HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-00960 10-24-2011 A Model Housing Transportation PlanP�MENrO
ar h
N
o a
IV
a
DEVELOPMENT AND RESEARCH
octubre 20, 2010
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
WASHINGTON, DC 20410-6000
Clarence E. Woods, Assistant Director
Southeast Overtown Parkwest, Omni, and Midtown CRA
49 NW 5th Street, Suite 100
Miami, FL 33128
Re: Confirmation of the selection of Block 36 and Block 25, or Lyric Place
Dear Mr. Woods,
I wanted to thank you for your attendance at our recent planning meeting for our project on
coordinating housing and transportation, where the main goal of our efforts is to develop a site
specific affordable housing station area plan. As I described to those attending the project's
Planning Workshop in September, the basis for this particular project was a request from
Congress that tasked the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the
Federal Transit Administration (FTA) with developing new and innovative ways to coordinate
mixed -income housing with transit -oriented development.
From the project's inception to when the City of Miami was selected as the final location,
Newport Partners and Kimley-Horn conducted an exhaustive nation-wide search in an effort to
identify a list of potential cities to play host to this project's efforts. As a result of that search,
the following eight cities were chosen as candidates for further study: Atlanta, Baltimore, Boise,
Houston, Miami, Orlando, Phoenix, and Minneapolis/ St. Paul. Based on information provided
by the City of Miami and careful evaluation of criteria such as vision, advocacy, policy,
programs, a site visit, a stakeholder workshop and other intangibles, Blocks 36 and 25, also
known as Lyric Place, were chosen to serve as the national model for coordinating housing and
transportation.
Upon completion, the plan will be presented to Congress as a national model for serving the
housing needs of a community while increasing the existing mass transit ridership, reducing
household spending on transportation, and improving the neighborhood.
Once again, I'd like to thank you for your contribution at the Planning Workshop. You, as well
as the many others who attended, have been instrumental in helping us move this project along to
where it is today.
Sincerely,
Luis Borray, Architect
Affordable Housing Research and Technology Division
Office of Policy Development and Research
US Department of Housing and Urban Development
www.hud.gov espanol.hud.gov
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
t City Clerk
F; e, It* k1 i _ _r''� J
A Model
Housing
Transportation
Plan
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
SEPTEMBER 2011
iikAliar
Ktrnley tiorri andaAes. t I(. , . , , , ,„,
Coordinating Housing and Transportation:
A Model Housing Transportation Plan
September 2011
Prepared For:
U S. Department of Housinc 1tr"ars !' 'etopment
Affordable Housing Research and Technology Division
Office of Policy Development and Research
451 7th Street, Southwest
Washington, D.C.
www.HUD.gov
Prepared By:
Newport Partners, LLC.
3760 Tanglewood Lane
Davidsonville, Maryland
Phone' 301.889,0017
www.newportpartnersllc.com
Acknowledgments
The development of the model housing
transportation plan for the selected site in
Overtown in the City of Miami was the result of
a collaborative effort by the U S. Department
of Housing and Urban Development (HUD),
Newport Partners, LLC, and Kimley-Horn and
Associates, Inc. Throughout the process, there
were individuals from HUD whose input and
guidance contributed significantly to the plan's
design, content, and quality, The planning team
would like to thank the following HUD staff
for the time and effort they contributed to this
project:
• Luis F. Borray, Architect, HUD Office of
Affordable Housing Research and Technology
• Regina C. Gray, Program Coordinator and
Research Analyst, HUD Office of Affordable
Housing Research and Technology
• Edwin Stromberg, Program Manager, HUD
Office of Affordable Housing Research and
Technology
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
Kimie •-fl rn and AssociateF FM
14400 Commerce Park Drive, Suite 400
Reston, Virginia
Phone: 703.674,1300
www.kimley-horn.com
Upon being selected as the chosen city for this
project, there were several officials from the
City of Miami that were instrumental in helping
select an available site and leading the effort
to gather community stakeholders from local
housing, redevelopment, and transportation
agencies and organizations. The planning team
would like to recognize the following individuals
for their contribution to this project!
• Alfredo Duran, Deputy Director, Department of
Community Development
• Jose Gonzalez, Assistant Transportation
Coordinator, Office of the City Manager
• Colin Worth, Bicycle Coordinator/Special
Projects Assistant, City of Miarni Capital
Improvements Program
• Pieter Bockweg, Executive Director of the Omni
and SEOPW CRA
• Clarence Woods, Assistant Director of the
SEOPW CRA
A Model Housing Transportation Plan 1 N'EWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES 1
The purpose of this study was to bring
transit -oriented development planning
together with affordable housing
planning through the development
of an implementable Model Housing
Transportation Plan. The plan, with input
from local, regional and federal planning,
housing and transit agencies and other
stakeholders, is unique to the site for
which it was developed; however, it is
intended to serve as an illustrative model
for planning professionals, community
advocates and community -based
organizations in other jurisdictions with
similar contexts. It endeavors to advance
the nation's understanding of the need
for affordable housing near transit and to
promote strategies and tools to empower
stakeholders to implement housing
transportation station area plans that benefit
the entire region. And finally, it seeks to
demonstrate how federal agencies, such as
the U.S. Department of Housing (HUD) and
the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) can
work together to support local and regional
efforts to develop coordinated housing and
transportation plans.
The study city for this planning effort is
Miami, Florida. The station area chosen
for the plan is a'/a-mile radius around the
Overtown Metrorail Station. This station
area encompasses a once thriving African -
American neighborhood blighted by the
construction of highways and resulting
Urban Renewal of the late 1950s and
early 1960s. Unlike many transit -oriented
development studies, this station already
exists, and was designed for a much higher
volume of traffic than it currently serves. The
station area includes a fair amount of vacant
land and parking lots. It is located next to
A Model Housing Transportation Plan I NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES
Executive Summary
downtown Miami and near employment
centers including the medical district, the
port of Miami, the entertainment district
and city and county government buildings.
Currently, most people traveling to the
employment centers come by car from
Miami -Dade and Broward counties. A recent
article cited Miami as one of the worst cities
in the nation for renters (Brennan, Morgan.
'The Best and Worst Cities for Renters,"
6/8/11, Forbes.com). As a result of all of
these factors, this station area presents an
opportunity for quality urban growth in the
City of Miami that fits within the regional
context.
Through collaborative discussions during a
planning workshop and following the Mixed -
Income Transit -Oriented Development
(MITOD) Action Guide (Reconnecting
America and the Center for Transit Oriented
Development), the team identified the
needs of the community and designed a
plan to serve as a catalyst for continued
development and revitalization of the area.
The plan envisions mixed -use development
throughout the station area with the highest
densities closest to the Overtown station.
An interconnected network of pedestrian -
and bicycle -friendly streetscapes, green and
open spaces, and appropriate ground floor
uses would create an environment that is
engaging and supportive of restoration of
the neighborhood.
At the request of stakeholders, plans that
incorporated affordable housing were more
fully developed for two blocks within the
station area. The first was a "maximum
zoning plan" to test how much affordable
housing the newly adopted Miami-21
zoning ordinance would allow. The other
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
ii
is a "market plan" based on feedback
from local stakeholders. The market plan
reflects densities that stakeholders felt
were realistic and marketable given the
context of the community. Both plans show
infill development that would bring people
back to the neighborhood and could be
implemented with different housing options
to suit the needs of different populations - all
the while having convenient access to many
of the city's and region's major employment
centers and service destinations.
The real challenge presented in this study
is how to build affordable housing in an
underdeveloped inner-city neighborhood
within walking distance of an underutilized
public rail station. The challenge for transit -
oriented development during a booming
housing market is to keep the long-term
rental and ownership costs affordable,
but in a time of high unemployment and a
depressed housing market, the greatest
challenge is financing to construct the
buildings,
To address this challenge, our
recommended strategy is to create a
coordinated public/private - national/local
partnership for an affordable housing trust
fund to attract local private development.
The creation of an affordable housing trust
fund leveraging Transportation Infrastructure
Finance and Innovation Act (T1FIA) funds,
Transportation Investment Generating
Economic Recovery (TIGER) funds,
Community Development Block Grants
(CDBG) and HUD HOME funds would
reflect the goals of HUD and FTA to support
coordinated housing -transportation efforts,
while providing the seed money needed to
attract private local investment.
Under this strategy, local public/private
partnerships would apply to the federal
partnership for funding to capitalize a
rotating loan fund and then a consortium
of lenders would agree to participate in
partially funded projects. The Southeast
Overtown/Park West (SEOPW) Community
Redevelopment Agency (CRA) could serve
as a pilot to test the effectiveness of this
approach and to ensure that the Housing
Transit Market Plan can be implemented.
To enhance the possibility of successful
implementation, the city and CRA should
also use Tax Increment Financing (T1F), the
bonus density available through provisions
in Miami 21 to increase site yield, and Low
Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC).
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
'
WNW -1.111P
NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES 1 A Model Housinc Tansportat!cn Plan
Appendix: Planning Process Overview
Chapter 1: Introduction
Table of Contents
1
Study Context 1
Mixed Income Transit -Oriented Development and How it Relates to Affordable Housing 1
Station Area Planning 3
Purpose of this Model Station Area Plan 5
Chapter 2: Setting the Context
Process
Regional Context
General Character of the Station Area
General Circulation and Transportation Character
7
7
9
11
15
Chapter 3: Gathering and Analyzing the Data 19
Introduction to Mixed -Income Transit -Oriented Development Guide
Existing Conditions Analysis
Mixed -Income Transit -Oriented Development Opportunities Analysis
Mixed -Income Transit -Oriented Development Strategies Analysis
19
19
26
29
Chapter 4: Modeling the Station Area Plan 31
Conceptual Station Area Plan
Site Specific Plans
31
34
Chapter 5: Summarizing Potential Strategies and Tools 55
Potential Strategies 55
Tools to Implement Strategies 57
Chapter 5: Conclusion and Recommendations for Implementation 61
Strategies, Actions, Policies, and Capital Investments
Recommended to Support implementation 61
Lessons Learned from the MITOD Process 62
Next Steps 63
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
A-1
11.1.1.1.1111.11.11.1
A iviedel Housing Transportation Plan NEWPORT PARTNERS 1 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES
Study Context
As Americans begin to realize the high
economic and social costs of housing and
commuting and the importance of safe,
stable communities, there is a growing
trend toward maximizing existing resources
while promoting a high quality of life, not
only natural resources like water, but also
existing transportation assets. Places like
Seattle, San Francisco, Denver, Chicago,
Arlington, and Portland —just to name
a few —have and are expanding the
number of work, living, and entertainment
opportunities around high quality transit.
These places are actively preparing plans
and implementing policies to reduce the
number of vehicles on their streets, reduce
traffic congestion, increase walking and
bicycling, and the improve the quality of
Introduction
community environments, This chapter
overviews a people -focused way of thinking
about planning and introduces the goal of
this study effort.
Mixed Income
Transit -Oriented
Development
and How it
Relates to
Affordable
Housing
Transit -oriented development (TOD) can
generally be described as walkable, dense,
Chapter 1
compact, mixed —use development in close
proximity to high -quality transit. According
to TransitOrientedDevelopment.orq, the
predominant aspects of TOD are the
following:
• Compact walkable design with the
pedestrian as the highest priority
• Transit station as prominent feature of the
development
• Regional node containing a mixture of uses
in close proximity including office, residential,
retail, and civic uses
• High -density, high -quality development
within a 10-minute walking radius
surrounding a transit station
• Good access to high -quality transit services
• Designed to encourage nonmotorized travel
(walking, bicycling, etc,)
• Reduced and managed parking within the
10-minute walk radius around the transit station
Transit —Oriented Development in Chicago, IL.
A Model Housing Transporiaton Plan I NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES
The Center for Transit Oriented
Development (www.ctod.org) defines TOD
as projects that accomplish the following
• Increase "location efficiency" so that people
can walk, bicycle. and take transit
• Boost transit ridership and minimize traffic
• Provide a rich mix of housing, shopping, and
transportation choices
• Generate revenue for the public and private
sectors and provide value for both new and
existing residents
• Create a sense of place
Mixed -income housing is an important
aspect of TOD, It helps eliminate income
segregation and allows low-income
households the opportunity to benefit
from having easy access to public transit.
Without mixed -income housing. low-income
households are forced to retreat to lower
cost housing further from employment,
shopping, and social activities. As a result,
any savings in housing is offset by higher
transportation costs Without a concerted
effort to include affordable housing near
transit stations, the demand for such
housing will price lower -income households
out of the market for this type of housing.
Furthermore, with low-income households
more dependent on public transit than
other higher income categories, an increase
in ridership is often the result of locating
affordable housing near transit.
Another critical aspect of mixed income
transit -oriented development is to maintain
the affordability of housing over the long
term, Since these multiuse developments
frequently improve the quality of life for
residents with nearby retail, employment,
transportation, recreation, and walkable
environments, they become very desirable
and the cost of housing increases.
Finally, the term mixed income is a
clarification suggesting that people of
different incomes should live within the
community to make it vibrant. When we
started this project, we used the term
affordable housing and although the goal
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
tdaptatoe of tar * scolh eetail usna fn an urban onvWromrtent (Who. Foods, Chicap0. ILj.
NEWPORT PARTNERS I - KIMLEY FIORN AND ASSOCIATES I A Model Housing Transportation Plan
is to ensure that low-income residents can
benefit, stay or move to the community, the
term, according to the project stakeholders,
carries misleading connotations,
Station Area
Planning
Reconnecting America and the Center for
Transit Oriented Development produced
a series of guidebooks on TOD and
station area planning. The first is Mixed -
Income Housing Near Transit: Increasing
Affordability with Location Efficiency. The
second is Station Area Pianning: How to
Make Great Transit -Oriented Places. This
guide defines eight typologies or types
of station areas along with development
guidelines and planning principles. The
planning principles identified in the guide
include:
• Maximize Ridership Through Appropriate
Development
• Generate Meaningful Community
Involvement
• Design Streets For All Users
• Create Opportunities for Affordable and
Accessible Living
• Make Great Public Spaces
• Manage Parking Effectively
• Capture The Value Of Transit
• Maximize Neighborhood and Station
Connectivity
• Implement TI rJ Plan And Evaluate Its
Success
As the consulting team began this project
with HUD, the Center for Transit Oriented
Development launched their Mixed -Income
Transit -Oriented Development (MITOD)
Action Guide, an online tool to support the
planning of mixed income TOD at station
areas. In Chapter 3, the methodology
suggested by this guide is referenced as
a process for creating a model housing
transportation plan.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
11.11111.11.11111
A Mode, F+aus;ng Transportation Plan I NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES
Project Goals
Implement a Coordinat d Approach
For a ulate an A tionable Plan
Create a Site -Specific Plan that Fits
Within a Regional Context
tl,,. i,-Irit txat,on.
Develop a Strategy to Locate
Affordable Housing Near Transit
I. I
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
_maim.
4 NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-HORN ANt) ASSOCIATES I A Model Housing Transportation Pian
Purpose of this
Model Station
Area Plan
The purpose of this effort was to bring
transit -sensitive planning together with
affordable housing through the development
of a Model Housing Transportation Plan
(the Plan). The Ran, with input from local
and regional planning, housing and transit
agencies, and other stakeholders. is
unique to a specific site, yet serves as an
illustrative model for jurisdictions with similar
typologies.
This project is in response to a 2008 report
by the U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD) and the Federal
Transit Administration (FTA) that served to
outline strategies for how the two groups
could work together to better coordinate
housing and transportation programs to
promote affordable housing near transit,
The report entitled, Better Transportation
and Housing Programs to Promote
Affordable Housing Near Transit, was in
Site Location
•
•
response to the Joint Explanatory Statement
issued by the House -Senate Conference
Committee with the fiscal year (FY) 2008
Consolidated Appropriations Act.
This Act urged HUD and FTA to continue
their efforts to promote the inclusion of
affordable housing near transit. This project
is a direct result of a statement contained
in the HUD and FTA report where both
agencies resolved to help support the
development of a model affordable housing
transportation plan that could serve as a
template for other jurisdictions.
The Plan focuses on a single site so that it is
implementable while also serving as a model
for other communities with similar traits or
typologies. This represents the first effort
from HUD and demonstrates incremental
improvements to the process. The plan itself
is intended to be catalytic and impact the
future of the chosen community.
Communities interested in creating their own
station area plans will be able to see what
data was gathered, where it was found,
and how it was analyzed to determine the
1
I •
- - ma
MYIOnC O .rt
Leyrn
.. . -
,..r«,..,1....
best strategy for increasing the supply
of affordable housing as applied to the
Overtown station in the City of Miami.
The Plan considers land availability,
affordable housing options, existing and
proposed development incentives, financing
options and ridership, and travel trends.
These are presented through a series of
layers —a master plan, a conceptual plan,
open space plan, vehicular access plan, and
a pedestrian and bicycle access plan, It also
includes two options for implementation:
a site maximum plan whose design is
reflective of the maximum amount of density
and building height under current zoning
requirements, and a market plan that
incorporates a design that is more reflective
of current market conditions.
The Plan explores a number of tools, that
local jurisdictions can use to help encourage
the development of affordable housing near
transit in their own communities and makes
suggestions for implementation.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
A Model Hot ono Transportation Ran NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-MORN AND ASSOCIATES
5
Process
To find the model location for this study, the
team went through a series of steps. The
team began with a broad list of cities and
pared that down based on transit -oriented
development criteria. After choosing the
city of Miami, representatives from Miami's
planning and housing departments took
the team on a site visit to choose a specific
station, The team visited the Bricl.ell
Avenue Metrorail station area, School Board
Metromover station area, and Overtown
station a, ea_
During a workshop with local, regional,
and federal representatives from housing
and transportation agencies to coordinate
efforts, local stakeholders identified
Overtown as their priority for mixed income
TOD. More specifically, they identified
properties near the Overtown station that
MetroraM O eerowry, Overtawei (1411r 1)
Setting the Context
are currently owned and controlled by the
Southeast Overtown Park West (SEOPW)
Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA)
that are in need of mixed -income housing to
catalyze redevelopment and revitalization in
this very low-income, inner city location.
In the CRA's redevelopment plan (Southeast
Overtown/Park West Community
Redevelopment Plan. November 2004
Dover Kohl & Partners; May 2009, City of
Miami Planning Department), the goal is to
create "a thriving mixed -use neighborhood
and commercial hub in the heart of
downtown." The residents and stakeholders
are concerned with "affordable housing for
existing residents" and "support for small
businesses and the creation of new jobs for
current residents."
Chapter 2
The redevelopment plan includes vibrant
streetscapes and is guided by 6 goals and
14 principles (Table 2.1) that are broader
than, but still similar to, the goals of the
Model Housing Transportation Plan (the
Plan). Our effort brings the transportation
asset to the forefront of the Plan and
focuses on mixed -income housing within a
walkable distance to the Overtown station.
This chapter provides the context for the
region and the neighborhood to inform the
design of the Plan.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
' http://www.miamicra.com/docs/2009_SEOPW_
Redevelo p m ent_Plan. pdf
A Model Housing Transportation Plan I NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES
7
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
Table 2.1: Summary of Goals and Guiding Principles for SEOPW Community Redevelopment Plan
Goal 1
Preserving
Hsstonc
Buildings &
Community
Hentage
Expanding the
Tax Base using
Smart Growth
Principles
V /
Goal 3. Housing
Intlll Dtveirsoj
& Retaining
Affordability
Goal 4 Creating
Jobs within the
Commun'ty
V.
Goat
13;or1 :)lion &
tAart.ottrig of th,D
C4 immunity
Goal 6
Irnprovon111tie
(Duality of Life for
Residents
V
Principle 1 t nL_, o V /
Comm' onit,
Princ,pto• 2 Affordable
Housing
Principle 3 Housing ✓
Variety
V
V
V
V
Principle 4 Job Variety V
ICIno; .tt0 i. '.a11.atro
Streets
/
V
f
V
Pi nclpir- f2 Pi r nniTtn]n 1
Y
✓
✓
✓
Principle 7 Greer &
Open Space
V
Principle 8 Historic ✓
Preservation
V
✓
✓
Principle 9
Appropriate
Architecture
Principle 10 Attractive
Streets
Pl+nr..rpii- 11 2a-i lour 1
Environment
✓
V
✓
Principle 1 ^
Neighborhood Centers
/
�/
Principle 13 Revise V
Regulations
V
VZoning
Principle 14 Restore /
Conrn1unit,; �/
V.
�/
Note: The names of the Guiding Principles above have been reduced to a few key words for purposes of brevity. Check marks in the
boxes above indicate where a principle is supported by a goal of the plan.
Source: Southwest Cvertown/Park West Community Redevelopment Plan, City of Miami, May 2009.
8
NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-FUORN AND ASSOCIATES l A Model Housing Transportation Plan
Regional
Context
Community and Economics
Miami -Dade County experienced steady
and rapid population growth in the 1960s
and 1970s. Population doubled from
1960 to 1990. Population then increased
again between 2000 and 2010, rising to
2,496,435 in 2010 according to the 2010
U.S. Census. Projected growth through
2025 is expected to follow a similar trend,
albeit at a somewhat slower rate. The
principal driver of population growth has
been and will continue to be immigration,
historically from Latin American, South
American, and nations within the Caribbean
basin.
In 2005, Miami -Dade County boasted a
nearly $106 billion economy. Miami -Dade
County experienced real economic growth
dating back 30 to 35 years from 2005. From
2001 to 2005 the county estimated that
Ovsrtown Transit Vlllapn in Ovnrtewn (MIa if
the economy grew at an approximately 3,5
percent annual rate. The County's economy
is led by the following group of four sectors
that provide more than 50 percent of
employment:
• Professional and business services
• Government
• Education and health services
• Retail trade
The two significant external generators of
economic activity in Miami -Dade County are
international trade and tourism. Wholesale
trade and transportation (which are linked to
international trade) provide approximately 11
percent of the County's employment base,
while the leisure and hospitality industry
provides more than 140,000 jobs (roughly 9
percent of total employment).
The County's role as a transshipment hub
has increased in terms of volume and origins
and destinations of goods. Cargo tonnage
increased nonlinearly by more than 10
times at the Port of Miami and slightly more
than sixfold at Miami International Airport
since 1970. The region's cargo economics
remain largely tied to Latin America as has
been demonstrated by significant declines
in air and sea cargo volume during Latin
American economic declines in the 1980s.
Tourism in the Greater Miami area (Miami
Beach and City of Miami) remains an
important component of the overall Miami -
Dade County economy, Since 1980 tourism,
as measured by overnight visitors, grew
steadily from more than 6.7 million in 1980
to 11.3 million total visitors in 2005, In 2010,
a survey by the Greater Miami Convention
and Visitors Bureau indicated that greater
Miami and the beaches had hosted more
than 12.6 million annual visitors. These
visitors contributed more than $18.8 billion
to the region's economy.
Despite economic growth and relative
diversity among population, there is a large
divergence between the low end and the
high end of the region's economy. There is
a widening gap in wage income between
A Model lousing Transportation Plan I NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES
those who work in positions requiring high
levels of education and training and those
wi iu do not. As a resui'i ',vhile the economy
as a whole has done well, there are many
communities in the County that have been
bypassed by the benetits of economic
growth.
Current income figures for Miami -Dade
County are low by national standards.
Median household and median family
income are approximately 80 percent of the
corresponding figures for the nation. Upper
income ranges of Miami -Dade households
essentially rnirror national figures; however,
lower income ranges are over -represented
relative to the nation. More than 20 percent
of households in Miami -Dade have an
income below $15,000, Current income
and income distribution ,)atterns are partly
a result of massive immigration in the late
1970s and early 1980s followed by a steady
inflow thereafter. Continued low educational
attainment and other factors common to
lower income groups throughout the country
Figure 2.1: Miami -Dade
County Metrorail and
Motromover Systems
— -a
O
O
appear to be common among the County's
lower income populations.
Transportation Access and
Facilities
Miami and the surrounding metropolitan
area are well -located at the intersection of
North and South America. With exceptional
air and sea transportation access, Miami is
a significant international trading center and
has been an entry point for people into the
United States from Caribbean and South
American nations for decades. The region's
airports (including those outside of Miami -
Dade County) move millions of passengers
and tons of freight annually. Meanwhile, the
region's ports handle goods from across
the globe and transfer them to rail and
truck for distribution across the country.
The region is a significant cruise port with
most cruise lines servicing the United States
having terminal access, Millions of people
travel though the region annually, destined
for the many cruise lines serving the port.
Figure 2,1 shows the general layout of
transportation infrastructure in eastern
Miami -Dade County.
In addition to the region's air and sea
access, the metropolitan area has a well -
developed interstate and major highway
system. Interstate 95 runs north from
Miami and is closely paralleled by Florida's
Turnpike and historic US Route 1. East/
west are 1-195 (Airport Turnpike), 1-395
(Dolphin Expressway), and State Route
826 (Palmetto Expressway). These major
highways are important routes to support
the region's economy by moving people and
goods efficiently by road in South Florida.
Three major fixed guideway transit systems
operate within the metropolitan area. The
South Florida Regional Transportation
Authority (SFRTA) operates the Tri-Rail
Commuter Rail Service. This service
operates along a railroad alignment parallel
to the 1-95 corridor from Miami to West
Palm Beach. The service spans Palm
Beach, Broward, and Miami Dade Counties
and has 22 stations,
10
NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES I A Model Housing Transportation Ran
Miami -Dade County's 22-mile, elevated
rapid transit system runs from Kendall
through South Miami, Coral Gables, and
downtown Miami; to the Civic Center/
Jackson Memorial Hospital area; and to
Brownsville, Liberty City, Hialeah, and
Medley in northwest Miami -Dade. It has
connections to Broward and Palm Beach
Counties at the Tri-Rail/Metrorail transfer
station. An extension of the system is
currently under construction and will bring
service directly to Miami International
Airport.
The third system that operates solely in
the City of Miami is the Metromover (Figure
2.2) automated people mover (APM),
circulator, This 20—station APM system
runs elevated throughout Miami's downtown
and also serves the Omni and Brickell
neighborhoods. It serves as the downtown
core's transit circulator and operates fare
free. Numerous connections are provided
with Metrorail and local bus services in
downtown Miami.
Figure 2.2: Selected
Sites Vicinity
General
Character of the
Station Area
History, Cultural Heritage, and
Identity
The study area is within the Southeast
Overtown/Park West Community
Redevelopment Agency's (SEOPW CRA)
area. The quarter —mile area surrounding
the Overtown station (Figure 2.3) is located
within the historic boundaries of Overtown,
which is one of the oldest residential
and commercial areas of Miami. The
neighborhood was originally settled by
African Americans late in the 19th century
(1890s). During the time of its settlement,
African Americans were not allowed to live in
the other developing areas of Miami and as
a result, settled just beyond the developed
city boundary, which was near to the many
citrus and other fruit farms that originally
bordered Miami. Literally located on the
"other side of the tracks" of Henry Flagler's
Florida East Coast (FEC) railroad, the name
Overtown was derived from neighborhood
residents' references on how they traveled
"over town to this neighborhood.
Once a vibrant community, time and the
impacts of haphazard city -building policies
and growth of the past have taken their
toll on Overtown. Like many historically
African American and predominant minority
neighborhoods in cities across the United
States, the construction of the region's
major highway system, and resulting "urban
renewal' in the late 1950s and 1960s
disproportionately impacted Overtown.
Significant population displacements and
dislocations occurred as a part of the
accommodation of 1-95 and 1-395 in the
area. The construction of these freeways
fractured once vibrant African American
neighborhoods and left disconnected
urban places in their wake. Geographically
fractured, Overtown experienced substantial
A Model Housing Transportation Pan I NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY•I1ORN AND ASSOCIATES
Figure 2.3: Overtown Station Area
•
1C1 Lin,
— •7..
Historic Overtown+
tyflc Theatre
0 it
Legend
Met•oRax
aMel.Rai s;airo,
NMI MeltAta Jrr
0 11.4W- lo:et Sta4on
Ated i! 4 mile ladeus.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
12
NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES I A Mode, Housing Transportation Plan
disinvestmer a and degradation. Today, few
significant structures of historic or cultural
significance remain in the neighborhood,
Historically, jobs available to Overtown
residents were a combination of those
associated with Henry Flagler's Florida East
Coast (FEC) Railroad Company, the tourist
service industry. and agriculture, As the
community matured (prior to its decline),
African Americans enjoyed increasing
success within the neighborhood and
became business owners and leaders of
important community institutions. They
created a viable economic community
by building important community and
commercial institutions such as schools,
homes, churches, hotels, apartments,
theaters (including the Lyric Theatre, which
still stands and is in active use), night clubs,
and neighborhood markets. N W 2nd
Avenue, which is at the core of the study
area, was referred to as Avenue G in the
1920s and 1930s, It was a center for
entertainment, retail stores, and hotels,
Community Characters Urban
Form, and Quality
Overtown lies just northwest of Miami's
downtown, divided by 1-95, 1-396, and the
FEC railroad. A once vibrant community,
until the late 1950s, Overtown was filled with
a mixture of shops, community institutions,
and residences The neighborhood was
traditionally comprised of buildings in the
one- to three-story height range of a mixture
of architectural characters and building
types. Many of the best examples of the
community's historic architecture have long
been demolished; however, a few significant
structures remain. The restored historic Lyric
Theatre is among the few architecturally -
significant buildings that remain in the
neighborhood. Other culturally significant
landmarks in Overtown include the Greater
Bethel AME Church, Mt. Zion Baptist
Church, and St. Agnes Episcopal Church.
Other places of interest in the neighborhood
include the reconstructed Dorsey House,
the Old Black Police Precinct Museum, the
Overtown Public Library (its exterior walls
are adorned with paintings by Overtown's
famous urban expressionist painter, Purvis
Young), and L. E. Thomas Building,
Today, the study area as well as much of
Overtown is in transition. Countless vacant
lots, empty buildings, and parking lots are
located throughout the area. By virtue of its
convenient location to Miami's downtown,
major transportation facilities and services,
and relatively easy access to Miami Beach,
there is renewed development interest in the
area. At the height of the real estate market
in 2007 and 2008, several substantial
development projects were planned within
easy walking distance of the Metrorail
station at Overtown. Little development has
occurred in the neighborhood since the start
of the current national economic recession.
What change did occur in the neighborhood
amid the national economic slowdown
included significant renovation to the Lyric
Theatre and a major public development
project called Overtown Transit Village. In
A Model Housing Transportation Plan I NEWPORT PARTNERS ( KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES
13
Neighborhood
Development Zone
(NDZ)
OvertOwn is or, _ :.lilt Iv _ar,L rr•; n.:
Devek pment ;'�_�r�•.
City (rf Minh CJ1- I :, 1 . er
in need of assistance wth their efforts
t,:)v.ai:1 Thr? rrfr�ntrhr ;
of Nt)1_ is pail of the ' :a, c'l t�di�a
I ,1
d�w� lol�ne�n1. 1':':9tun i Zt tin Tvh•
Rork.; ,+0 0aS ;tal,s!r-
t
O.eAew* TtsnoN t11111 I- rill igbeni l
the last decade, some businesses have
returned to NW 2nd Avenue; however,
work remains to revitalize the community's
historic commercial street. The SEOPW
CRA continues to expend time, energy, and
money to encourage and support quality
initiatives that enhance the neighborhood's
quality, livability, and safety.
A challenge to any future neighborhood
enhancement and change will be
overcoming significant physical barriers —
many of which were those that sent the
neighborhood into decline in the 1960s.
Overtown and parts of the study area
are defined by substantial transportation
features such as 1-95 (elevated), 1-395
(elevated), Metrorail and Metromover
alignments (both elevated), and the
Florida East Coast Railroad. Each of
these transportation facilities are physical
barriers for neighborhood connectivity and
continuity, but also are visually obtrusive
and psychologically difficult to cross.
Numerous local plans have proposed
extensive modifications to several of these
transportation facilities to lessen their
neighborhood impact; however, without
substantial funding, they are unlikely to be
pursued.
Many of the neighborhood's streets
terminate at major transportation facilities
or are at least partially blocked (visually or
physically) by them. Corresponding with
the decline in the neighborhood, many
of the area's streets have incomplete
tree canopies and sidewalks that are in
need of repair. Where redevelopment
has occurred, streetscapes have been
redesigned and are of good quality;
however, there are countless blocks that
will need investment in streetscapes in the
future. As redevelopment continues, special
attention will need to be paid to creating
safe, walkable, and attractive streetscapes
throughout the neighborhood.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
14
NEWPORT PARTNERS I KINLLEY-MOAN AND ASSOCIATES I A Model Housing Transportation Plan
General
Circulation and
Transportation
Character
Pedestrian Access and Safety
The local (noninterstate and highway) street
network throughout Overtown is largely
pedestrian scale. Most kcal streets are two
to four lanes, have low posted speeds, and
allow on -street parking. A preponderance
of stop signs at intersections and striped
crosswalks make traversing streets relatively
safe and easy.
From a landscape perspective, the tree
canopy on many streets is fractured and
incomplete; however, where redevelopment
has occurred, new trees have been
planted and are steadily restoring portions
of the urban tree canopy. While the
street network is largely walkable from a
facilities perspective, numerous barriers to
waikability exist. Among the most notable
of these are concern for people's safety
and security, a lack of nearby and desirable
destinations, and physical barriers such as
major transportation facilities. Based on
limited data available from the city's police
department, crime of many different types
appears to be a continuing issue throughout
Overtown. Creating a truly walkable (and
bikeable) network of streets within Overtown
will require physical improvements to
streets, but also a change in the developed
realm to make the neighborhood safer, more
secure, and more desirable for walking.
Bicycle Access
Currently, there are few bicycle facilities
within the City of Miami and no contiguous
dedicated lane facilities (bike lanes, cycle
tracks, or off-street trails) in the study area.
Miami is working to implement extensive
bicycle facility recommendations from the
Miami Bicycle Master Plan (September
2009), which will create an extensive
network of bicycle facilities citywide. With
Overtown's largely interconnected network
and many wide streets, there are many
opportunities (as identified in the Miami
Bicycle Master Plan) for bike facilities in
Overtown.
Transit Facilities and Services
Overtown is served by numerous bus
services, the Overtown station, and
stations along the Metromover system at
Government Center and Arena/State Plaza.
The Overtown station receives Metrorail
service at the following intervals:
• 10-minute headways during weekday rush
hours
• 15-minute headways at midday
• 30-minute headways approximately
between 7:30 p.m, and system closure
• Weekend service at 30-minute headways
The Metrorail system runs in a generally
north/south direction, arcing toward the
west at its northern and southern termini.
ww 1r Street '$.Nwi&•
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
A;model -lousing Transportation Plan I NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES
15
i
Figure 2.4 shows the organization of
Metrorail and its stations. Many of the
Metrorail stations outside Miami's downtown
core provide park -and -ride facilities to
increase the reach of the transit system. The
total parking provided by the 16 stations
with park -and -ride facilities is more than
9,300 parking spaces, May 2011 data
provided by Miami -Dade County indicates
that the parking is approximately 67 percent
occupied on average weekdays.
Generally, heavy rail transit stations have
walk sheds of approximately '/4 to '/2 mile,
depending on the quality of the urban
environment surrounding the transit station.
The bike shed for similar systems tends to
be in the 2 to 3 mile range, more dependent
on the presence of suitable bicycle routes
and facilities to potential transit users. The
provision of interconnected bus service to
stations further increases the reach of the
fixed guideway transit lines, dependent on
the quality of the service and its geographic
orientation.
Ur _pan conditions vary throughout the
Metrorail system. Within the downtown area,
pedestrian conditions are generally good
and the walk shed of Metrorail is likely to
be in the 'A to 1/2 mile range. Extending into
transitional and suburban areas of the city
and county, conditions for many different
reasons are less supportive of walking and
the walk shed for stations is likely to be in
the 1/4 mile or less range. Bicycle facilities
throughout the metropolitan area are limited
and it is unlikely that a significant portion of
the transit system's ridership is generated
from people bicycling to transit.
The Overtown station is situated in the
relative middle of the Metrorail line and
has good access to stations on north and
south legs of the line. In fiscal year 2010,
the Metrorail system experienced more than
17 million boardings. This was a decrease
of approximately 1.5 percent from fiscal
year 2009, when the system experienced
more than 18.2 million boardings. Based
on data provided by Miami -Dade County,
the Overtown station experienced 36,283
boardings in May 2011. The Overtown
station is the 14th busiest station in the
Metrorail system. The Government Center
station, one station to the south, is the
busiest station and experienced more
than 270,000 boardings in May 2011. The
following summarizes average weekday,
weekend, and holiday boardings at the
Overtown station for May 2011:
• Weekday (average): 1,540 boardings
• Saturday (average): 434 boardings
• Sunday (average): 374 boardings
• Memorial Day: 330 boardings
Based on monthly origin -destination
data provided by Miami -Dade County for
Metrorail, many of the trips to and from
the station appear to originate at the
Dadeland South and North stations. Nearly
30 percent of all weekday trips destined
for the Overtown station originate at the
Dadeland South and North stations, where
there is considerable parking available to
transit patrons. More than 3,300 parking
spaces are available at the two Dadeland
stations. Data provided from Miami -Dade
County indicated that the park -and -ride lots
at the Dadeland stations were more than 90
percent full during average weekdays.
Figure 2.4: Metrorail System
Schematic
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
16
-11111.111111111111.11111.111
NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEV-MORN AND ASSOCIATES I A Model Housing Transportaton Plan
The Overtown station also seems to have
some link to the adjacent Government
Center Station and Civic Center Station,
Approximately 1,500 daily trips destined
for the Overtown station originate at the
Government Center and Civic Center
stations, both of which are served by
Metromover services.
The Metromover system operates its inner
and outer loops (Omni and Brickell) from
5:00 a,m, to midnight seven days a week.
Trains arrive at frequent intervals, but not
based on specific headways. Bus service
(Metrobus) to the Overtown Metrorail station
vanes by line. Metrobus service to the
station includes Routes 2, 7, 95 Golden
Glades, 95 Dade-Broward Express, 211
Overtown Circulator, anc the 243 Seaport
Connection.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
A Mcoel Housing 1lansportation Plan i NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-FWRN AND ASSOCIATES
17
Introduction to
Mixed -Income
Transit -Oriented
Development
Guide
Part of the process for preparing and
developing the Plan was to gather
information on the Overtown station area.
Much of the general information was
gathered through the charrette workshop
held in September 2010 and by reviewing
the 2009 SEOPW Redevelopment Plan (City
of Miami) and the City's Consolidated Plan.
In addition, the team followed the newly
released Mixed -Income Transit -Oriented
Development (MITOD) Action Guide to test
its guidance in developing a plan. Experts
at HUD added additional questions to
help clarify and address the housing and
transportation needs of the community.
Summary of the Mixed -Income
Transit -Oriented Development
Guide
The MITOD Action Guide developed by the
Center for Transit -Oriented Development
is intended to be a "how to" tool for local
planners and other stakeholders to follow
to create successful communities around
planned transit stations. Using the MITOD
Action Guide involves adhering to the
following three-part process (shown in
Figure 3.1):
• Existing Conditions
• MITOD Opportunities
• MITOD Strategies
The process calls for the collection of a
wide range of data including demographic,
real estate, development capacity, and
Gathering and Analyzing the Data
v Figure 3.1: MITOD Process
Initial MITOD Existing MI TOD
Perceptions Conditions A. Opportunities
neighborhood stability. The planning
process used for the purpose of this project
parallels the one outlined in the MITOD
Guide.
How Mixed -Income Transit -
Oriented Development was
Applied in this Study
The Action Guide serves as a template
for asking the questions needed to create
the Plan. Part of the process in answering
the questions was to review the ease of
gathering MITOD required information
and then assessing the usefulness of this
information in developing a plan In addition
to the resources outlined above, much
of the information was gathered from the
National TOD Database (NTD) and the U.S.
Census Bureau (Census).
Existing
Conditions
Analysis
Station Area Population
Characteristics
Overtown is within a Neighborhood
Development Zone (NDZ) with just over
10,000 residents living in 3,646 households
with a median household income of
$13,211. The population is 75 percent
African American and 20 percent Hispanic.
The bounds of the Overtown community are
more expansive than the studied Overtown
station area. The station area itself (1/4 mile
radius surrounding the station) has relatively
MIHOD
Strategies
Chapter 3
Develop your
MITOD Plan
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
' Available at http://www.mitod.org
2 Available at http://wwwtoddata.cnt.org
3 www.census.gov
A Model Housing Transportation Plan NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY•HORN AND ASSOCIATES
19
few housing units and the median income
is slightly lower than the overall community,
As a result of the many vacant properties
within the station area, its overall population
density (people per square mile) is low (less
than 2,000 people per square mile). Several
blocks within the station area are higher
density individually. Figure 3.2 shows study
area population density by block group,
Based on data from the National TOD
Database (NTD), the station area's median
income is approximately $11,300. This
is less than 30 percent of the median
income for the Miami transit region. The
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) defines an area whose
median income is Tess than 30 percent of
area median income to be extremely low
income. Table 3.1 shows a distribution
of household income in the station area
from data provided by the National TOD
Database. Figure 3,3 shows household
income in the study area. As shown in the
Table 3.1: Household Income Distribution
Source: National TOD Database
1
r
ENE
Pot col Poi011
Atxtscttn:� Iroarw4totl
rlroflwlc S Ihjr FVOnAt'bCh i't,i
SJS,000 S1SCOD wild
539,94.
figure, a significant portion of the station
area, area between Metrorail and 1-95/395
has incomes between $10,000 and
$15,000.
it ; s Inc.lr
More than 80 percent of households within
the Overtown station area earn less than
$25,000 annually. The specific blocks
identified for this project, show a median
household income between $10,000 and
$15,000, which Is consistent with the NTD
median income figure of $11,300.
To determine the percentage of household
income spent on housing, data from the
Center for Neighborhood Technology's
Housing & Transportation Affordability
Index was used,' This index tool uses color
gradations on interactive maps to depict
the cost of housing relative to household
income. Figure 3.4 shows the affordability
index for the station area.
Pecreai
howetwid
mnmr of
S J.U0See mute
Housing is considered affordable when
housing costs are no more than 30
percent of household income. Areas
shaded in yellow represent locations
where the housing is less than 30 percent
of household income. Areas shaded in
turquoise are those whose housing costs
exceed the 30 percent threshold. Areas
shaded in white contain no housing
units. Based on the data from the Center
for Neighborhood Technology, with the
exception of northern and southern
shores of Biscayne Bay, the housing near
and within the study area appears to be
affordable by definition.
The Overtown station area is composed
largely of single, nonfamily households.
Based on data from the NTD, nearly
70 percent of all households are single,
nonfamily (Table 3,2), Interestingly, the most
dense areas have the lowest occupancy
rate, as shown in Figure 3.5, The blocks to
the west of the station have moderate unit
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
' Center for Neighboring Technology's
Housing & Affordability Index measures
the true affordability of housing based on
its location. It does this by measuring the
transportation costs associated with a
housing unit.
20
PARTNERS l KIMLEY--HORN AND ASSOCIATES i A Model Housing Transportation Plan
AIII•c,. 5- ••••
•,, , ',- 'it At
t >
_-_ _ ...... • ,... • • z. • ,
*
• .:
'e,..,. . .._• •
s
,.. - _ f,
V •
1-•:' 4 ..., •
• i
- n-
•
w 1,,m• . • ;...
\
• - 4 ' • IL
• 4.--' •
• IN .- •
•
1
• ' - '
•
°
" •
•
• •
a
• •
...:
cL *
.'z• ,. v rli,,, rA
1 , • "
•
•
•
..if,,S atti,,••
• I. r--..i.''..
• ,:,,.._.— .
• , ' i.',e,
7
6
•
a Mi......
r1
• r 4••• ,
: ' „AREA
,4c - : .7.
••
ill_
x W 8 ...-..
••
••
IP..
• •
'`••'..7.--,, *iiilli.
..,
t •....
•"" 1, ,'IP' 3v„_'• '
...., . ,.. ,..;
'' • we • 0
4.411••11 6.6
4.—•11 • kd • ...4 11.4-N4110
51
hr r1•15.
Figure 3.2: Population Density by Block Group
Figure 3.3: Median Household Income by Block Group
Legend
O moo
*A•Atiew
O TAM aR4a1 9a' al
..1,410Rait
• • d
2 .,Ttr. t.W4:rtre5.ft,if
Al• r
30C.
"AZer St* k tCXJ
"a04 g nos,
- 11
Lrgiend
O hirlarerl-i.r.
Inn futaai+...
• PAntr.Roil
rAAroltaill
q.E d
a ?Lunar! ..1** ...13:01, Arta Caere
.A.te ion I IS NT
Eao. a. II I° CO) J 15 COD
t-taIL 1X
-
_ 41.101-rsell
A.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
fr
Housing Transpertation Ran 1 NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES 2 1
occupancy and the Northeast corner of the
station area has the highest occupancy.
Distribution of Ages
The median age in the station area is
approximately 34 years old. Slightly more
than 30 percent of the households in the
study area are between the ages of 35 and
54. Approximately 30 percent are aged 65
and over. An age distribution summary for
the study area is shown in Table 3,3.
Composition of Local Employment
Participants at the workshop noted that
the major employment areas within the
City of Miami were the Port of Miami,
the Miami International Airport, the Civic
Center area, downtown, and the Medical
Center. Metrorail connects directly or has
interconnecting bus or rapid transit services
to each of these areas.
Figure 3.4: Affordability Index
Source: Center for Neighborhood Technology H+T
Affordability Index.
Change in Population and
Housing Characteristics Over
Time
Prior to the late 1950s and early 1960s,
Overtown's population was significantly
higher and the neighborhood was
arguably more stable and successful. The
construction of 1-95, 1-395, Metrorail, and
urban renewal that followed decimated the
neighborhood. The area's housing stock
was significantly affected and the once
contiguous neighborhood was divided by
transportation infrastructure, helping send
it into rapid decline. When asked about
current changes, officials from the SEOPW
CRA noted that two large residential
developments within the neighborhood
have resulted in the housing of a diverse
and educated group of newcomers and a
significant number of students.
Existing Housing
Percentage Share of Multi- and
Single -Family Housing Units
According to the city's latest Consolidated
Plan, there are about 4,800 housing units in
the Overtown NDZ. More than 80 percent
of these housing units are multifamily units.
Thirty-three percent of the multifamily unit
buildings/complexes contain 10 to 19 units
and 37 percent contain 20 or more units.
Table 3.4 summarizes housing unit types
within the study area.
Mix of Housing Unit Size
Data on housing unit size was not readily
available. Understanding the area's context
and the significant percentage of single
person households, the units are likely to be
comparatively (to the region) small.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
22
- -1111
NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES A tvlooel Housing Transportation Pan
2
O
2
1400
1200
1000
800
650
400
200
0
5rn8Ie, Non-fam:t�
Marred Non -faintly
E
'1
25
20
% of > of ti of of 44 of
tt•hokis Ixww•trvtll hcHlu4w71ds hortehu:lt, fta..finld.
sect 1'.' w tetiArl x .S withaecA 3S *Orion SS •Atorr46S
34 4.4 0.9 .*Id moo
Table 3.2: Household Composition Table 3.3: Age Distribution
Source: National TOD Database
Source: National TOD Database
e s ie i 1 al ,�„r �▪ T" e i _ Legend
.< 1 l
♦ w • • + L. • , ___ MY.t astir...
• s. a .. E lc i !, • r►. :
♦ 'fi...1-115'•4 a .11
• ` .a ! McVitoil _tint"
♦ 14(4",P ill
• `- ♦ r. it ■ ■
47,2• F;
• `M 41h .' ♦ .1 I • `CMS let it:F .aE 4 Arta hu?►r
I J:ve .a$M r-414Y.J tit (' _u. a-�iv {wr7..s
i t��, r * 1�u1 • «•tpk:
•
ir+I ; • ?- t
•
•
III ■
A. f
•
e-
. . 4 r "• F..w f'd S1
•
!{���►tom '=-;
•
•
Figure 3.5: Housing Unit Occupancy by Block Group
• hF *Il Sf,�. A
1 •
-- .-• `
• t- '
r,L�"N yr ... • .
• 1
• t;
• 1.��:
1.icONM! 1:In : 7
54.
1Ct4J ect
A
Submitted into the nufsic�
record in connection with
item # ll on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
A Motiel Housing Transportation Plan I NEWPORT PARTNERS I KiMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES
23
Percentage Share of Renters anti
Homeowners
The city's 2009-2013 Consolidated Plan
noted that about 87 percent of residents in
the Overtown NDZ are classified as renters.
!`ae of the ffrrusino Story
Approximately 25 percent of the total
housing units in the Overtown NDZ were
built before 1949.
Quality and Condition of the
Hot) s rig Stock
According to Miami's latest Consolidated
Plan, the condition of housing within the
Overtown neighborhood is poor. The Plan
stated that the Overtown community is in a
deteriorated state with substandard housing
and many abandoned and boarded -up
buildings. Furthermore, the Plan found that
within the City of Miami, most of the housing
stock is more than 30 years old. The Plan
further stated that more than half of Miami -
Dade County's oldest housing stock is
located within Miami.
Subsidized Affordable Housing Near
the Tr: r. it Reaicn
HUD's Multifamily Assistance and Section
8 Contracts Database was used to identify
subsidized affordable housing within the
transit region. Two properties were noted
to be in the Overtown neighborhood.
According to the database, the Section 8
contract for a property that contained 30
units had expired in April 2011. The contract
for another property containing 70 units is
set to expire in July 2013.
To get a better understanding on the
amount of subsidized housing near transit
in the City of Miami, the team referenced
Unit Type
Overtown
CY, of Total
tilnllc F:utiil;
885
1-unit, detached
429
48.5%
1-unit, attached
456
51.5%
2 units
90
2.3%
3 or 4 units
189
4.8%
5 to 9 units
905
23.1%
10 to 19 units
1,279
32.6%
20 or more
1,459
37.2%
Table 3.4: Summary of Housing Unit Types
Source: National TOD Database
a report from the American Association
of Retired Persons Public Policy Institute.
This report —Preserving Affordability and
Access in Livable Communities: Subsidized
Housing Opportunities Near Transit and
the 50 + Population — provided the quantity
of affordable units near transit and noted
the number of units under contract set
to expire by 2014, The City of Miami has
approximately 6,800 units within a half -mile
of a rail station or frequent bus service.
Approximately 5,700 of these units will
expire by 2014. Within the station area, 75
percent of the census blocks have up to
7.5 percent of households receiving public
assistance as shown in Figure 3,6,
Populations Served by the
Subsidized Housing
Understanding the demographics of the
station area, it is very likely that the primary
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item #1lon 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
24 NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES
I A Model Housing Transportation Pan
population group served by subsidized
housing is African American,
Likelihood that Units will Remain
Affordable
There is concern that currently affordable
units will remain as such once Section 8
subsidies expire, This was discussed by City
and CRA officials at the planning workshop
conducted for this study. Given the proximity
to downtown Miami and transportation
services, efforts will continue to be needed
to maintain an adequate volume of
affordable housing in the area.
Change in Cost of Housing Over
Time
Officials from the SEOPW CRA were asked
to describe how the cost of housing in
Overtown has changed over time. The
officials noted that while overall real estate
values are generally declining in Miami,
Overtown has experienced unheard of
escalation of property values in some areas.
On a square foot basis, land the SEOPW
CRA is currently looking to acquire has
nearly tripled in price in recent years.
Comparison of the Cost of Housing
to the Restr-" rr
Officials from the SEOPW CRA were asked
to describe how the cost of housing in
Overtown compares to the rest of the
region. Officials noted that there is still a
significant difference between the price
of real estate in Overtown and the rest
of Miami; however, the gap is beginning
to close. The officials indicated that the
difference in real estate values between
Overtown and the rest of Miami is closer
than it has been in many years.
Prevalence of Foreclosures In the
Area
The rate of foreclosure in Overtown is one
in every 1,876 properties. This is according
to Realtytrac, a real estate web site that
tracks foreclosure, auction, bank -owned,
for -sale -by -owner, and resale properties
across the United States, In terms of total
Figure 3.0: Percent of Households Receiving Public Assistance by Block Group
acV
Or
4 `rr
•
units in foreclosure, this is much less than
what most other communities in Miami
have experienced. Foreclosure data on the
web site is tracked for each zip code. Each
of the zip codes immediately surrounding
Overtown has a higher rate of foreclosures.
The City of Miami has a foreclosure rate of
one in every 346 properties.
Populations Not Served by the
i rrent Hous"".
•
Miami's Consolidated Plan noted that there
are no neighborhoods within the City of
Miami where an average household can
afford to purchase a single-family home
without becoming cost burdened. Similarly,
the average household cannot afford to
purchase a condominium in the city without
becoming cost burdened, This is due to
a combination of price appreciation, high
maintenance fees, and a population with a
low median household income.
The Consolidated Plan also provided
some insight into the city's rental market
Legtnd
9rtT!.{c'.!r s}�fM
M01�: ARC
w4tRaa
it e s Omni, IA, Atenr +err: 1:• 1/.1
G ac 400 6.: 3 Ft •
A\
f , I
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
A Model Housing Transportation Plan
11.111.111111M11.11311E
1 NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES
and in terms of affordability and noted that
it has challenges The high rate of condo
conversions over the past few years has
reduced the supply of rental units. Combined
with an increase in demand for rental units
due to the economic downturn, this has led
to the city experiencing a very low rental
market vacancy rate, It appears
that much of the low-income population
is not being served by the current housing
stock.
Mixed Income
Transit -Oriented
Development
Opportunities
Analysis
Preservation Opportunities
There are not many preservation
opportunities within the station area given
that most of the housing was razed during
urban renewal. Culturally significant and
community important buildings have been
retained and many are undergoing or have
already undergone some form of renovation.
Development Site Capacity
Based on numerous urban design studies
prepared for the City of Miami as well as
assessments completed by speculative
and proposing developers within the study
area, there appears to be considerable
development capacity. Setting aside the
existing development market and the
area's ability to absorb more residential and
commercial development, Miami 21 provides
considerable capacity for development
within the study area, The City's zoning code
includes several different mixed -use and mid -
to high -density zoning classifications within
the study area. With or without bonuses
and other special conditions, existing zoning
provides the ability for thousands of dwelling
units and parking spaces and nonresidential
square footage to be developed within the
study area.
Demonstrating the relatively favorable
market conditions in the study area, The
Gatehouse Companies submitted a detailed
development proposal for Blocks 25 and
36 in 2007 and have continued to pursue
development plans for these same blocks
since that time. The proposal submitted by
The Gatehouse Companies contained the
following development totals:
• Residential rental units (affordable): 200 to
220 units
• Residential for sale units (workforce targeted):
65 to 75 units
• Parking garage (public): 300 spaces
• Retail space: 40,000 to 45,000 square feet
(including a 30,000 to 35,000 grocery store)
The Gatehouse Companies development
proposal was a public -private venture,
working with the SEOPW CRP., Their
proposal indicated that the specific type and
tenants to inhabit the retail component of the
development would be determined by the
market, but that there had been considerable
interest from specific tenants at the time of
their development plan submittal.
Recent and Planned
Development in the Area
There have been two large housing projects
in the area and another 2,000 housing units
are planned within the area. Numerous
buildings along the NW 3rd Avenue corridor
have received facade improvements and
the street was designated "The Historic
Overtown Business Corridor."
Predominant Land Uses in the
Transit District
The majority of the land uses in the study
area are currently residential uses, Some
small-scale commercial exists along NW 2nd
Avenue and NW 3rd Avenue and Overtown
Transit Village contains government and
institutional office space. Zoning varies
throughout the area, but generally allows for
significant density and a mixture of uses.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
r
26
NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES I A Model Housng Transpor;aton Ran
3
Quantity and Character of
Vacant Land or Underutilized
Land within the Transit District
There are a number of vacant parcels within
the study area. The majority of the parcels
are entirely vacant— buildings and access
infrastructure removed —with security fencing
surrounding them to discourage illegal and
undesirable activities, uses, and trespassing.
A few of the vacant parcels, particularly those
along NW 2nd Avenue, are being temporarily
used for parking for area organizations
through an agreement with the underlying
property owners.
The vacancy of some properties within the
station area is a result of the relatively recent
demolition of the Miami arena, which is now
located at the waterfront. Many of the now
vacant properties served as parking Tots for
the arena and several were the site of the
arena itself.
Compatibility of Existing
Policies and Mixed Income
Transit -Oriented Development
Miami recently adopted Miami 21, a landmark
form -based zoning code for the city. This
ordinance promotes TOD and the creation
of mixed -income communities through
the encouragement of a mixture of uses
in projects, appropriate density, context
sensitivity, appropriate parking ratios, high
quality design, and the creation of quality
streetscapes and public open spaces.
Presence of Inclusionary Zoning
Miami's zoning ordinance (Miami 21) is not
explicitly inclusionary; however, it offers
developers many incentives to provide
affordable housing within development
projects. The incentives identified in the zoning
ordinance include height and density increases
for providing affordable housing. They also
include reduction in parking requirements. By
providing the maximum amount of affordable
housing. in some zoning classifications,
density and height are permitted to be
increased by as much as 100 percent of by -
right density and height.
Protections for Current Renters
Miami uses Community Development Block
Grant (CDBG) funds to maintain affordable
multifamily rental housing.
Designated Redevelopment
Area
With some of the highest concentrations
of poverty, segregation, low educational
attainment, homelessness, and HIV/AIDS
in the nation, the city of Miami is one of the
most difficult redevelopment areas in the
country. Given the scope and severity of these
problems, a concentrated neighborhood level
approach to community development was
developed by the city. As such, the 2004-
2009 Consolidated Plan identified a two -
tiered approach to community development.
Under this system, the city targets distressed
neighborhoods within the city that are in most
need of assistance. These areas are referred
to as NDZs. Overtown is one of eight NDZs.
The NDZ concept is a comprehensive long-
term approach to neighborhood revitalization
that focuses on community assets as a means
of stimulating market driven redevelopment.
It calls for sustained, multiyear commitments
from local governments, the private sector,
foundations, and community -based
organizations. The following is a list of the
principles that guide the NDZ model:
• Community -based leadership and collaboration
• Community decision support infrastructure
• An inventory of built, economic, and social
assets
• A neighborhood plan/vision for the future
• Sustainable development plan
Adding to being within an NDZ, Overtown also
is covered by a CRA, as described in previous
sections.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
A Model Housing Transportation Ran I NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-HORN AND A
Station Area Zoning
The station area (1/4 mile radius) is within
the City of Miami and is subject to the
city's newly adopted zoning code, Miami
21. Zoning limitations vary throughout the
study area and the city's specific zoning
classifications for land within the study
area is shown in Figure 3,7, The city's new
zoning code is a largely form -based code
and provides flexibility in nearly all aspects of
built form, Figure 3.8 shows the permitting
processes for development, which
includes various processes for applicants
to use to request and receive approval for
exceptions to the zoning code. The bonus
and exception process is not uncommon
to development proposals and has been
successfully undertaken by many approved
and completed deuelopment projects. The
following summarizes zoning requirements
for Blocks 25 and 36:
• Existing Zoning: T6-24
• Height
-- By Right Maximur Height (without
bonuses). 24 stoles
- Bonus Height: 24 stones
Total Maxsrnum Heght. 48 stories
• Density
- Ay Right Maximum Density: 150 dwe!rng
,•,,n;,_.._g units/acre
- Tate
acre
• Parking Requirements
Resrderiial ' 5 spares pe-
visitor space per 10 units
Retail: 3 spaces per 1,000 square tee
Affordable I--r:s ng 50% r , fc
affcrdab:e . a
Transit: 30% for transit aolacency
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. 'Thompson
City Clerk
-lgure 3.7: Arwa Zontnp
Source: Miami 21 4tlas, City of Miami. November 2C)Q9
Legend
I. Ir las.hew
ait MA I/•111N
M WOW^ N.M..
w 4fYMCIAJM.
11 a I.r HlwtaK
al Win' AMWAY..
n r ,,.mow ew/
ill♦ wa-lnwc11
N I MAC IMIIMMOM
- Ma, OWN. cos
r a oc .•w
lw .a/+rk
▪ «. IOW
▪ ry t. IC 11M0 •,_
- l. cue ranviva.
r o.a crc wsmncw .a r.wm
tt..Cf9
YtIR
T
NEWPORT PARTNERS I KlML£Y-HORN ANC ASSOCIATES I A model HOL sing Transportat'en Plan
Mixed Income
Transit -Oriented
Development
Strategies
Analysis
Stability of Station Area
Population
The station area's population appears to be
increasing. Recent development projects
and continued efforts by private developers
and local organizations have brought new
housing units and people to the area.
Surrounding neighborhoods also appear to
have slowly rising populations and relatively
low rates of foreclosure.
Potential Post -Transit Housing
Market Conditions
The Overtown station already exists, but is
underutilized. The overall housing market
is slow in South Florida, but given the
appreciation of land values in the station
area, mechanisms need to be put in place
to retain the affordability of units. Some
market appreciation could be beneficial
for the community and attract more
professionals who work in the government
and downtown and can build ridership at
the station.
Site Classification
With a relatively stable population, a
regionally stagnant real estate market, and
significant capacity for future development,
the MITOD Guide classifies this station area
as one whose primary strategies are to
promote affordable housing development
Fir 3.1Ik Mod 21 Penmen Pioo ss figinteal
Source Mom: 2 r
r Yalka':t
Ey fist, r.
LjIOIt
iYll t
N ar'1'll
I JaiI rn
nee tsobrrl e'
I.e. 1 Le
F'O1M n;
:ro sT+t'
1'11F11
'Unite,I
Dora or
L1 u,bi
F.usrllratoi
baQ
F. awe n p
UeF et-e^rt
V /nn..o
:Me were
CoRly tie or
F le wr^ how -tp
-mi!
and reduce the cost of housing production.
The tools to implement these strategies
are identified at the end of this report. The
Overtown station area is best described as
an urban neighborhood by Reconnecting
America and CTOD's Station Area Planning:
How to Make Great Transit -Oriented Places.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
RO Otero NI Crpevtr vt
CRC Coc+Sewetl Re.i+w Cairo, Res
PZOR r/onlno Zoo-%»,d Arse ehD:1y
Pei Rol coda n
rM nw
UHstm�t
C eea,,cate
1ih w1'1 .1rtrmp
tc e-es
\,P '21
A Made) Housing Transportation Plan I NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-HORN ANO ASSOCIATES
_ -- - 29
NW 9th
it
rm,AthSt
NVV 'r, St
MN 61h St
Conceptual
Station Area
Plan
Completed in 2004, the Southeast
Overtown/Park West (SEOPW) Community
Development Plan outlines a long-
term strategy for the enhancement of
portions of the Overtown and Park West
neighborhoods. This document covers
a much broader geographic area and
subject matter than that included in
this planning effort. The document was
prepared consistent with the Community
Redevelopment Act of 1969 for eliminating
and preventing slum or blight conditions
by rehabilitation, conservation or
redevelopment, or a combination thereof.
The community development plan provides
14 mule r3dur ; jrrounding the
UVc own Staton
ANL
--4.1541)1
NV% t1ihSI
nr^^J 1Gth
c)
rn
.,4 ka av
<
ki
1-395
p i
Y a'�
Modeling the Station Area Plan
useful information for station area planning
efforts as a part of this study.
The study area for this project is shown
in Figure 4.1 and is a'/a mile radius
surrounding the Overtown station. This
figure also shows the envisioned built
form, street network, and network of
interconnected open spaces envisioned for
the station area.
The general station area plan is intended
to include a mixture of uses, architectural
characters of buildings, parks, open spaces,
enhanced streetscapes, new pedestrian and
bicycle facilities, and a mixture of incomes
and housing types. The station area plan
shown is only one possible buildout plan for
the area and is intended to be illustrative,
not prescriptive. Based on other, more
detailed studies that have been performed,
Chapter 4
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
1'riscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
m
Q'
ri
7-11
=Ht-'
-s-
Bicentennial
Park
American
Airlines
Arena
T
Legend
nInrill DEvelopment
Existing Buildings
Institutional Buildings
1/4-mile Radius
Lyrie Theatre
O:<<rtown Transit Village
— Overtown Station
Modei Housing Transportation Plan 1 NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES
31
to achieve the vision generally illustrated in
Figure 4.1 will require a long list of actions
and partnership from many different
agencies and organizations. A number
of the guiding principles of the SEOPW
Community Development Plan are relevant
to this study, relating specifically to a desire
of the community to have a mixed income
neighborhood. Guiding principles relating to
mixed income include:
• The neighborhood has to retain access
to affordable housing even as the
neighborhood becomes more desirable to
households with greater means
• There must be variety in housing options
• Restore a sense of community and unify the
area culturally
The station area plan shown in Figure 4.1
shows a conceptual framework of buildings,
parks and open spaces, and street
modifications. It suggests that development
densities should be consistent with Miami
21 zoning, which essentially encourages the
largest buildings and tallest development
heights east of NW 2nd Avenue along the
Metrorail and extending from the Metrorail
to Biscayne Bay. West of NW 2nd Avenue,
built form and building height should
conform more closely to the scale of the
existing neighborhood and should remain
within previously adopted plan limits —
especially the Historic Overtown Folklife
Village plan
The overall plan suggests that bicycle and
pedestrian enhancements should be made
to streets throughout the area and that
greenways and trails from adopted local
plans should be accommodated, Public
open spaces of different configurations
and uses should be provided at locations
throughout the area and connected with one
another through high -quality streetscapes
and special green streets corridors, such
as are planned along portions of NW 9th
Street, NW 2nd Avenue, NW 3rd Avenue,
NW 8th Street, and NW 11th Street. The
following sections briefly describe open
space, and vehicular, pedestrian, and
bicycle elements of the station area plan.
Open Space
There are a number of parks and enhanced
public spaces (including heritage trails,
greenways, and streetscapes) within the
station area. These include the FEC and
Metrorail greenways, the Black Heritage
Trail, and green streets along several street
corridors. In addition, new and enhanced
open spaces are shown at several locations,
taking advantage of underutilized land and
irregularly shaped properties. Figure 4.2
shows the open spaoe plan for the
station area.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
Figure 4.2: Perks, Open Spat s, and
Trod*, and Green Streets
1-395
4` 4
ill 1th t to,
riv I S VI,
91h St D �Y
Nw royst-, r--, --.-, .... ..
NW 611) St •
Z
Z z
Bicentennial
Paris
.••. e• • .—, 11, .r., r•, Tee1 e.,.N..,,1..1�
r, ,._, ^1 .--. — , �...s e-v,-. --'
American
Airlines
Arena
I .egend
Green Street
aim Greenway
Black heritage Trail
Park
1/4-mile Radius
Lyric Theatre
Overtown Transit Village
Overtown Station
l
32
NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-MORN AND ASSOCIATES I A tv:odcd Housing Transportation Pian
Vehicular Access
Within the station area, there are a number
of long-term plans for enhancements to
the vehicular transportation network, These
include modifications to streets to improve
vehicular circulation as wet as pedestrian,
bicycle, and transit accommodation.
Figure 4.3 shows the city -envisioned street
network for the station 51ea. This figure
shows several significant changes to the
existing street network including:
• Streetscape enhancements along all street
corridors where redevelopment has not
already occurred
• Reconfiguration of NW 1st Avenue to
improve pedestrian and vehicular conditions
related to the FEC Railroad
• New street between NW 10th Street and
NW 8th Street
• Possible reconfiguration of a section of
1-395 (possible "trench configuration of
the roadway" to reduce its impact on the
neighborhood)
Nun) 4.3: Street Network
w
a
NW Afth St
1
tiV 10th St
lir 9th St
N Sth St
NW 7tts*
NWethSt
• Possible reorganization of existing one-way
streets in the study area and downtown
Miami (not shown)
1
11
I
1
1
Bicentennial
Park
American.
Ar nes
Arena
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
1 /4-mile Radius
0 street
Overtown Station
A Model Housng Transportation Plan I NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEV-HORN AND ASSOCIATES 33
Pedestrian and Bicycle Access
Currently, most streets within the study area
have sidewalks. As mentioned in previous
sections of this document, despite the
presence of sidewalks, the street network
is largely not conducive to walking and
bicycling. Figure 4.4 shows proposed
enhancements to the pedestrian and bicycle
network (including greenways) based on
adopted local plans and studies as well
as planning a part of this study. Notable
facilities include:
• Extension of the 9th Street safe walk to
Biscayne Bay through a green street project
• FEC greenway
• Metrorail greenway
• Bicycle facilities on many streets within the
station area
Site -Specific
Plans
The planning and coordination efforts of
the Model Housing Transportation Plan
project culminated in the development of
site -specific master plans, To help identify
the specific sites to develop the site -
specific plans, extensive coordination was
undertaken with City of Miami staff and
stakeholders identified by city staff. At the
core of the site selection process was a
two-day planning workshop, facilitated in
Miarni. At this workshop, local stakeholders
had the opportunity to provide input and
guidance on their respective visions for
redevelopment locations and opportunity
sites, affordable and market rate housing,
nonresidential uses, and public open
spaces proximate to transit in the selected
area. The planning workshop brought
together individuals with backgrounds in
development, government, housing,
Figure 4.4: Maio/ Bicycle, and Pedaatslan Facilities
Source Miami Bicycle Master Plan Sept. 2009 and City or Miami proposed
bicycle .network
m
a
N
4
1
A
- m '
E ¢
vow /1/i aa� El'1385 g V
�1tit
�(, 1010 1 __-- _— ., _ --- ---1,.. i .
Bicentennial
III �A 1 ; 7 ; r Park
NA t Inh sq 1 • e 1 li 1 3
�rr pyy� q, 1 1 d • 1
tip Pwis w�wi.1„ %I• ww--t.p-----.-1 --
I1r i f ! r
. pp, { ` 1 f R t Arena
NW4,st 1 j 1 4 1 '
/1 1 N'
NW 1st Ave
1 1 9
NW eth St/ % 1 R I a n
•
'82 1 'it 1 k i lji. 11 I t t', ,‘ ?4t1)-
finance, and transportation from local,
regional, and federal agencies and groups.
During the workshop, the stakeholders
and planning team worked cooperatively
to review and evaluate selected sites within
the city and discuss key considerations
of site selection. Items such as area
demographics, travel patterns, local plans,
development activity, transportation access,
locations of services, and employment all
were discussed. The general outline of the
workshop was the following:
• Introductions and stakeholder representation
• Orientation to the sites under consideration
• Site selection discussion —strengths,
weaknesses, opportunities, and threats
• Selection of the site
• Establishment of site priorities, needs,
desires, and vision
• Site concept development
• Model plan development
• Review of model plan concepts
• Comments and discussion
Lagand
On Street Blue Route
Greenway
1/4-mile Radius
Lyric Theatre
Overtown Transit Village
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
34
NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-MORN AND ASSOCIATES
A Model Housing Transportation Plan
3
During site selection and evaluation
discussions, stakeholders noted that
the role of the city's two fixed guideway
transit systems was important to consider.
Metromover is downtown Miami's circulator
service, It is fare free; however, it operates
only within downtown. It connects to
Metrorail at a number of locations. Metrorail
is the region's heavy rail transit service.
It extends from downtown and the city
into neighboring Miami -Dade County.
A major extension of Metrorail is under
construction and will extend its reach
to Miami International Airport, a major
employment center of the region. Other
major employment areas in the city were
noted as the Port of Miami, Civic Center
area, and Medical Center area.
Approaching site selection, stakeholders
offered specific ideas on the ways in which
the supply of affordable housing near transit
in Miami could, understanding market
conditions and practical limitations, be
increased. Workshop participants were
J.
Workshop: September 23 and 24, 2010
Stake:hak1er::. in luding de. elr.ipers housing community Jc . c 1 .: '.• l
tr.n$poltatlr,ri partricis and t,?gk)ti31 and natL nrll r}?dire seriti't' i
IIJD and fTA. met nn F_;eptc•rmlaer 23 .ind -t 201C, In Mon!
,
a conceptual Model Housing Transportation Plan The participants at this
Planning V orkshop were instrurnontal in helping to pic:,,do a Inca) persi eclite
on the area as it related to helping de -tine the site elm°tiori criteria noaiot
employment centers for lov:-Incomo residents and intpnitant aspects et then
city S transit nehvr)rk. In addition tt,w1 group I'rigl lliniited polir_ies used b$ t9`te+
City Jt Miami tc encourage affordable housing wi lde hnrluinn trjriii innovat .,
Ideas fcr prnject financing. Tt1 . kylloat:irly neept!k attended the v,•�rkshril,
• R'aitou+ (r' t{;,l:nr*- Nevui)ofl i'aitt'+Ots
• 1301 ty4, lr :� •,�i
• ROIray, I uIs - 11 S f3ripl 01 HI ID
• I.44 ,-'t oh'vi,�",y
• fr3'o,4.i:- ,'•, l'..r .r--ht�'ri� 1_-�•�i: 't��1•
• :i. ri'r-.�,•,� : —r .r r..f,"i'`�r i-': If il' t L):;
•
• Cvu1 Fiut..1•I ri l; I .t.:;'1
• Ma•iraan. M< r a ri-
• NtrAtt:t.Kelh—tr
• rallrr+sot, Pars—Nli 7
• Pvtr., I•rtuntce.- 1•
• Oi adt., f:44" t.i i iuLt flilcwrti iv 7._,rwl
• Sapone Phil -Newport Partners
• S ,'.V id—
• :,rta,i oI M:Lik
r
•
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
A Modal Housing Transportal4un Plan 1 NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES
35
highly supportive of the sites selected
for the development of the site -specific
plans. A group of conceptual site selection
considerations were developed during the
workshop to aid in selection of the sites
within the station area These considerations
(arid a summary of comments related to the
selected sites) included
• Site control. Site is owned by the SEOPW
CRA who has issued requests for proposals
for development of affordable housing.
• Access to rail and circulation. Site
is adjacent to the Overtown station and
Overtown Transit Village.
• Community need. Site is located in an
area where affordable housing has been
successful and is needed.
• Population served. Appropriate
demographics exist within the area to
support the creation of affordable housing.
• Neighborhood compatibility. Surrounding
neighborhood is of a compatible context.
• Connection to employment. Metrorail
and local bus services connect the area
conveniently to major employment centers.
• Appropriate zoning. Zoning provides
significant advantages to the development of
affordable housing.
• Local government buy -in. City, county,
and local organizations are supportive of the
proposed developrnent type.
• Connection to adjacent
neighborhoods. Neighborhood
demographics are supportive of affordable
housing,
• Addresses community priorities.
Economic development is a priority within
the area.
• Flexibility toward parking ratios. Zoning
code provides reductions for affordable
housing, which improves development
economics.
The site -specific master plans that were
developed show specific physical forms and
organization of uses. They illustrate elements
important to creating diverse, attractive,
functional, and desirable urban places.
Master Site Plan
Site -specific plans were developed for
two blocks within the 1 mile station area
of the Overtown station. Understanding
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
Thi; vrei, of the project in in a generally .Southwest
dire, Lion
36
NENPORT PARTNERS 1 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES I A Model Housing Tra, sportation Plan
site conditions and local context, two site
layouts were prepared. One layout focused
on the maximum allowable building height
based on existing zoning and requirements
or` iviiami 21, the city's comprehensive
zoning ordinance, Miami 21 provides
significant advantages to residential and
mixed -use developments considering
inclusionary affordable housing. It provides
bonus density and height as well as reduced
parking ratios depending upon the level of
affordable housing proposed.
The second plan put more emphasis on
assumed anecdotal market conditions
and existing neighborhood context. It also
benefited from flexibility contained in Miami
21 to reduce parking ratios and increase
density; however, it did not maximize size
density and height, Each plan presents a
planning -level application of good urban
design principles and maximizes affordable
housing opportunities on -site.
A plan maximizing affordable housing
opportunities within the limits of Miami
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
Table 4.1: Master Plan Summary
Description
Maximum
Block 25
Zoning Plan Market
Block 36 Block 25
Plan
Block 36
Maximum
Heig ht
Market Rate
48 stories
312 units
48 stories 6 stories
Residential Units
312 units None
8 stories
None
Affordable
287 units
230 units 212 units
202 units
Total
Retail
Residential
599 units
None
603 spaces
542 units 212 units
Commercial Uses
40,000 square feet None
Parking
555 spaces 180 spaces
202 units
40,000 square feet
1/2 spaces
Retail
None
84 spaces None
84 spaces
Source: Kimrey-Hom and Associates, Inc., 2010
Figure 4.6: Madurt Plait
This view of the project is in a generally Southwest
direction
A Mode, Housing Transportation Pan NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES
37
21 is shown in Figure 4.5. For simplicity,
this plan is referred to throughout this
document as the Maximum Plan. The
second plan, reflecting a general market
reality as presented by a local developer
who participated in the planning workshop,
is shown in Figure 4,6. For simplicity, this
plan is referred to throughout this document
as the market plan. Each plan reflects the
following:
• Community goals and objectives
• Local social and physical context
• Local regulatory context
• Transportation services and access
• General market conditions
Master Plan Totals
Based on site constraints and opportunities
as well as adopted zoning for the area,
Table 4.1 shows a summary of development
totals for the market and zoning maximum
plans,
rw tt.T: Leaking Northestt
This view of the maximum plan, is in a generally
Northeast direction toward 1-395
Focus Site Maximum Nan
Shown in Figures 4.7 through 4.9, the
maximum plan assumes that the maximum
density or height is achieved for each of
the two blocks under the current T6-24
zoning. The maximum plan assumes that
each block —Block 25 (north block) and
Block 36—is developed in a single phase.
Significant concepts incorporated into the
Maximum Plan include:
• Significant density and height
• Significant proportion of affordable housing
• Mixture of uses
• Structured shared parking
• Off-street loading
• Rooftop (of base building) arnenities
• Extensive network of plazas and high -quality
streetscapes
• Active transparent building facades at the
ground floor
The building on each block is comprised of
a base unit and tower unit, Each base unit
contains a parking core surrounded by a
residential or commercial wrap. Each tower
unit is comprised of residential units and
amenities. Key plan elements include:
• Density. The plan creates considerable
density proximate to the Overtown station.
• Appropriate setbacks. Buildings have
adequate setbacks frorn adjacent public
streets, Metrorail, and existing uses.
• Street network integration. The site
master plan shows the development
enhancing the 9th Street Pedestrian Mall
and creating a new north/south street
between NW 1st Avenue and NW 2nd
Avenue.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
. qv re .
This view of the maximum plan is in a generally
Southeast direction toward downtown
s
38
NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES A faodel Housirm Tr.-,n:-:-:ortator Plan
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
New Plaza
New Public Street
Tower Budding
Metrorail
Vehicular Access
9th Street
Pedestrian Mall
Tower Building
Vehicular Access
Amenity Deck
Residential/
Commercial Wrap
Overtown Transit
Village
Overtown
Metrorail Station
Figure 4.9: Maximum
Master Plan
This figure shows a roof
level plan view of Blocks 25
and 36.
A Mode+ Hcusin{t Transportation Plan NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY•HORN AND ASSOCIATES
39
AND
• Pedestrian -friendly streets. The master
plan shows the creation of high -quality
streetscapes along all site frontages.
• Open space integration. The master
plan shows an expansion and enhancement
of existing open spaces and plazas.
• Building amenities. Residential amenities
such as private outdoor common spaces
are planned for the roof level of the base unit
of each building.
• Appropriate parking treatment
and supply. Parking is fully screened
by residential or commercial uses or an
architectural treatment. An appropriate
supply of parking is provided in the base
of each building with access from the
development created street.
• Loading accommodation. All major
commercial loading and service functions
are accommodated internally.
The following sections and figures briefly
describe the ground floor and upper floor
plans for the maximum plan.
Gcner-^ :—..L (- --�+ Floor Plan
Figure 4.10 shows the ground floor plan of
Blocks 25 and 36. The following are key
elements for each block:
• Dedicated parking, loading, and drop-off
access from the new street
• No new driveways along NW 8th and 10th
Streets or NW 1st and 2nd Avenues
• Ground -level retail along NW 8th Street
• First floor (stoop level) residential uses along
NW 2nd Avenue, NW 9th Street Pedestrian
Mall, NW 10th Street, and the new street
• Suitably articulated pedestrian -scale building
facades along all public streets
• Enhanced streetscapes along all
development frontages
• Consistent street walls along all public
streets
• Opportunity for up to 40,000-square-foot
retail space on Block 36
• Expanded and enhanced plazas and
streetscapes
• Building courtyards
Generalized Upper Floor Plan
Figure 4.11 shows the upper floor plan
of Blocks 25 and 36. The upper floors
of the buildings are proposed to include
structured parking, service spaces,
residential amenities. and residential units.
The following are key elements of the plan
for each block:
• Structured parking (generally floors 2
through 6 or 7)
• Residential amenities above structured
parking
• Dedicated second and third floor entries to
retail space in Block 36
• Green roof systems
• Suitably articulated building facades (and
setbacks) to manage building mass and
height along public frontages
• Reduction of structure bulk above the 4th
floor through tapering
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
40
t•
NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES i A Model Housing Tiansportat on Ptan
Figure 4.10: Ground Floor Plan
(Maximum Plan)
Figure 4.11: Upper Floor Plan
(Maximum Plan)
Nor loth Street
I
ro (Parking.
above)
ha r,
D �
Residential
•
Ityit Residential
•w4
r• 444,
LTheetre Refap
(
*� 1A014A016"2"44
N N Bth Street
r
1,110rfelPv—,1 4-4
' f
f me y
14,--4---71 � �
it; * i f1tN►tr
� .' i.
L1111/11111111
r' Lynn ..
1 , Theatre ..
3'
#_' ..
— Nrw sth street
,,
Plaza
New Public Street
Tower Base
Residential
Drop-off Area
Parking/Service
Entrance
Residential
Wrap Bas
9th Street
Pedestrian
Loading/
Service Area
Parking/Service
Entrance/Ramp
Parallel Parking
Enhanced
Streetscape
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
Green Roof
(over residential)
Residential Tower
Amenity Deck
(over parking)
Green Roof
(over residential)
Residential
Tower
Amenity Deck
(over parking)
A Model.
Trareporkdion.Flan 1 NEWPORT PARTNSN6l K&.SIFNORN AND ABISOCIATES
41
Vehicular Circulation and Parking
Systems
The plan includes a new street that is
planned to nun parallel to the Metrorail track
structure along with consolidated vehicular
access along the same street. No new
driveways or points of vehicular access are
proposed along existing public streets. Key
elements of proposed vehicular circulation
and parking systems for Blocks 25 and 36
are shown in Figure 4.12 and summarized
below:
Vehicular Circulation
• Construction of a new north/south street
• Consolidation of vehicular access to the new
street for development
Figure 4.12: Vehicular
Circulation and Parking
• Provision of consolidated commercial
loading and service areas in each block
• Maintenance of existing two-way street
pattern throughout the area
• Provision of residential drop-off areas for
each primary residential entrance along the
new street
Parking Systems
• Structured parking in the interior of each
block
• Parallel parking along public street frontages
where cross -sectional width is adequate
• Some sharing of parking between residential,
commercial, and entertainment uses (Lyric
Theatre)
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
Parallel Parking
(typical)
Residential
Drop-off
Consolidated
Driveway
Access
New Public Street
Residential
Drop-off
Consolidated
Driveway
MIIIMEMMIIMMOOMMIMIL
42 NEWPORT PARTNERS l KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES i A Model Housing Trarsportaticn Plan
Pedestrian and Bicycle Circulation
and Accommodation
The maximum plan provides space for the
planned Overtown and FEC Greenway
connections. The plan also proposes
significant enhancements to the existing
9th Street pedestrian mall. Sidewalks
and pedestrian -friendly streetscapes
are proposed along the public faces of
Blocks 25 and 36. Key elements of the
proposed pedestrian and bicycle circulation
and accommodation plans for Blocks
25 and 36 are shown in Figure 4.13 and
summarized as follows:
Figure 4.13: Pedestrian and
Bicycle Accommodation
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
• Continuous sidewalks
• Intersection and midblock bulb -outs
• Improvement to streetscapes along all
public frontage of Blocks 25 and 36
• Improvement to the 9th Street pedestrian
mall
• Construction of a raised pedestrian
crossing between the future Overtown
Greenway/FEC Greenway and the 9th
Street pedestrian mall
• Integration of Lyric Plaza into the 9th Street
pedestrian mall
Comer Plaza
Sidewalk
Improved
9th Street
Pedestrian Mall
Raised
Pedestnan
Crossing
f ync Plaza
Bulb -out
(typical)
H.+using Transportation Pear. 1 NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES
43
Ground Level Open Space Elements
Figure 4.14 shows key open space
elements associated with the proposed
plan. The plan proposes improved
streetscapes along all public street
frontages, an improvement to the 9th
Street pedestrian mall, plazas at significant
building entries and potential gathering
areas, and a linear green space running
parallel to the Metrorail track structure. The
plan also proposes a priority pedestrian
treatment —raised pedestrian crosswalk with
special paving —at the intersection of the
9th Street pedestrian mall and the proposed
new public street. This treatment is intended
to strengthen the connection between the
9th Street pedestrian mall and the Overtown
Greenway and proposed FEC Greenway.
The following describes key open space
elements:
• Pedestrian -focused streetscape
enhancements to all public street frontages
• Curb extensions at public street
intersections and development driveways
• Entry plazas for significant building
entrances
• Enhancement to the 9th Street pedestrian
mall
• Priority pedestrian treatment between the
9th Street pedestrian mall and the Overtown
Greenway
• Creation of a plaza for Lyric Theatre to
connect its entrance to the 9th Street
pedestrian mall and provide a gathering
space for the theatre
• Linear green space along the Metrorail track
structure
Upper Floor Open Space Elements
Figure 4.15 shows key upper floor open
space elements associated with the
proposed plan. The plan shows private
building amenities for residents. The plan
shows upper floor amenity areas for both
buildings, If possible, green roof elements
should be incorporated into buildings.
Green roofs have demonstrated their ability
to manage stormwater, reduce climate -
control related energy costs for buildings,
and reduce negative heat island effects. The
Figure 4.16: reiriktg UL.Lilnr Mot laneeing,
Looking Soutkeent Note NW Ind Arenno/NW 1 aeh
Street letireeotieo
following describes upper floor open space
and green building elements:
• Private (owner/renter) amenity areas for each
building
• Green roof systems on some buildings
The plan proposes considerable density
on Blocks 25 and 36 as shown in Figure
4.15. The zoning maximum plan shows
two towers rising up to 48 stories. The plan
shows tapering of building mass as height
increases, The plan also shows setbacks
from the Lyric Theatre. The buildings on
each block contain a vertical mix of uses —
residential, parking, community space, and
parking.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
44
NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES i A Model Housing Transportation Plan
Figure 4.14: Ground Level
Open Space Plan
1
Figure 4.16: Upper Floor
Open Space Elements
Mr^.' 10th Street
•
Lyric
There
=lJ
M
y
•
•
'
NW 8th Street
NW 1 Ott" Street
Comer bulb -out
(typical)
Entry plaza
Linear green
space
Enhanced
streetscape
Central plaza
Special paving
Street tree
(tyPicai)
Lyric Plaza
Mid -block
bulb -out (typical)
Linear open
space
Enhanced
streetscape (typ)
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
Upper level
outdoor
amenity area
Green roof
(typical)
Upper level
outdoor
amenity area
A Model Housing Transportation Plan I NEWPORT PARTNERS KIMLEV-HORN AND ASSOCIATES 45
Organization
Figures 4.17 through 4.20 show a cross -
sectional organization of the plan. Along
public street and open space frontages
(exterior of the block) at the ground floor are
active community, residential, or commercial
uses. Above the ground floor are residential
uses, again facing public streets and rights -
of -way. At the core of each block are the
parking and loading areas. The parking for
each building is fully screened from public
view using a residential or commercial
space or an architectural treatment, There
are a number of reasons that development
on each block was organized in the
aforementioned manner. The combination of
desire for efficiency, physical configuration
of the two blocks, and zoning requirements,
among other things, contributed to the
proposed layout.
Miami 21 requires that all facades of
parking structures fronting public streets
are screened with active uses or a suitable
architectural treatment. Blocks 25 and 36
•
•
are relatively large (wide/long), Optimally,
residential buildings have a relatively narrow
fioorplate to provide the opportunity for
adequate natural light and ventilation into
each residential unit, Placing parking at the
core of the block made more efficient use of
the block depth.
:it NW8tt'Sirtiol�_ • • • •
t—n# w
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
Note: See Figures
4.18-4.20
•
•
•
.•••
46
NEWPORT
PARTNERS I KIMLEV-MORN A/40 ASSOCIATES
A Mock.' Housing Transportation PIn-
. * 'i ib III: ' tG tsc 1q
48 Stories
Residential Tower
8 Stories
Residential Base
ii,
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10 Z_
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
Existing NW 2nd Proposed Development New Street Metrorall
Use Avenue Structure
Figure 4.18: Cross Section (A) along the 9th Street Pedestrian Mall, Looking North
% u a I. ask>n i.
ilk* ;i i •St1 i iii-
A
V
48 Stories
Residential Tower
8 Stones
Parking &
Residential
Stories
Commsscial
Existing NW 2nd Lyric Theatre
Use Avenue
Figure 4.19: Cross Section (B) along the NW 8th Street, Looking North
hi8 Stones
Parking &
Residential
2 Stones
Commercial;
NW Bth
Street
48 Stories
Residential
Tower
New Street
Metrorall
Structure
48 Stories
4
Stories
_ ALAI*111 _ems► ►
ors. sh
Proposed Development
9th Street
Pedestrian Mall
Figure 4.20: Cross Section (C) along the Metrorall Alignment, Looking West
Proposed Development
NW 10th
Street
A Model Housing Transportation Plan I NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES
tt
47
Figure 4.21: Zoning Maximum Plan Massing, Looking Northeast
from NW 2nd Avenue/NW 8th Street Intersection
Farling Structure
Residential Use
Commercial Use
- Potential Green Root
Nu\ \cstc.Sheik-
Figure 4.23: Zoning Maximum Plan Massing, Looking South
from NW 10th Street
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
Figure 4.22: Zoning Maximum Plan Massing, Looking East from
4 --
New SCae�
Figure 4.24: Zoning Maximum Plan Massing, Looking West
NW 2nd Avenue from the Metrorail
48
NE WPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-NORM AND ASSOCIATES I A Modat Housing Transportation Plan
The plan proposes considerable height, as
shown in Figures 4.21 through 4.24. The
plan uses an approximately eight -story
base building at the maximum lot coverage
permissible by zoning in combination with a
slender 40-story tower to minimize the effect
of the development's height.
The combination of a reduction in size of
the tower floorplate and additional setback
above the 8th floor seeks to manage the
bulk of the development relative to the
surrounding neighborhood. To manage
the development's height, the location of
the towers also is staggered, They are
positioned to minimize any wall effect
attributed to their height and scale. Figures
4.20 through 4.23 diagrammatically illustrate
proposed mass and scale of the zoning
maximum plan from different view angles.
Focus Site Market Plan
Shown in Figures 4.25 through 4,27,
the market plan is less dense than the
maximum plan. Densities proposed for the
market plan are within the by -right limits
Figure 4.182 looking Nottbsitat
of the existing T6-24 zoning. The market
plan assumes that each block —Block 25
(north block) and Block 36—is developed
in a single phase. Significant concepts
incorporated into the market plan include;
• Density and height similar to areas west of
the study area
• No market rate housing units
• Mixture of uses
• Structured shared parking
• Off-street loading
• Amenities for residential units in a courtyard
or on the roof
• Enhancernent of the 9th Street pedestrian
mall
• Active transparent building facades at the
ground floor
Each building contains a parking core
surrounded by a residential or commercial
wrap. Key plan elements include:
• Neighborhood scale, The market plan
has maximurn building heights of between
six and eight stories.
•
•
•
•
•
Less costly structures. The market plan
is comprised of low-rise structures, which
are generally less costly to construct than
high rises
High degree of lot coverage. Overall lot
coverage is higher in this scenario due to
lower building heights.
Street network integration. The master
plan shows an enhancement of the 9th
Street pedestrian mall and a new north/
south street between NW 1st Avenue and
NW 2nd Avenue.
Pedestrian -friendly streets. The master
plan shows the creation of high -quality
streetscapes along all site frontages.
Open space integration. The master
plan shows an expansion and enhancement
of existing open spaces and plazas.
Private outdoor
common spaces are planned for the root or
ground level of each building.
Appropriate parking treatment
and supply. Parking is fully screened
by residential or commercial uses or an
architectural treatment, An appropriate
supply of parking is provided in each
building.
Figure 4.21 Leo.* Mtllillest
A Mode! Heusinc; i,ansportation Plan j NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-BORN AND ASSOCIATES
49
Packing structure
Residential Wrap
Courtyard
Amenity Area
Lyric Plaza
Lyric Theatre
*r
NW loth Street
<
11;:416
I !� a.cMagni.) l'-‘1P
•
104
r rl y
� r.
�+
New Public Street
Residential Building
Metrorail
Vehicular Access
9th Street
Pedestrian Mali
Residential Building
Vehicular Access
Amenity Deck
Residential/
Commercial Wrap
Overtcwn Transit
Village
Overtown
Metrorail Station
Figure 4.27: Market
Master Plan
This figure shows a roof
level plan view of Blocks 25
and 36.
50
1111111
NEWPORT PARTNERS KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES A Model Housing Trar.sportaton Plan
Ground Floor and Upper Floor Plans
The ground floor and upper floor plan is
similar in layout (not density or intensity) to
the zoning maximum plan in the previous
section with regard to the following:
• Generalized ground floor plan
• Generalized upper floor plan
• Vehicular circulation and parking
• Pedestrian and bicycle circulation and
accommodation
• Ground level open space elements
• Upper floor open space elements
Figure 4.28 shows the generalized ground
floor plan of Blocks 25 and 36. Figure 4,29
shows the upper floor plan of Blocks 25
and 36. Key elements of proposed vehicular
circulation and parking systems, open
space systems, and pedestrian and bicycle
systems are shown in the aforementioned
figures.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. '1 I1ompson
City Clerk
A Model Housing Transportation Pan 1 NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES
51
Figure 4.28: Ground Floor Plan
(Market Plan)
Figure 4.29: Upper Floor Plan
(Market Plan)
Plaza
New Public Street
Service
Area t of
(parking
above J Parking/Service
t �d�, Entrance
ance
4 S
�� w� t +' "Ca Courtyard
6. "IResidenbai • M me.. 4 -
Residential
hi +A 'r !• Drop-off Area
Resentia
WrapidRase
f
1 r t yi
e re
(14 It
+ `10414 Residential
I
LYric
Theatre
Retai
Street
ferflI
`
9th Street
Pedestrian Mal
Loading/
Service Area
Parking/Service
Entrance/Ramp
Parallel Parking
Enhanced
Streetscape
Green Roof
(over residential)
Parking
Structure
Green Roof
(over residential)
Amenity Deck
(over parking)
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
52
NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLET-MORN AND ASSOCIATES 1 A t•.!odel Housing Transportation Plan
Where the market and maximum plans
primarily differ is with regard to the buildings
themselves. The density of the two plans is
dramatically different. Each of the two plans
generally organizes the development in the
same manner with ground floor community,
residential, or commercial uses and upper
Floor residential uses. The market plan
configures parking at the core of each block
along with loading areas. Parking for each
building is fully screened from public view.
The market plan ;proposes considerably
less density and height than the maximum
zoning plan. The mass and scale of the
market plan are shown in Figures 4.30
through 4.34. The market plan is four to
eight stories and relies on significant lot
coverage to achieve its density. The mass of
the buildings in the market plan is managed
through variation in height of the buildings
and setbacks at property lines.
Similar to the maximum zoning plan, the
market plan incorporates parking structures
in the interior of each block, screened by
residential and commercial uses. Figures
4,30 through 4.34 diagrammatically illustrate
proposed mass and scale of the zoning
maximum plan from different view angles.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
A Model Housing Transportation Pan I NEWPORT PARTNERS j KIMLEY-WORN AND ASSOCIATES
53
Figure 4.31: Market Plan Massing, Looking Northwest from the Figure 4.32: Market Plan Massing, Looking Northeast from NW
2nd Avenue/NW 8th Street Intersection
proposed New Street/NW 8th Street Intersection
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
Patting 51»rture
r--
1 j Residential Use
Potential Green Root
co
.e?
Figure 4.33: Market Plan Massing, Looking Southeast from NW Figure 4.34: Market Plan Massing, Looking Southwest from the
2nd Avenue/NW 10th Street Intersection proposed New Street/NW 10th Street Intersection
MUMMERY PARTNERS I ICINILEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES p A Model Housing /tensor:de an
Summarizing Potential Strategies and Tools
Potential
Strategies
After gathering and analyzing necessary
information, the .mixed -Income Transit -
Oriented Development (MITOD) Action
Guide suggests choosing among the
following nine strategies:
1. Prevent displacement via regulation
2. Preserve transit-ori3nted development
(TOD)-appropriate affordable housing
3. Increase affordable homeownership
opportunities
4. Promote affordable housing development
5. Preserve affordable housing development
opportunities
6. Reduce the cost of housing production
7. Leverage rnarket-rate development
8. Promote transit amongst low-income
populations
9. Site public facility investments in station area.
The most important strategies for inner city
sites with underutilized stations include:
• Preserve existing project -based Section 8
and other subsidized housing
• Prevent displacement via regulation
• Reduce the cost of developing mixed -
income housing
Preserve Existing Project -
based Section 8 and Other
Subsidized Housing
The strategies for increasing the supply of
affordable housing fall under one of two
categories —preservation or development.
While preservation can include the
preservation of land for future development
of affordable housing near proposed
transit stations, it is more applicable to the
preservation of privately -owned, subsidized
affordable rental housing. These projects
have received subsidies in the form of loans
with below -market interest rates, grants, or
even rent payments. In return, the owner of
the property agrees to restrict rent to eligible
low-income households and charge them
a reduced rent. However, the agreements
for property owners to restrict occupancy to
eligible low-income households are of limited
duration. In fact, a recent study noted that a
significant amount of subsidized affordable
housing units near transit are set to expire
before the end of 2014.1
Owners of these units are likely to convert
the units to higher -rent unassisted housing
or to nonresidential use in appreciating
markets (i.e., those near frequently used
transit stations). For instance, a property
owner might decide it's more profitable to
convert the now expired affordable units
to condominiums and sell them at prices
above those that current low-income
tenants can afford. The process of eviction,
conversion, and sale happens at a faster
rate than these units can be replaced
through development. Thus, a significant
shortage of affordable housing units near
transit can take place in a relatively short
period of time.
There are tactics that local government can
employ to reduce the effect of condominium
conversions and better manage the supply
of affordable housing near transit, These
include restricting the conditions under
which affordable units can be converted
to condos, imposing permit limits, or
administering fees on converted units,
Meanwhile, state and local governments
can maintain restrictions on the occupancy
of affordable units through the use of
low-income housing tax credit (UHTC)
allocations.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
' Preserving Affordability and Access in
Livable Communities: Subsidized Housing
Opportunities Near Transit and the 50+
Population, 2009
y Modei Housing Transportation Plan NEWPORT PARTNERS I KiMLEY--HORN AND ASSOCIATES
55
Prevent Displacement
Through Regulation
Local government also can preserve the
supply of affordable housing near transit
through regulation. Rent controls, transfer
taxes, or a first right of refusal law all can
be employed to prevent displacement.
Rent controls might be used to limit the
amount that rent can be increased on
existing tenants, or such a tool could
be used to stipulate the maximum rent
that can be charged to new tenants.
Rent controls help market rents remain
affordable to a larger portion of income
levels.
Transfer taxes are levied when the sale of
property occurs and a change of title takes
place, These taxes help to deter rampant
property speculation and short-term real
estate investment. In an appreciating real
estate market, the proceeds from the tax
can be used to fund affordable housing
that will be necessary in light of rising
property values.
K w cona'truc:Uon In Overtown
Right of first refusal laws allow nonprofit
affordable housing developers the first
opportunity to purchase multifamily
buildings put up for sale. In addition, right
of first refusal laws might also allow tenants
the first right to purchase their building
through a limited equity cooperative.
Reduce the Cost of
Developing Mixed -Income
Housing
One of the main challenges to expanding
the supply of affordable housing near
transit is the high cost of land surrounding
transit stations. What can communities do
to lift this burden? Local governments and
organizations can partner with non -and
for -profit developers alike to create joint
public/private development opportunities
and utilize tools to reduce and manage
development costs to reduce the cost of
units delivered to the market with the intent
that they will be made affordable.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item #11on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
56
NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES I A Mode, Housing Transportation Pitvi
Tools to
Implement
Strategies
The following is a summary of tools that can
be used to help communities increase the
supply of affordable housing near transit
through development.
Options for Financing
Affordable Housing Near
Transit -Oriented Development
There are several options for financing
affordable housing near transit that local
governments can use. Funds received from
HUD under the HOME and the Community
Development Block Grant program can be
used for a range of activities that could help
support affordable housing near transit.
Depending on the legislation in place, local
governments also can set aside funds
received from tax increment financing to
fund affordable housing. Linkage fees,
Vacant property winds Itlb. Study Area
transfer taxes, in -lieu fees, and condo
conversion fees are all financing options that
can be implemented by local governments
as well. In addition, low-income housing tax
credits, tax-exempt bonds, FHA mortgage
insurance prograrns, and the affordable
housing programs of the individual Federal
Home Loan Banks are other financing
options as well.
Public Land Disposition Plan
In situations where developable land near
transit is owned by the local government,
the creation of a public land disposition
plan can ensure that these sites are
home to affordable housing units. Local
governments who control land near transit
can sell the land at discounted prices to
help facilitate the development of affordable
units. They also can lease the land to
developers and stipulate that affordable
housing be included to some degree on
the site. The sale of the land also can be
conducted competitively with the inclusion
of affordable housing on the site being the
main criterion of evaluation, While not part
of a formal public land disposition plan, the
City of Miami is able to provide city -owned
land to developers at no cost, in return for
developing affordable housing on the site.
Land Banking Funds
Land banking funds serve to acquire, hold,
and facilitate development on undeveloped
property. The land is then transferred to
a developer with the agreement that a
certain number of affordable housing be
included on the property. While being held
by a land bank, a property might have title
encumbrances cleared, tax liens forgiven,
or environmental contamination remediated.
The land bank also can work to assemble
small individual parcels into a larger and
more usable single parcel of land.
Parking Regulations
The impact of high land costs near transit
can be minimized by relaxing the amount
of parking required for residential projects
in locations proximate to transit, However,
NOM
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 11 on 10-24-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
4 Model 4o•iising Transportation Plan I NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES
57
resident demand may still lead developers to
over -supply parking for their project. Thus,
municipalities can enact parking maximums
to guard against this, Another option is to
employ a shared parking approach. With
shared parking, an apartment building might
share parking space with an office building.
Residents of the apartment building use
the parking space during the evenings and
nights and on the weekends when demand
for parking from the office building is at a
minimum.
Fast Track Permitting
Projects that increase the supply of
affordable housing near transit can be
expedited through the permitting and
approval process. This reduces the amount
of time that land has to be 'held' during
the development process and can reduce
financing costs. Projects can be expedited
by prioritizing their review, establishing
set time periods for decisions on their
applications, or even assigning an individual
within local government to be responsible
for expediting the project through the review
and approval process. The City of Miami
currently uses this tool for projects that are
certified by the Department of Community
Development.
Fee Waivers
Reducing or eliminating impact fees for
projects providing affordable housing near
transit can provide a meaningful reduction
to the overall project cost. Cities can
choose to use a sliding scale where projects
near transit that contain more affordable
housing units can have their impact fees
reduced to a greater extent. Where budgets
are tight, local governments can choose
to use impact fee deferrals. In this way,
the payment is delayed until later in the
development process. The City of Miami
is currently utilizing this tool. The Zoning
Department will defer payment on impact
fees for projects that are certified by the
Department of Community Development.
Inclusionary Zoning
Another way to encourage the development
of affordable housing near transit would be
through inclusionary zoning. This is a tool
that works best in a housing market that is
expecting a considerable amount of new
supply. Inclusionary zoning requires private
developers to include a certain number of
affordable housing units in projects that are
otherwise market rate developments. The
percentage of units required to be affordable
and the level of affordability for these units
can be determined at the discretion of
the municipality. In some places where
inclusionary zoning is used, developers
can meet the requirement for affordable
units at an offsite location. This would
undermine the effort of trying to locate more
affordable housing units within projects
being developed near transit. Thus, it's
recommended that the city stipulate that the
affordable units be included onsite.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # \1 on jt-dL4-11
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
58
NEWPOHT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES I A fvlodel Housing Transportation 'iar
Linkage Fees
Linkage fees can be used to help reduce
the cost of developing affordable housing
near transit. For instance, jobs are usually
created when there is new commercial
development in an area. However, some of
these jobs might not be high -paying enough
to allow workers to live nearby or near
transit that would allow them access to the
location. Collecting linkage fees allows local
governments to use the funds to facilitate
the development of affordable housing near
transit, so that lower -earning workers still
have reasonable access to employment
centers.
Incentives for Proactive
Station Area Planning and
Zoning
This is a tool that can be used by state
or regional agencies to help communities
think about their housing affordability and
mobility needs before development occurs
around a transit station. The benefit is that
the community can establish a vision for a
particular area and consensus is reached for
what type of development an area is best
suited for. This can help local governments
evaluate project proposals quicker and
more effectively, which reduces overall
development costs. States or regional
agencies can help encourage such planning
by offering grants based on planning
and zoning that encourages affordable
housing near transit or by giving preferential
treatment to the municipality for other
discretionary funding, such as water, sewer,
or environmental cleanup.
Joint Public/Private
Development
Public agencies that control land near transit
stations can work with a private developer
to help put excess or underused property
to use as a site for affordable housing. In
situations where developable land near
transit is in low supply, this can be a
particularly effective tool. While the Federal
Transit Administration has traditionally
guided joint development activities of transit
agencies to maximize revenue through
land sales or lease agreements to support
operations, it currently supports land sales
or leases at less than market value if the
transaction will promote increased transit
ridership. Facilitating the development of
affordable housing near transit is understood
to promote ridership.
Infill Development or
Redevelopment in Transit
Zones
TOD can serve as a tool to revitalize
communities. The positive impact of TOD
extends out to the area surrounding the
station where people are able to walk to
the station from where they live. Good
opportunities for infill developrnent include
brownfields and underutilized commercial
and industrial sites.
Facilitate Use of Value Capture
to Fund Affordable Housing
This tool is most effectively employed on
areas where new transit stations are being
built. The real estate around planned transit
stations is sure to see its value increase. In
addition, the area is likely to attract more
people as a result of the new transit access.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # \\ on 0-c -1— I .
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
A Model Housing Transportat,on Plan
NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES
The value of all this can be captured in
several different ways. It can be realized
through increased parking fees or business
license fees for locations near transit or it
might be seen as increased sales revenue
on locations near transit or more likely,
higher property taxes collected on real
estate around transit as a result of property
appreciation.
Tax Increment Financing
Funds obtained through tax increment
financing (T1F) can be used to offset
the higher land costs associated with
developing affordable housing near transit.
With tax increment financing, bonds are
issued and the proceeds are used to
finance projects within a localized area.
The incremental future tax revenue of a
specially designated area that contains the
area being redeveloped backs payments on
the outstanding bonds. The selected site in
Overtown was noted to be in a TIF district.
Wafts wMiMoMM MOON a ds M:
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # \i on
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
60
NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES I A Model Housing Transportation Piarr
Conclusion and Recommendations for Implementation
Strategies,
Actions,
Policies,
and Capital
Investments
Recommended
to Support
Implementation
The conclusion of the Mixed -Income
Transit -Oriented Development Guide
asks the user to evaluate the station area
based on its population stability, real estate
market, and land capacity. Based on the
information gathered, the Overtown Station
area was found to have a stable population,
a stagnant real estate market, and
relatively high development capacity. This
combination of findings led to a strategy
that seeks to promote the development of
affordable housing at a reasonable volume
and reduce the cost of housing production.
Tools to help facilitate these strategies are
those that can be implemented by the local
government and those that leverage the
support of partners.
Tools suggested by the MITOD Guide to
promote affordable housing development
that are locally controlled include:
• First -right -of -refusal laws for tenants and
nonprofits
• Development agreements
• Public land dedication and write -downs
• Tax forgiveness for back taxes on affordable
housing sites
ChgrZiLim•
Tools that would require the support of
partners include:
• Joint public/private development
• Transit -Oriented Development (TOD)-
targeted housing financing
• TOD-targeted homeownership assistance
To reduce the cost of housing and help
facilitate the development of affordable
housing near transit, the MITOD Guide
suggests the following locally -controlled
tools:
• TOD-targeted parking regulations
• Fast -track permitting
• Fee waivers, reductions, and deferrals
• Regulatory accommodation for small sites
• Tax forgiveness for back taxes on affordable
housing sites
The only tool to reduce the cost of housing
production that requires the support of
Submitted into the public
•
•
'. �-.,• u
•
•r..
•
record in connection with
item # \\ on tO �`�� I l
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
•
A Model Housing TF--,r 3pertt on Plan I NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEV-HORN AND ASSOCIATES
61
partners was to encourage the remediation
of brownfield sites. While all of these
strategies and the suggested tools are
appropriate, Overtown Station area is
unique and already has many of these
strategies in place as a result of the CRA,
TIF, and NDZ designations The site is under
the control of the SEOPW CRA and they
have a local nonprofit affordable housing
developer interested in developing the site.
Many of the tools suggested by the MITOD
Guide are a part of Miami 21. What remains
is the need for innovative financing to
reduce the cost of development.
During the workshop, stakeholders had
a number of suggestions for reducing the
cost of development. Pieter Bockweg, the
Executive Director of the SEOPW CRA,
said that they can use TIF money to help
incentivize the creation of mixed -income
housing. The city can allow density bonuses
and he suggested additional FAR Bonuses.
Keith Melton with Federal Transit
Administration suggested broadening
efinitions:
Transportation
Infrastructure Finance
and Innovation Act
the scope of TIFIA to help finance TOD
projects. He said, 'TIFIA is flexible, but has
focused on transit, The Federal government
is on board to broaden this and create
pilot programs for affordable housing near
transit "
The strategy would be to create a public/
private—national/local partnership for an
Affordable Housing Trust Fund (AHTF) to
attract private development. The CRA
would apply to the Federal government
to capitalize a rotating loan fund and then
a consortium of lenders would agree to
participate in projects partially funded
through the loan fund. Local control of
the studied site, the use of TIF, increased
density bonus from the city, plus the use of
the AHTF would increase the chances of
success for developrnent to occur on the
site.
The innovative use of an AHTF would
be joint HUD/FTA funded with TIFIA,
TIGER, CDBG, and HOME funds. The
Federal partnership would choose local
i IGER)
an • tion
Inves ent Generating
Economic Recovery
administrators such as the CRA. The CRA
would fund projects based on a point
system where points are awarded for
appropriate site control; compatible zoning;
proximity to transit, and other factors.
Another tool that could be used is merit -
based LIHTC.
Lessons
Learned from
the Mixed
Income Transit -
Oriented
Development
Process
Using the MITOD Guide helped to maintain
a structured approach to gathering and
analyzing the information needed to
formulate the station area plan. While the
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # \i, on
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
Floor .rear atio
TIFIA provides credit assistance to surface
transportation projects including those
relating to transit Eligible ent.lies include
starr2 and local governments t ansit
agencies and private entities Based
on ar ic,vrrvr p1 flu. programs eligrbiIity
requirements it dor;sn t appear that these
funds could be used directly lund affordable
housing near transit However It was noted
during the Planning Meeting that the scope
of Ile program could be brr-,ad,yied t. • do
5o.
TIGER stands for Tiansportation tft ost rrnnl
C.i0rwA,itinq Er.nnornrc y Funding
under this program r•; awarded on a
cr�r.�pefrlr.e tulsis for road rail tr,]nslt
or port projects A general review of the
program yielded no timer cronnc-r. t,cn
between this prordrarri and the funding of
affordable housing neat transit In the future,
hasod on the competitive basis by which
funds are provided, projects with plans to
include affordable housing proximate to
future rail or transit projects could receive a,
advantage
P \R Ypres nfs I
rotors to the amount ni flora spike a prer.ci
contains relative to the size of the land
the building has been constructed upon
Higher FARs on a collection of sites wtl
result ire •Jrtwetopment that is mor,: dense
than in areas with lower FARs It also allows
developers fo lower certain per unit costs.
This type o1 bonus could be provided in
ictur'n for a do, eloper inrludirirt in agreed -
upon number of aftDrdable units.
62
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT 1 A tilodt,l housing Transportation Plan
MITODGuide is comprehensive in scope, it
is relatively easy to transform the information
gathered into actionable strategies, which
are accompanied by specific tools.
MITOD Guide users should consider the
value of stakeholder interaction through
collaborative meetings involving local
government officials, business leaders,
and other members o: i:i1e community.
Duri•ig these meetings, the primary topic of
discussion should relate to how the group
can work together to increase the supply of
affordable housing in the area under study.
Consensus as to the appropriate approach
for an affordable inclusive development
should be achieved by the working group.
This consensus has the potential to be
helpful in creating and maintaining project
momentum, leading to a situation where the
overall goal of creating additional mixed -
income TODs can be more readily realized.
The direction provided by the MITOD Guide
is useful in helping stakeholders become
better oriented on general strategies, with
the understanding that many will need to be
altered 'io suit local conditions.
Users of the MITOD Guide should be
prepared to consult a variety of sources as
they gather information. Some data is easily
accessible through online tools like the
Center fcr Transit Oriented Development's
National TOD Database or the Center for
Neighborhood Technology's Housing and
Transportation Affordability Index. Other
data especially that which requires a more
local perspective is best obtained Through
discussions with officials from the local
housing authority planning department,
community redevelopment agency, or transit
agency. Relationships with these individuals
can be established during initial stakeholder
meetings.
Next Steps
The next step in this process is for HUD and
other government partners to assess the
possibility of the public/private—local/federal
partnership approach identified in this study.
Follow-up activities will need to include:
• Determining the ways FTA and HUD
can partner to use TIFIA, TIGER, CDBG,
and HOPE funds to create a Federal
loan fund that can be administered by
the local partners as an AHTF to attract
local developers and help them obtain
construction funding from local banks.
• Creating a pilot project with the SEOPW
CRA to test the implementation of the AHTF
through a point system and evaluate its
effectiveness in creating mixed -income TOD.
• Explore the possibility of having proximity to
transit taken into account in the allocation of
LIHTCs.
• Determining the scope of similar locations
or station area typologies where this model
housing transit plan may apply,
Development Development Block
Grant
Block C:,r:ini
g)c.rde funr:•
Ihent adrlre•ss a +^at.Jc rar
:i)mrqunity d0,yeloprn .nt. Tt,c procji.trn
sts one of its eligible activities as any that
tNviiotr1 ro and modoratrr•incornt: lx.4son3.
Program
1 I: i .
1- , ,,. a .t11 ,, .1.ii I!_ I,nu: it l ' 1' 1,
can L•" use'J in p,ailnet51nl:.. I l.::al rr�n
tiruHl croups to acgrnrr ; 11 ,r r'hdhIitst�•
aflerdable housing
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # \ \ on\o--a`-' '
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
A t,^nde' Pc. sing Transportation Plan I U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
City Selection
The process to select a city for which to
develop a model plan was undertaken
in three distinct phases —identification,
solicitation, and evaluation and selection.
The evaluation and selection phase required
a number of iterations to identify and
confirm the specific site within the selected
city.
Identification of Candidate
Cities
In the first phase, the following list of cities
were considered for the model housing
transportation plan.
• Arlington, VA
• Atlanta, GA
• Austin, TX
Planning Process Overview
•
•
•
•
Baltimore, MD
Boise, ID
Boston, MA
Charlotte, NC
Chicago, IL
Dallas, TX
• Denver, CO
• Houston, TX
• L os Angeles, CA
• Memphis, TN
• Minneapolis, MN
• New Orleans, LA
• New York City, NY
• Orlando, FL
• Philadelphia, PA
• Pittsburgh, PA
• Phoenix, AZ
• Portland, OR
• Salt Lake City, UT
• San Diego, CA
immapip=immiclix
• San Francisco, CA
• San Jose, CA
• Sacramento, CA
• Seattle, WA
Early in the planning process the list
was reviewed to reduce the number for
solicitation through a discussion of the
following:
• Availability of iand for residential
development
• Extent of the rail transit system
• Usage and ridership of the public transit
system
• Need/ability to locate affordable housing
near transit
• Presence of community organizations
involved in advocating/locating affordable
housing near transit
• Presence of community groups supporting
affordable housing
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # \ 1 on 1O-a1-4-1 f .
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
A Model Housing Transportation Plan U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT A-1
Cities that were known to have undertaken,
at least some effort, toward transit -oriented
development were discussed as prospective
candidates for a number of reasons
including:
• Presence of social, commercial, and
governmental infrastructure to implement
non-traditional development projects
• History of success to incent future
investments in transit -oriented development
• Availability of local codes, plans, and
ordinances supporting transit -oriented
development
Through a series of discussions with
HUD and the Center for Transit Oriented
Development, Miami, FL was added to the
list of candidate cities as a result of their
efforts to locate affordable housing near
transit. The following shortlist of cities was
identified for solicitation of statements of
interest in participating in the model plan
development effort:
• Atlanta, GA
• Baltimore, MD
• Boise, ID
• Houston, TX
• Miami, FL
• Orlando, FL
• Phoenix, AZ
Statements of interest from
Cities
The second phase of the site selection
process involved contacting the seven
candidate cities and asking each one to
submit a statement of interest (SOI) in
participating in the project. The primary
purpose of the SOI was to provide the
planning team with an understanding of the
following:
Each city's approach to addressing
affordable housing needs
• Philosophy toward mixed use and infill
development
• Approach and philosophy on the movement
of people throughout their city
• Commitment and capabilities related to
implementing the model plan
Each candidate was asked to provide
answers to the following questions to
address the three topics listed above:
• Current approach and interest in providing
affordable housing
• Vision for community growth and/or change
• Vision and goals for transportation
• Overview of substantive future transit
investments
• Presence of local advocacy or support
organizations for affordable housing
along with a summary of the role of each
organization
• Overview of local policies and goats related
to growth rnanagement, linking land use and
transportation, promoting compact mixed
use development, and creating high -quality
urban places
• Brief description of areas of focus or interest
for infill and transit -oriented development
Evaluation and Selection
The third phase of the site selection process
involved selecting the final location based
on an evaluation of the SOls. SOIs were
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
r. item # \l on tO-at-t-1 1
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY•HORN ANO ASSOCIATES I A Mode! Housing Transportation Plan
received from six out of the seven candidate
cities. Each city was considered against
a specific set of evaluation criteria and
scored accordingly based on an evaluation
matrix. The principles included in the matrix
are described below along with a brief
description of their intended meaning.
Affordable Housing
Question. What is the location's current
approach and interest in providing affordable
housing or their demonstrated need to
implement affordable housing policies or
plans?
Purpose To determine the location's
commitment and approach to
providing affordable housing. In certain
circumstances, it accommodates for a lack
of commitment (where there is a lack of
resources, perhaps) by allowing the location
to express its desire to address a proven
need for affordable housing. Commitment
was determined by a review of the types
of programs or policies that exist in the
community, the perceived effectiveness of
policies and programs, and the local effort
dedicated to evaluating the success of the
programs and policies.
_,nge
What are the community's vision
and goals for area growth and/or change?
Purpose To understand the location's
strategies, vision, and goals to guide
and accommodate future growth and
community change.
Partnerships and t oral Support
Question Are there strong advocacy or
support organizations for affordable housing
in the community?
Purpose. To evaluate the level of interest
and commitment to HUD's housing and
transit initiative. The location needed to
solicit input from and ask for the support of
local organizations as this project's initiatives
are advanced and implemented. It is
understood that localities and governmental
organizations and agencies cannot always
successfully implement projects without
outside support,
Policies Encouraging Transit -
Oriented Deve rent
Purpose To evaluate whether the location
has in -place policies, programs, and plans
related to linking land use and transportation
decision making and promoting compact
mixed -use development proximate to high -
quality transportation assets. Communities
with a history of successfully implementing
transit -oriented development and those
that have policies, programs, and strong
community interest in implementing this
type of development may be better early
candidates for housing transportation plan
implementation.
intangibles
Question Are there any intangible aspects
of a particular location that make it an
especially strong or weak candidate for the
model planning project?
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # \\ on 10-14-1I
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
A Model Housing ?ransporlation Plan 1 NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES
A-3
Purpose: To u-iderstand whetner
there are aspects of th'd land use and
transportation linkage that are not easily
rated or described. but are of significance
in terms of how to successfully create
high -quality transit -oriented development
projects. Factors such as the marketability
of a location, the market for a particular
development project, the ability to
provide a good location (or locations) for
development, the perceived acceptability of
infill development, and other conditions can
influence the viability or outcome of plans.
Some communities genuinely need planning
and policy assistance. Others already
have the appropriate mechanisms in place
and may simply need a plan from another
community from which to refer.
Based on these principles of evaluation,
the City of Miami was selected as the final
location while it was decided that Atlanta,
GA would serve as the alternate.
Figure A.1s Selected Sites Vicinity
caeu: a Vt! TI
t;EVCO%1IT •:Rn': L
Miami stood out as a result of their
demonstrated need for affordable, work
force and HIV/AIDS housing; their vision for
the specific locations identified as needing
housing proximate to transit, the potential
their transit systems provide for station area
development; and their transit -oriented
development (TOD) policies which may
result in more immediate implementation. In
addition, several important relationships with
city staff and leadership were identified that
would prove to be beneficial as part of the
planning process.
The city also had recently adopted Miami
21, a new form -based zoning code,
ivriami 21 promotes urban infill, mixed -
use development, pedestrianism, and
multimo='allsm while allowing for reduced
parking requirements in mixed -use and
other transit -oriented development type
projects. Furthermore, the Code's intent
is guided by specific principles aimed at
fostering growth around transit nodes,
planning transportation corridors in
Q
uwT► C LAf,
cr. T l
.[sYlawn, T Cr{'Rf 1
•
I •
YbcIuru
coordination with land use, implementing
alternatives to automobile use, and locating
affordable and workforce housing in areas
that match job opportunities,
Sites Considerec
Within the city. several sites were considered
for selection. They included the Coconut
Grove, Brickell Avenue, School Board, and
Overtown sites. The sites were spread along
the Metrorail and Metromover systems, as
shown in Figure A. f .
The Coconut Grove Metrorail (Figure A,2)
site is located along the Dixie Highway
(US 1), a major regional commercial corridor.
The station area is characterized by mostly
low density single-family uses, limited
commercial uses, and a few industrial sites.
The area is served by the region's Metrorail
system and has a station and park and
ride facility. Properties throughout the area
are generally small in size and there is little
assemblage that would support a larger -
scale development.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # 1\ on10-At —t 1
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
A-4
NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES A Mode-, -lousing Transportation Plan
The Brickell Avenue (Figure A.3) site is
located in Miami's downtown core, within
a mixed -use neighborhood of the central
business district. It is served by both
Metrorail and Metromover. While there
is some available property in ire area,
considerable market rate development has
already occurred and a local developer was
identified to already be pursuing affordable
housing within the area.
The School Board (Figure A.4) site is located
north of Miami's central business district
within the Omni Community Redevelopment
Agency (CRA) area. Many contiguous vacant
properties exist adjacent to the station;
however, the vision for the area is not
residential. The area is planned to continue
to evolve as a media and production (for
movies) neighborhood, Further, the area is
not served by the region's Metrorail service
and only receives service by the downtown
circulator, Metromover,
••
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
• •
• •
• •
• • ,
• f1
• ��..
•
•
•
so
••
•
.•
•
•
•
•
••
•
• {
•
•
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # \( on 0I
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
A Model Housing Transportation Plan i NEWPORT PARTNERS J KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES
A-5
�3
The final site considered is located in
Overtown (Figure A,5) adjacent to Overtown
Transit Village. Referred to by local
developers as Lyric Place, in recognition
of the adjacent historic and culturally
significant Lyric Theatre, the area is well -
served by the region's Metrorail system at
the adjacent Overtown station. The site
proposed has long been discussed by
the city and Overtown CRA as a preferred
location for affordable housing due to local
demographics, transportation access, and
long-term community plans.
During the site selection process, the
advantages and disadvantages of
each of the four sites were weighed. At
the conclusion of the site evaluation,
the decision was made to select the
Overtown site at Lyric Place for model plan
development
Figure A-41 School
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
■
•
•
•
•
tl••
A-6
mar•••
e
•♦•
R
•••
••
Planninc
v
Workshop
As previously mentioned, a two-day
planning workshop was facilitated in
Miami where local stakeholders had the
opportunity to provide input and guidance
on their respective visions for affordable
and market rate housing, non-residential
uses, and public open spaces proximate
to transit in the selected area. The planning
workshop brought together individuals with
backgrounds in development, government,
housing, finance, and transportation from
local, regional, and federal agencies and
groups.
During the workshop, the stakeholders
and planning team worked cooperatively to
review and evaluate the selected sites within
the city and discuss key considerations
of site selection. Items such as area
demographics, travel patterns, local plans,
development activity, transportation access,
locations of services, and employment all
Aim VlckMky
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
■
■
•
■
•
•
•
•
•
♦♦♦
•
•
•
♦
•
•
•
•
• i
•
•
• r
•
•
1
•
•
•
•
•
NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES
were discussed. The general outline of the
workshop was the following:
• Introductions and stakeholder representation
• Orientation to the sites under consideration
• Site selection discussion - strengths,
weaknesses, opportunities, and threats
• Selection of the site
• Establishment of site priorities, needs,
desires, and vision
• Site concept development
• Model plan development
• Review of model plan concepts
• Comments and discussion
During site selection and evaluation
discussions, stakeholders noted that
the role of the city's two fixed guideway
transit systems was important to consider.
Metromover is downtown Miami's circulator
service. It is fare free; however it operates
only within downtown. It connects to
Metrorail at a number of locations. Metrorail
is the region's heavy rail transit service.
It extends from downtown and the city
into neighboring Miami -Dade County,
•
••
• • _
Area Vicinity
• • • • • • • •
••
.•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
■
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
♦
•♦
••
R
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # \ \ on LC .
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
A Modal Ho( s;ng Transportation Plan
A major extension of Metrorail is under
construction and will extend its reach
to Miami International Airport, a major
employment center of the region, Other
major employment areas in the city were
noted as the Port of Miami, Civic Center
area, and Medical Center area.
Approaching site selection, stakeholders
offered specific ideas on the ways in
which the supply of affordable housing
near transit in Miami could, understanding
market conditions and practical limitations,
be increased. Workshop participants
were highly supportive of the site at Lyric
Place for the model plan. A group of site
selection criteria were developed to aid in
selection and are listed below along with the
advantages the Lyric Place site provided:
• Site control Site is owned by the Overtown
CRA whom has issued requests for
proposals for development of affordable
housing.
• Access to rail and c:rcu'aron Site is
adjacent to the Overtown Metrorail station
and Overtown Transit Village.
• .. .r Site is located in an
area where affordable housing has been
successful and is needed.
• Population served Appropriate
demographics exist within the area to
support the creation of affordable housing.
• Surrounding
neighborho.id is of a compatible context.
• Connection to employment Metrorail
and local bus services connect the area
conveniently to major employment centers,
nra Zoning provides
significant advantages to the development of
affordable housing.
• Local government buy-ci City, county, and
local organizations are supportive of the
proposed development type.
• l nRnr_=;bt',e rr'..3u19'Prit r.,.•tit;o4l-iat7Cj-
Neighborhood demographics are supportive
of affordable housing.
• Economic
development it a priority within the area.
• I ! i Zoning code
provides reductions for affordable housing,
which improves development economics.
With the selection of the Overtown site, a
model plan was developed under the guise
Figure A.e: {!1s Wolkibop
of zoning and planning documents and
expressed vision from the stakeholders.
During the workshop, a zoning maximum
plan was developed and achieved the
following level of intensity and mix of uses:
• I-;eml t 48 stories
• r- approximately 1,100 units (500
affordable and 600 market)
• Commercial 40,000 square feet
Stakeholder participants were generally
supportive of the plan; however, it was
universally acknowledged that any site
development would not be a zoning
maximum. The general sentiment was that
development on the selected site would
serve as a catalyst for area redevelopment.
Stakeholders were interested in formalizing
a public/private (local and national)
partnership to develop a revolving loan
fund for development and leverage HUD/
FTA grant opportunities to assist with
development costs.
.- 's'
t j
or
�rf / f i
..
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # \\ on to -a, •-1 I .
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
A Mo4Jel Hous.ng Transportation Plan j NEWPORT PARTNERS I KIMLEY•HORN AND ASSOCIATES
A-7
„ Kimley-Horn
C and Associates, Inc.
1 1400 Commerce Park Drive
Suite 400
Heston, Virginia 20191
Phone 703.674.1300
www.kimley-hom.con
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # ,\ on (O .
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
37 ,0 fanglev,iood Lane
D vidsonv Ile. Maryland)
Phone: 301.889.0017
www.newportpartnerslIc.com