and increased understanding of the problems and opportunities existing in the Biscayne Shopping Plaza, a vigorous concerted effort must be made to revitalize the shopping center in order to attract new tenants and shoppers. This needed impetus at N.E. 79th St. would assist in stepping up the redevelopment process in the northern area of Biscayne Boulevard. The following actions are therefore recommended by the City of Miami Planning Department to stimulate the revitalization of Biscayne Shopping Plaza. --Undertake a beautification project within the plaza to enhance its physical appearance Physical improvements within the shopping center are needed to upgrade the image it now projects to passing motorists and shoppers. Treatment to the facade, exterior painting, minor repairs and modifications, and similar "paint -up, fix -up" actions would greatly enhance the appeal of the shopping plaza. The facade would be most effective if blended together in a coordinated manner. Visual cohesiveness gives the impression of a one -stop, efficient shopping center. --Improve the physical environment within and around the shopping plaza by extensive landscaping A tree planting program extending throughout the plaza would greatly im- prove the attractiveness of the plaza and provide much needed shade. Land- scaping, in conjunction with a beautification project, would create a pleasant shopping atmosphere. A joint private -public tree planting effort is encouraged for the key intersection of N.E. 79th St. and Biscayne Boulevard. The City of Miami will. 1 4 66 provide assistance in planting the trees (in a similar arrangement which now exists between the Flagler Federal Bank and the City in their project) The City cannot plant trees north of N.E. 79th St. on the Boulevard because it is classified a state road and lacking curbs. Curbs must be present for trees to be planted to avoid obstructing motorists' views and to maintain the safety. of the road. Extensive landscaping around the major N.E. 79th St./Biscayne Boulevard intersection would, however, greatly improve the visual appearance and help to establish a distinct entryway into Miami, as well as the Biscayne Shopping Plaza. --Implement an aggressive marketing campaign to reduce vacancies and attract more shoppers A more aggressive marketing approach would help to attract new tenants and fill the unwanted vacancies. Efforts to attract tenants offering a greater variety of goods and services to consumers should be made. Although the surveys recently conducted indicate Pantry Pride attracts a large percentage of the shoppers into the plaza--68%, it does not appear to function as an anchor store for other consumer -type stores located in the shopping center. Another anchor store that would serve to compliment the others shops and draw shoppers into the plaza should be encouraged to occupy space in the center. An appropriate theme for the Biscayne Shopping Plaza to emphasize when acquiring new tenants is quality merchandise at discount prices. The shopping center must create a unique shopping experience and opportunity for consumers who would otherwise go elsewhere and, in fact, now do. The City of Miami Planning Department, after reviewing prevailing condi- tions within the marketplace and carefully examining characteristics of 1 67 existing facilities, has identified a number of retail establishments and service firms which would contribute to the economic viability of the Biscayne Shopping Plaza. Tables 4 and 5 are included as guides to be used in the selection of new tenants which could realistically be attracted to fill the existing vacant retail and office space. --Strengthen the Biscayne Plaza Merchants A,;sociation's involvement in promoting a positive image of the shopping center All tenants should be encouraged to join the Merchants Association. This would help overcome problems inherent in the dual ownership of the plaza. A cooperative, united group of merchants would foster more effective promotional efforts. Actions that might be carried out by a strong association are: collective advertising measures; staging of plaza -wide sales involving all merchants, and a collective, visible listing of all tenants erected at the entrances to the shopping center. A concerted effort on the part of all mer- chants would stimulate local pride in the plaza. --Improve signing demarcating the Biscayne Shopping Plaza A single large sign serving to mark the district as a whole would be very effective at the busy intersection of N.E. 79th St. and Biscayne Boulevard. The existing signs, one on 79th St. and one on the Boulevard, are not large enough and are inconspicuous. They do not adequately demarcate the shopping plaza to passing motorists. Welcome signs posted at Miami city limits at the north and south ends of Biscayne Boulevard identifying the Boulevard as the "Gateway to Miami" would be very effective in establishing a positive identity for the area. The signs, listing the components of the Boulevard and including the Biscayne Shopping Plaza, would assist in attracting more shoppers to the plaza. 68 ANYMIIIP TABLE Ix-4 TYPICAL RETAIL - SERVICE ESTABLISHMENTS AND CORRESPONDING SQUARE FOOTAGE REQUIREMENTS Establishment •Space Requirements (Square Foot) Fast Food Outlet 500 - 3, 500 Clothing 1, 200 - 7,500 Shoes 1,300 - 5,000 Furnishings 600 7,800 Appliances 1,200 5, 20G Hardware 1,000 - 6,500 Cards And Gifts 1,000 3,800 Stationary 2,000 - 5,200 Drugs 2,500 6,500 Barber And Beauty 450 - 2,300 Cleaners 450 2,100 Shoe Repair 500 1,200 Source: Urban Land Institute 69 300 - 1,000 400 3,700 300 - 1,500 350 5,600 TABLE IX-5 SELECTED OFFICE BUILDING OCCUPANTS AND CORRESPONDING SQUARE FOOTAGE REQUIREMENTS Office Space Type Of Requirements Firm (Square Foot) Accounting Architectual Advertising Brokerage Credit Reporting Engineering 350 - 3,500 Employment Agency 300 - 1,600 Finance Company 750 - 1,800 Insurance Agency 300 2,600 Interior Decorator 900 - 1,800 Legal 300 2,500 Medical - Dental 500 - 1,600 Mortgage Company 800 - 1,800 Public Relations 300 -.1,500 Real Estate 150 2,200 Travel Agency i50 1,500 Source: Urban Land Institute. 70 --Improve signing within the Biscayne Shopping Plaza to increase the safe and efficient flows of vehicular and pedestrian traffic Better sign communication is needed to relieve confusion to drivers in the entrances, exits and parking areas. The entrances and exits should be clearly identified to drivers approaching from N.E. 79th St. and the Boulevard. The parking area east of N.E. 5th Ave. (in front of Walgreen's) has a confusing traffic pattern. One-way and Alc:er directional signs should be clearly displayed to lessen the confusion. To facilitate safer pedestrian movement throughout the plaza, pedestrian crossing signs must be posted at the three crosswalks designating them as such. The existing sign marking the crosswalk on N.E. 81 St. near the bank needs to be set back a greater distance from the crossing. Approaching cars would then have sufficient opportunity to slow before reaching the crosswalk. Since the plaza is bisected by two streets producing a sizeable amount of traffic (5th Ave. and 81st St.) during shopping hours, additional caution signs and/or lights would further promote the general welfare of the pedestrians. These measures would encourage safe driving speeds and increased awareness of pedestrian traffic. In order to futher promote safer pedestrian movement within the plaza, "no -bikes" signs should be posted throughout. Presently, "no -bikes allowed" messages are stenciled in yellow on the shopping center's walkways. These are not clearly visible and are often overlooked by bike -riders. The provision of bike racks at several spots in the shopping center wouldalso discourage bikes from being ridden on pedestrian walkways. The directory maps located at different points in the plaza, designed to aid shoppers in finding the various stores, are in need of repair and updating. 71 Stores no longer in operation should be deleted from these signs. The Junior Restaurant sign on the N.E. 8lst St. and Biscayne Boulevard should also be. removed. --Provide amenity comforts throughout the shopping plaza to promote a pleasant shopping atmosphere and experience A successful neighborhood shopping r>.:_r desires to be comfortable as well as convenient. Benches placed throughout the Biscayne Shopping Plaza would 1 provide those persons accompanying shoppers with a comfortable place to wait. The benches now scattered throughout the plaza are in poor condition and are not being utilized by tired shoppers and waiting friends. Action should be undertaken to improve the bus stop waiting areas which service the plaza on N.E. 5th Ave. at N.E. 79th St. and N.E. 81st. St. inter- sections. Covered waiting areas would be more desirable to riders, providing them shelter from the sun and rain. These measures to accommodate shoppers in a comfortable environment, in conjunction with a beautification and landscaping program, would considerably improve conditions at the Biscayne Shopping Plaza. --Provide more visible security measures Presently, there are security measures implemented within the shopping plaza. A security officer walks throughout the center and police cars regularly patrol the area. However, consumer surveys indicate a desire for more visible security. Crime has been found to be more perceived than actual. A perceived situation is still detrimental to the positive image the Biscayne Shopping Plaza would like to portray. The return of the "policeman -on -a -horse" would help to alleviate this condition. The novelty of such law enforcement would also serve to attract more shoppers. 71 Stores no longer in operation should be deleted from these signs. The Juniors Restaurant sign on the N.E. 81st St. and Biscayne Boulevard should also be removed. --Provide amenity comforts throughout the shopping plaza to promote a pleasant shopping atmosphere and experience A successful neighborhood shopping c_..:r desires to be comfortable as well as convenient. Benches placed throughout the Biscayne Shopping Plaza would provide those persons accompanying shoppers with a comfortable place to wait The benches now scattered throughout the plaza are in poor condition and are not being utilized by tired shoppers and waiting friends. Action should be undertaken to improve the bus stop waiting areas which service the plaza on N.E. 5th Ave. at N.E. 79th St. and N.E. 81st. St. inter- sections. Covered waiting areas would be more desirable to riders, providing them shelter from the sun and rain. These measures to accommodate shoppers in a comfortable environment, in conjunction with a beautification and landscaping program, would considerably improve conditions at the Biscayne Shopping Plaza. --Provide more visible security measures Presently, there are security measures implemented within the shopping plaza. A security officer walks throughout the center and police cars regularly patrol the area. However, consumer surveys indicate a desire for more visible security. Crime has been found to be more perceived than actual. A perceived situation is still detrimental to the positive image the Biscayne Shopping Plaza would like to portray. The return of the "policeman -on -a -horse" would help to alleviate this condition. The novelty of such law enforcement would also serve to attract more shoppers. 72 --Establish better coordination between the Little River Business District and the Biscayne Shopping Plaza Coordinated development of these two adjacent commercial nodes would create a more viable business concentration. There is presently little inter- action between these two areas. Although they are physically separated by the Little River Canal, they should not bP "?ewed in isolation of one another. The improvement of pedestrian linkages and the future establishment of a shuttle bus servicing the two areas should be investigated. These actions would assist in tying the market area of the Biscayne Shopping Plaza to the west. --Rezone. Biscayne Boulevard, north of N.E. 80th St., from C-2 to C-1. CA low the proposed Special Planning District (see Appendix) to apply to this new C-1 District. The general character of Biscayne Boulevard is intended to be that of quality office, residential, and retail development. Uses permitted with- in C-2 Districts such as second hand shops and auto repair shops are not appropriate along this entryway portion of the Boulevard. Furthermore, the Special Planning District with its modified use regulations will ex- ert positive spillover effects with respect to the Biscayne Shopping Plaza and its economic viability. X APPENDIX + v e 73 SPD-3-BISCAYNE BOULEVARD NORTH SPECIAL OVERLAY DISTRICT. Section 1. INTENT (1) Biscayne Boulevard has traditionally been known as the "Gateway to Miami". It is, therefore, in the public interest that future development and redevelopment upgrade and, subsequently, augmen* the visual impression of this. arterial landmark. The ..._ent of these regulations is to encourage high quality office, residential and commercial development in a linear setting. This district, superimposed over the existing zoning district, modifies use regulations and explicitly states the manner in which development ri§hts may be transferred from transitional use lots to SPD 3 lots .with respect to floor area . (2) All other zoning regulations and procedures not affected by this regulations shall be in full force and effect. Section 2. USE REGULATIONS (1) Any use permitted in an R-3 District, Subject to USE, AREA, YARD, LOT COVERAGE, MINIMUM FLOOR AREA AND USABLE OPEN SPACE, regulations specified in said District. (2) Apartment buildings and apartment hotels not exceeding a density of one (1) dwelling unit for each six hundred (600) square feet of lot area. (3) Hotels, Motels. (4) Office for the conduct of real estate, mortgage financing, accountants, tax consultants, dental or medical (including. clinics), or office of other professions, or businesses, not involving sale or handling of merchandise on the premises. (5) Banks and finance offices, exclusive of drive-in tellers. (6) Broadcasting Stations for Radio and. T.V. (7) The following kinds of retail stores: Bookstores open to the General Public; Stationery; Confectionery or Ice Cream; Drugs; Newsstand or Sundry; Florists; Fruit or Vegetables; Gifts; Grocery; Hardware; Hobby; Home Appliances; Jewelry Liquor Package; Meat Market or Delicatessen; Music; Film Exchange and Photographic Supplies; Shoes; Clothing; China and Crockery; Variety; Antique, Carpets; Rug and Floor Covering. (8) Art Supplies (9) Bakery Goods Shop (10) Personal Service Shops such as Barber Shops and Beauty Parlor.. (11) Dry Cleaning Agencies or Pressing Establishments. (12) The following uses when conducted within a building or portion thereof which has no openings on any side adjacent to, residentially zoned property, and which has all activities, other than retail sales and display or office usage, confined either to the rear one-half of the ground floor, or to a floor other than the ground floor. • 73 SPD-3-BISCAYNE BOULEVARD NORTH SPECIAL OVERLAY DISTRICT. Section 1. INTENT (1) Biscayne Boulevard has traditionally been known as the "Gateway to Miami". It is, therefore, in the public interest that future development and redevelopment upgrade and, subsequently, augmen* the visual impression of this arterial landmark. The ....ent of these regulations is to encourage high quality office, residential and commercial development in a linear setting. This district, superimposed over the existing zoning district, modifies use regulations. and explicitly states the manner in which development rights may be transferred from transitional use lots to SPD 3 lots with respect to floor area . (2) All other zoning regulations and procedures not affected by this regulations shall be in full force and effect. Section 2 USE REGULATIONS (1) Any use permitted in an R-3 District, Subject to USE, AREA, YARD, LOT COVERAGE, MINIMUM FLOOR AREA AND USABLE OPEN SPACE regulations specified in said District. (2) Apartment buildings and apartment hotels not exceeding a density of one (1) dwelling unit for each six hundred (600) square feet of lot area. (3) Hotels, Motels. (4) Office for the conduct of real estate, mortgage financing, accountants, tax consultants, dental or medical (including clinics), or office of other professions, or businesses, not involving sale or handling of merchandise on the premises. (5) Banks and finance offices, exclusive of drive-in• tellers. (6) Broadcasting Stations for Radio and T.V. (7) The following kinds of retail stores: Bookstores open.to the General Public; Stationery Confectionery or Ice Cream; Drugs; Newsstand or Sundry; Florists Fruit or Vegetables; Gifts; Grocery; Hardware; Hobby; Home Appliances Jewelry Liquor Package; Meat. Market or Delicatessen Music;' Film Exchange and Photographic Supplies; Shoes; Clothing China and Crockery; Variety Antique; Carpets; Rug and Floor Covering. (8) Art Supplies (9) Bakery Goods Shop (10) Personal Service Shops such as,BarberShops and Beauty Parlor. (11) Dry Cleaning Agencies or Pressing Establishments. (12) The following uses when conducted within a building or portion. thereof which has no openings on any side adjacent to residentially zoned property, and which has all activities, other than retail sales and display or office usage, confined either to the rear one-half of the ground floor, or to a floor other than the ground floor. 74 (a) Letter Service and Mimeographing. (b) Custom Dressmaking, Millinery or Drapery Store, provided that no'products are prepared for the purpose of supplying other business located elsewhere. (13) Laundry Agencies. (14) Leather Goods. (15) Optical Stores. (16) Photographers. (17) The sale and incidental servicing of Radio, Television, Phonographic and Home Appliances, provided that: (a) The servicing of all appliances shall be confined to no more than the rear one-half of the premises. (b) The area of the building devoted to service activity shall be effectively screened from the front portion of a building so as to not be viewed from any portion of the area of the building devoted to sales or display. (c) Areas for service trucks and loading and unloading activities shall be properly screened with ,walls cr landscaping from abutting residential areas. (18) Restaurants, Tea Rooms or Cafes (excluding dancing or entertainment). (19) Shoe Repair Shops. (20) Sporting Goods. (21) Tailor Shops. (22) Art Galleries, Museums and Libraries. (23) Parking lots and parking garages. (24) Watch and Jewelry Repair. (25) Department Store. (26) Furniture Store., (27) Office Furniture and Equipment. (28) Interior Decorating. (29) Ticket Agencies. (30) Telephone Exchange and Telegraph Office. (31) Educational Institutions of a business, professional or scientific nature (classroom or lecture instruction only), not including music school, trade school, nor any School specializing in manual training shopwork, or in repair or maintenance of machinery or mechanical equipment: (32) Medical or Dental Laboratory. (33) Employment Office. (34) Theater. (35) Commercial marinas on non-residential sites, subject to the on -site parking, open space, sanitary and'safety provisions required in Article IV, Section 23, Sub -section (8) of this Ordinance. (36) Wet dockage or moorage of vessels sixteen (16) feet and over. in length,' as an accessory use to a principal residential use, provided that the total number of slips does not exceed more than twenty (20) percent of the total number of existing dwelling units in facilities with more than twenty (20) slips. An accessory use permit is required for non -owned vessels sixteen (16) feet or over in length. 75 (37) Wet dockage or moorage of permanent live -aboard... vessels* subject to the following density limitations. (a) On Vacant Sites. Maximum density permitted is the maximum. use density allowed in the district. The docking of one (1) or more permanent live -aboard vessels is subject to the on -site parking, open space, sanitary and safety provisions required Article IV, Section 23, Sub- section (7) of this ordinance. (b) On sites with existing dwelling units. Maximum permitted is either the difference between the maximum use density allowed in the district and the actual density of one (1) permanent live -aboard vessel for every six thousand (6,000) square feet of lot area, whichever is less. In no case, shall the use density of the zoning districts be exceeded by the addition of permanent live -aboard vessels. The docking of five (5). or more permanent live -aboard vessels is subject to the on -site parking, open space, sanitary and safety provisions required in Article IV, Section 23, Sub -section (8) of this Ordinance. (38) Accessory Uses and Structures. (39) The following uses if approved as a CONDITIONAL USE: (a) An addition to a conforming or non -conforming building or structure which contains a non -conforming COMMERCIAL USE, subject to the provisions of ARTICLE XXVIII, Section 1, (1) (a) through (f) or Section 2, (2) (a) and/or Section 2, (3) (a) . (b) Automobile. Agencies (Sales + Display only) (c) Clubs or Lodges, Fraternal or Religious Associations. (d) Commercial boats, boat rentals, boats for hire, charter, boats and sale of marine fuel and supplies. (e) Post Office. (f) COIN OPERATED LAUNDRIES -provided that: A self-service laundry shall not exceed, for all washing units combined, a total rated capacity of 500 pounds, and provided further that no machine shall exceed a rated capacity of twenty-five (25) pounds. All vents and exhaust outlets which are used for removing fumes and/or heat from washers or dryers shall be confined either to the roof area of a building, or to the portion of an exterior• wall, area which is eight (8) feet or more above grade, and all such outlets shall be constructed so as to discharge in a vertical direction. (g) Drive-in Tellers. (h) Wet dockage or moorage of vessels sixteen (16) feet and over in length, representing more than twenty (20) percent of the total number of existing' dwelling units in accessory use facilities with more than twenty (20) slips. 76 (40) Other uses: Other uses or enterprises similar to the above, which, in the judgement of the Zoning Supervisor of the Building Department are similar to and not more objectionable to the general welfare, than the USES listed. "OTHER USES", so determined shall be regarded as listed uses. In no instance, however, shall the Zoning Supervisor determine, nor the regula- tions be so interpreted, that a USE shall be permitted in a r'strict when such USE is speci- fically listed . first permissible in a less restricted District. Section 3. SPECIAL TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS. (1) For building sites which have a minimum of 120 feet of street frontage along Biscayne Boulevard and which have an adjacent transitional use lot in an "R" District, development rights for the floor area may be transferred from this "R" District lot to the assembled SPD-3 lots (principal site). The floor area ratio for the principal site upon which the building must sit, shall not exceed 2.5. a) An R-3 or R-4 transitional use lot, not exceeding 7,500 square feet of net area, may transfer floor area development rights equivalent to an FAR of 1.5 times the net square footage of said lot. b) An R-2 transititional use lot, not exceeding 7,500 square feet of net area, may transfer floor area development rights equivalent to an FAR of 6 plus an FAR bonus of 9, equaling an FAR of 1.5, times the net square footage of said lot. (2) Where transfer of said development rights occurs, all new development and redevelopment to the prin- cipal site shall be subject to site and develop- ment plan review by the Planning Department in accord with Article IV, Sec. 42. (3) A legal document binding the transitional use lot to the principal site must be approved by. the City Attorney and recorded. 76 (40) Other uses: Other uses or enterprises similar to the above, which, in the judgement of the Zoning Supervisor of the Building Department are similar to and not more objectionable to the general welfare, than the USES listed. "OTHER USES", so determined shall be regarded as listed uses. In no instance, however, shall the Zoning Supervisor determine, nor the regula- tions be so interpreted, that a USE shall be permitted in a District when such USE is speci- fically listed as first permissible in a less restricted District. Section 3. SPECIAL TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS. (1) For building sites which have a minimum of 120 feet of street frontage along Biscayne Boulevard and which have an adjacent transitional use lot in an "R" District, development rights for the floor area may be transferred from this "R" District lot to the assembled SPD-3 lots (principal site). The floor area ratio for the principal site upon which the building must sit, shall not exceed 2.5. a) An R-3 or R-4 transitional use lot, not exceeding 7,500 square feet of net area, may transfer floor area development rights equivalent to an FAR of 1.5 times the net square footage of said lot. b) An R-2 transititional use lot, not exceeding 7,500 square feet of net area, may transfer floor area development rights equivalent to an FAR of .6 plus an FAR bonus of .9, equaling an FAR of 1.5, times the net square footage of said lot. (2) Where transfer of said development rights occurs, all new development and redevelopment to the prin- cipal site shall be subject to site and develop- ment plan review by the Planning Department in accord with Article IV, Sec. 42. (3) A legal document binding the transitional use lot to the principal site must be approved by the City Attorney and recorded. 77 7,500 SQ. FT , TRANSITIONAL USE LOT SIZE 22,500 SQ, FT. LOT SIZE XI.5FAR TRANSFERRED 11,250 SO. FT. 45,000 SQ. FT. EQUALS *air 1I,250 SQ, FT, GROSS IMPROVEMENTS 45,000 SO. FT. GROSS IMPROVEMENTS 56,000 SO. FT. GROSS IMPROVEMENTS 0011.ASS u IRATTION ors ffsPE OAL 78 PROPOSED ALTERATIONS IN USE REGULATIONS DUE TO RECOMMENDED ZONING CHANGES From C-1 (Local Commercial) to SPD (Special Planning District Zoning Overlay) A. Permitted Uses to be Omitte: include: 1. Sanitariums 2. Substance Abuse Facilities 3. Nursing Homes 4. Convalescent Homes 5. Dance Studios 6. Clubs, Lodges, Fraternal or Religious Associations 7. Automobile Sales and Displays 8. Commercial Boats and Boat Rentals, Sale of Marina Fuel and Supplies B. Conditional Use Additions 1. Clubs, Lodges, Fraternal or Religious Associations 2. Automobile Sales and Display 3. Commercial Boat and Boat Rentals, Sale of Marina Fuel and Supplies II-. From C•-2 (Community Commercial) to C-1 (Local Commercial): A. Permitted Uses to be Omitted, include: 1. Turkish Baths 2. Massage Parlors 3. Reducing and Health Studios 4. Commercial Recreational Establishments 5. Pool and Billiard Rooms 6. Storage of Contractor's. Material 7. Gas Stations 8. Bars, Saloons, Taverns 9. Auto Parts 10. Second Hand Stores 11. Rescue Missions and Revival Church 12. Auditoriums III. From C-2 (Community Commercial) to`C-1A (Planned Shopping Center) A. Permitted Uses to be Omitted, include: See II, with the exception of Gas Station.