Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Analysis & Maps
City of Miami Planning and Zoning Department Division of Community Planning ANALYSIS FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PZAB File ID No. 2699 Applicants: 701 Associates, LLC and Miami Automotive Retail, Inc. Location: 704 SW 7 Avenue, 712, 716, 720, 734 SW 7 Street Miami, Florida 33130 Commission District: District 3—Commissioner Frank Carollo NET District Office: Little Havana Planner: Sue Trone, AICP FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: The existing Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation for the subject parcels is Medium Density Restricted Commercial. Areas in this designation allow residential development up to 65 dwelling units per acre. Supporting services such as community -based residential facilities of up to 14 clients (excluding drug, alcohol or correctional rehabilitation facilities) are allowed; community -based residential facilities with 15-50 clients, day care centers for children and adults are also allowed in suitable locations. Commercial activities that serve retail and personal services within a building or complex are permitted within the Medium Density Restricted Commercial FLUM designation. These commercial entities are generally small scale, accessory uses. Places of worship, primary and secondary schools, and accessory post -secondary educational facilities are permitted. In contributing structures within historic sites or historic districts, professional offices, tourist and guest homes, museums and private clubs or lodges are permitted. Density and intensity limitations are limited by the existing limits of the contributing structure. REQUEST: The Applicant is requesting to amend the FLUM designation of the subject parcels from Medium Density Restricted Commercial to Restricted Commercial. The Applicant is also seeking a change of zoning in a companion item, File ID 2700. The Restricted Commercial FLUM designation allows residential density up to 150 dwelling units per acre subject to the same conditions as the High Density Multifamily Residential FLUM designation and a finding by the Planning Director that the proposed site's proximity to other residentially zoned property makes it a logical extension or continuation of existing residential development and that adequate services and amenities exist to accommodate the needs of potential residents or guests in hotels and motels. This FLUM designation also allows the following: general office use; clinics, laboratories, auditoriums, libraries, convention facilities, places of worship, and primary and secondary schools. Commercial activities that serve the daily retail and service needs of the public and that require auto access are also allowed, such as: general retail; personal and professional services; real estate, banking, and financial services; restaurants; saloons; cafes; recreation facilities; major sports, exhibition, or entertainment facilities; marinas and living quarters on vessels as permissible, and related activities as explained in the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan (MCNP). Nonresidential portions of developments designated as Restricted Commercial are allowed a maximum Floor Lot Ratio (FLR) of 7.0 times the net lot area of the subject property which may be increased by the applicable land development regulations up to an FLR of 11.0 with the following exceptions: (1) in Edgewater the maximum FLR may be increased up to 17.0; (2) in the Urban Central Business District and Buena Vista Yards Regional Activity Center the FLR may be increased up to 37.0. SITE INVENTORY: The subject properties comprise a site of five parcels, the northeast corner of which lies at the intersection of SW 7 Avenue and SW 7 Street. A complete legal description of the site is available in the Hearing Boards Office. The total site area is 37,500 square feet, or 0.85 acres. A summary of this information and the Applicant's request is contained in the table below. Address Folio SqFt Current Zoning Current FLUM Rezone Request FLUM Change Owner Owner Address 704 SW 7 AV 0102040601010 6,366 T5-0 MEDIUM DENSITY RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL T6-8-0 RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL MAR 704 LLC 665 SW 8ST, MIAMI, FL 712SW7ST 0102040601020 8,500 T5-0 MEDIUM DENSITY RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL T6-8-0 RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL AUTOMOTIVE RETAIL INC. 665SWSST, MIAMI, FL 716 SW 7 ST 0102040601030 7,500 T5-0 MEDIUM DENSITY RESTRICTED COMMERCIALT6-8-0 RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL MAR 716 SW 7TH ST LLC 665 SW 8 ST, MIAMI, FL 720 SW 7 ST 0102040601040 7,500 T5-0 MEDIUM DENSITY RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL T6-8-0 RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL MAR 720 SW 7TH STREET LLC 665 SW 8 ST, MIAMI, FL 734 SW 7 ST 0102040601050 7,500 T5-0 MEDIUM DENSITY RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL T6-8-0 RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL MAR 734 SW 7TH STREET LLC 66S 5W 8ST, MIAMI, FL Source: Miami -Dade County Property Appraise , Cityof Miami Zoning GIS Application August 24, 2017 The site has frontage on SW 7 Street, a state- maintained highway (US-41). It has three lanes of traffic with marked speeds of 30 miles per hour. The right-of-way on SW 7 Street is approximately 50 feet in width and is flanked with a sidewalk of approximately 6 feet on both sides. On SW 7 Avenue the right-of-way is also 50 feet with sidewalks on both sides of the street, approximately 10-12 feet. See vicinity map on the right. Site Visit On the morning of August 23, 2017 around 8 AM staff visited the site and discovered that the two easternmost parcels are vacant and the three westernmost parcels have improvements with residential uses. 716 SW 7 Street and 734 SW 7 Street are single -story multi -family structures; 720 SW 7 Street is a two-story multi -family structure. All three of these structures Vicinity map of the subject parcels. Source: City of Miami GIS Page 2 111 PZAB File ID 2699 2 have ingress and egress directly on SW 7 Street. Aerial images appears to reveal additional parking behind the structures. _ A view inclusive of the subject parcels with the residential developments in the foreground and downtown Miami in the background. Ingress and egress accesses SW 7 Street (US-41) directly. The area is amply served by bus transit. Directly across the street is a covered bus stop serving two bus routes, 8 and 207. On SW 8 Avenue bus service served by route number 8 is being discontinued due to Miami Dade County's needs to discontinue redundant bus routes (see Attachment A). A trolley circulator runs the length of SW 8 Street from downtown to NW 37 Avenue and is free. One block to the south is SW 8 Street —the SW 8 Street corridor (from 1-95 in the east to SW 12 Avenue) is heavily commercialized while the SW 7 Street corridor is predominantly residential. The FLUM designation on SW 8 Street is Restricted Commercial. Behind the subject properties are low -scale commercial properties. The easternmost property behind the subject properties is a used car lot owned by Brickell Motors, which has cross -block operations with frontage on SW 8 Street. Today, SW 7 Street looks quite different from SW 8 Street. During the site visit, images of both locations were collected. Because the application is to amend the subject properties from Medium Density Restricted Commercial to the same FLUM designation as those properties immediately behind the subject properties (e.g. to the south) on SW 8 Street (Restricted Commercial), a visual comparison of the two streets is provided below to see what a potential outcome could be. Page 3 l 11 PZAB File ID 2699 3 Comparative images from existing land uses: SW 7 Street and SW 8 Street SW 7 ST (FLUM: Med. Dens. Restricted Comm.) SW 8 ST (FLUM: Restricted Commercial) 1111 Facing on the kw � '�,� 1. '� � _ ,' . 5„''yr� east, a large Walgreens is viewable left. This is peak rush-hour traffic. s ' Facing west with subject site viewable on the left. Medium -scale commercial uses can be seen in the distance. r g��,. K 1,�. - s , Facing east, residential development on both sides of SW 7 Street are visible. P.e 4 r Facing northeast, this image shows Brickell Motors in the foreground. Y4 MILE BUFFER ANALYSIS A'/4 mile buffer was created around the boundaries of the subject parcels to create a study area to analyze tenure, land uses, and other, general qualities of the subject site in the surrounding context. The analyses commence by making observations within the study area. The observations are based on data collected from the FLUM, Miami -Dade County Property Appraiser, the Census Bureau, and data collected in the field from a staff site visit. FLUM Designation, Existing Land Use, and Tenure Within the study area there are a total of 1,073 addresses, 340 of which are non-residential and 733 of which are residential. Approximately a third of the properties in the study area are non- residential, leaving two-thirds of the properties as residential. Of the residential properties, 17 percent have a homestead exemption according to records provided by the Miami -Dade County Property Appraiser at the time of this report. A summary of this is presented in a table on the next page. Page 4111 PZAB File ID 2699 4 1.7 • 1y ♦� 1 • l Ar A 4A• r A'• Residential and Non -Residential Land Uses in the 1/4 Mile Study Area All Uses Residential Uses Only Land Use Number Percent Number Percent Residential, with Homestead Exemption 121 11% 121.00 17% Residential, withouth Homestead Exemption 612 57% 612.00 83% Non -Residential 340 32% N/A N/A Total 1,073 100% 733 100% Source: Miami -Dade County Property Appraiser, August 22, 2017 A pattern exists along SW 8 Street where a majority of properties have commercial existing land uses. Just to the north of SW 7 Street, the majority of properties have existing land uses as residential with some exceptions. There are some nonresidential uses found within other, less intense and less dense FLUM designations within the study area, such as the Medium Density Multifamily Residential' designation and the Low Density Restricted Commercial' FLUM designation. The map below illustrates these patterns. i w • •i! •• • a • A a a • • •s fI • • • • 0•• sir] it a• r. •a a •• •r Y333 • a +• •• •f a # • *aril• • A • a• jA • A r 441 5ti•..T--« 4 • • . r• • lair• r. • • •a ■ 1• - sa yr i U • • t5L 4 A a Ala•44 — • A i, a ■ a ad, ••4 a ••• •a • ♦' • •• a 1 e • 5700a3. • • • • a •as •• •• • a • a • • •• a • • ra Era r • • r •A •4 • •a • _ •. •r r• !• • a a, •r •• 40•A • a ir • e A •a!r • •rs - 7•w• a V • A r • alai If Cigar •a! • •• a• • S+ •a a A ! ! + a a•w . •* 4 ••A *•• 5J, =7H ST • •• A ■ N larw A A • AA 4 ...— • w••r * ,a A • A A •c. r• •• war a la.ly • ar 4` a • ■ as ■ O • ■ w • *.Z+• • Arrlar a • • ~r*7:7,4 ..•r■: ra w. rr■ 3' A 1' Addresses a Ietl1offesle fed • F;pmesteaded • RhnresidentialAddresses ter+ 114 FAta Stud,/ Area SUb 4Ct Parcels Future Land Use Designations nPubl c Parks and Recreation n Single Family- Residential QDuplex - Resrdental n Loss Density Multifamily Residential II Medium Density Multtem•IyReadent>al Law Density Rest idod Commercial r -r Medium pensity Restricted Commercial Restricted Commercial Maior Institutional 0 0 05 01 021,1ires The map above shows FLUM designations and existing land uses {residential or nonresidential). Source: Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan and Miami -Dade Property Appraiser 1 This FLUM designation allows 65 du/ac and somewhat liberal commercial uses. 2 This FLUM designation allows 36 du/ac and quite limited commercial uses, mostly as accessory to the residential use with some exceptions. Page 5I12 PZAB File ID 2699 5 • ARIA w Ap • • • • •• ....1..._._---__----- -- • • I • i la* An examination of Census Block Group data reveal the levels of low and moderate income individuals that live in the City of Miami as of the Decennial Census, 2010. For a household of three, the range for these income categories are summarized in the table below. Low to Moderate Income Range for A Household of Three Low Income Moderate Income $54,400-$81, 599 $81,600-95,199 Source: Department of Community and Economic Development, City of Miami The Census Block Groups in which 51 percent or more individuals living in them are identified as having incomes that are within the Low to Moderate Income threshold are Block Groups designated as "Low and Moderate Income." The majority of Census Block Groups within the City of Miami have this distinction; the majority of the study area for this application includes Census Block Groups with 91 to 100 percent Low to Moderate Incomes. In the entire study area, all portions have a designation that is at least 71 percent Low to Moderate Income or greater. The map below illustrates this. ra• e • • • • • • •.. • --- a.'2'FAT --•. Y • • i • • 4. • Ar • ....-..-- Sy+i toT4&TM" aa! I _ _: •••••• 4 al *A••• •+•i• • • -•r • ■ A •• • 0 0-05 0. t 0.2 Miles 1 i 1 i 1/4 Mile Study Area Addresses • Not Homesteaded Homesteaded • Nonresidential Addresses Subject Parcels % Low -Moderate Income 1:71%-8O% 81%-90% 91%-100% The map above shows the percentage of Low and Moderate Income individuals who live in the Census Block Groups within the 'A mile study area as well as existing land uses of address points. Sources: US Census Bureau and Miami -Dade County Property CORRIDOR ANALYSIS: Page 6 111 PZAB File ID 2699 6 The subject site was additionally analyzed with regard to the FLUM designation in the context of the corridor on which it sits on SW 7 Street. This corridor was identified as parcels along SW 7 Avenue with a pattern of roughly the same FLUM designation (Medium Density Restricted Commercial) in which the subject site is located. This corridor runs the length of SW 7 Street, starting at I-95 to the east and going to just about SW 12 Avenue to the west. In total, the sum of parcels included in the corridor analysis is 126 parcels, making a total of 25.74 acres. On the north side of SW 7 Street, parcels "behind" those with Medium Density Restricted Commercial FLUM designations tend to have the slightly more restrictive FLUM designation of Medium Density Multifamily Residential, though there are occasional deviations. Generally speaking, in this area to the north of SW 7 Street the area has a low -scale, tree -lined, walkable, multifamily residential character, as depicted in the image here, on SW 7 Avenue. The view down SW 7 Avenue, along the tree -lined street covering multifamily residences, just to the north of the subject site. This area has the FLUM designation of Medium Density Restricted Commercial, with a FLUM designation tapering to Medium Density Multifamily at midblock. Midway along the north side of SW 7 Street, a large parcel has a Restricted Commercial FLUM designation (fronting SW 8 Avenue, taking up a half block to SW 7 Court). This property is owned by Miami Lighthouse for the Blind and Visually impaired. The subject site is on the south side of SW 7 Street. On the south side of SW 7 Street, the encroachment of Restricted Commercial designated parcels is evident in the Future Land Use Map. Five particular incidents of this encroachment are visible, three of which are at intersections (by 1-95, at SW 8 Avenue, and at SW 12 Avenue). Two other areas of encroachment are visible at midblock areas between SW 6 Avenue and SW 7 Avenue and between SW 5 Avenue and SW 6 Avenue. The map below illustrates the corridor analysis. Page 7111 PZAB File ID 2699 7 �.. i rI / Is &r1' 4711 S7 3�,.-y II—r IJ EficrJ8chme[It —_—__....._ f' F Uoa hmant Encrcarhment Encroachment Encroachment r x c c; '-_ ST al w_ r SW 471., Sr ro q t r SP. 'Tp ST 77tionadjurbiLils_../ 14 �`-.Ld1L111. j^ii.J71J.I.J 2' a —I. — I� 1 ': R'F S z -rvP`4 5'::7- 5T St., 1DT I-.97 C r it y < w x n 9N1571-E7 g m x � ' I 1fj 5 A. 1'T%: Sfi to - ¢ y T I 2 .. I i t r t: Q Ff,Vib Pa+asara Remaatnn ©kar lxcaiyRaaIrxe. arRa:sal ©sw7strslc �, 0 0.05 0,1 0.2 Miles ;• IJ: 1.; le FrRea rv- lrt'ter! Sul ® ,rr.payR#;r rr::O -rpkl L p,.- Resler MI ®Resrrser C.mmrr•mal Q LT, Cerallybt Lei 7. ly Fkvieatial OH ISNor Iry rub,: ya'iea T.rfl rlabor an: Mara Q YU gem Cersily Alaltio rr y Fkyyf rtat - Ir ..XrQi The above map illustrates the increasing encroachment of the more intense "Restricted Commercial" PLUM designation from SW 8 ST into the less intense "Medium Density Restricted Commercial" PLUM designated area along the south side of SW 7 Street in Little Havana from SW 4 Avenue to SW 12 Avenue. ADDITIONAL FACTORS: The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) is conducting its Project Development and Environment Study ("PD&E) for SW 8 Street and SW 7 Street from SW 27 Avenue to Brickell Avenue —hence, this study is occurring on the portion of SW 7 Street at the subject site. Currently, SW 7 Street has three lanes of traffic running one way, from east to west. The PD&E study proposes four alternatives that may dramatically alter this traffic pattern, The four alternatives are as follow: Summary of Build Alternatives Based on the PD&E Study by FDOT for SW 7 AVE and SW 8 AVE Alternative Designation Description of Change Alternative 1 Two-lane, two way traffic + turn lane Alternative 2 Two-lane, two way traffic + transit Alternative 2A Two-lane, two way traffic + bike lane Alternative 3 Two-lane, one way traffic Alternative 3A Two-lane, one way + shared parking Alternative 4 Three lane, one way A copy of the most recent presentation dated June 22, 2017 from FDOT describing these alternatives is available in Attachment B. According to Bao-Ying Wang, Project Manager for the Page 8 1 11 PZAB File ID 2699 8 study, the completion of this project is estimated to be mid-2018, after which time FDOT will go out for bid to construct the design. CONCURRENCY: The FLUM amendment was analyzed for concurrency using the City's Concurrency Management Analysis system. The proposed amendment meets levels of service standards of the MCNP. The analysis is included as Attachment C. FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT CRITERIA: Criteria 1 Policy LU-1.1.3: The City's zoning ordinance provides for protection of all areas of the city from: (1) the encroachment of incompatible land uses; (2) the adverse impacts of future land uses in adjacent areas that disrupt or degrade public health and safety, or natural or man-made amenities; (3) transportation policies that divide or fragment established neighborhoods; and (4) degradation of public open space, environment, and ecology. Strategies to further protect existing neighborhoods through the development of appropriate transition standards and buffering requirements will be incorporated into the City's land development regulations. Analysis of Criteria 1 The proposal is to amend the existing FLUM for five parcels on a block with eight parcels from Medium Density Restricted Commercial to Restricted Commercial. Such an amendment would represent an encroachment of the more intense FLUM designation into the existing corridor with the FLUM designation of Medium Density Restricted Commercial. Contemplating the implementation of the land uses through the land development regulations, the existing FLUM designation allows zoning to the T5 Transect (Urban Center). The companion item (File ID 2700) requests a rezone of T6; however, if this FLUM amendment is adopted, future applications to increase the zoning changes can be approved, up to the T6-48 Transect, without amending the FLUM. This creates a very different land use scenario. Given that this is an application for a mere five parcels that actually represent a portion out of 126 parcels forming a larger corridor, this is an encroachment of an incompatible land use. At the same time, if approved, the resulting pattern would have a transitionary quality inasmuch as the subject site would be subsumed into the existing Restricted Commercial portion to the south, abutting the Medium Density Restricted Commercial corridor from which the site would be withdrawn. Finding 1 This criteria is inconsistent as an encroachment. This criteria is consistent as a transition. Criteria 2 Policy LU-1.1.7: Land development regulations and policies will allow for the development and redevelopment of well -designed mixed -use neighborhoods that provide for the full range of residential, office, live/work spaces, neighborhood retail, and community facilities in a walkable area and that are amenable to a variety of transportation modes, including pedestrianism, bicycles, automobiles, and mass transit. Page 9 111 PZAB File ID 2699 9 Analysis of Criteria 2 The subject site is located on SW 7 Street, which is the local designation for US-41. It is amply served by transit, across the street from a bus stop serving two bus routes and one block away from the Miami Trolley, Little Havana Route, with free service. SW 8 Street has a variety of commercial and retail activity, and the area is walkable, as judged by staff from a site visit. Duplex development along SW 7 Street does not best serve the public if the design forces tenants to use ingress and egress directly into busy traffic. Moreover, diverse opportunities in the immediate area make the subject site well -suited for intense and dense development. Finding 2 Staff finds the application is consistent with Criteria 2. Criteria 3 Policy HO-1.1.3: The City will continue to develop comprehensive neighborhood redevelopment plans and programs that encourage private developers to build new, or rehabilitate old, residential structures and ensure that public investments are coordinated with private sector developments to increase the overall attractiveness of redeveloping neighborhoods. Analysis of Criteria 3 The amendment of the Future Land Use Map by changing the designation of five parcels is in contravention to policy HO-1.1.3. The result of approving the change of the FLUM for these five parcels would thwart an effort at comprehensive neighborhood redevelopment that could encourage private developers to build new or rehabilitate old structures in such a way that ensures overall attractiveness in the redevelopment of this neighborhood. A superior approach would employ a larger study area —for example the SW 7 Street corridor or a study area defined by a buffer analysis, like the 1/4 mile study area used here —undertake a planning study that considered development realities, and relevant social and community interests. Finding 3 Staff finds the application inconsistent with Criteria 3. Criteria 4 Objective HO-1.2: Conserve the present stock of extremely low-, very low- , low, and moderate -income housing (in accordance with the current standards and regulations of HUD and the State of Florida) within the City and reduce the number of substandard units through rehabilitation, reduce the number of unsafe structures through demolition or rehabilitation, and insure the preservation of historically significant housing through identification and designation. Analysis 4 Based on a study by Costar in 2016, there is a high likelihood that many of the residential units within the study area —and within the buildings in the subject site —are "Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing" units (see Attachment D). These units are residential units that are "affordable" at market rates. Amending the FLUM without a plan for rehousing tenants in Census Block Groups known to have 91 percent to 100 percent low to moderate income individuals is a near certainty for displacing these populations. Finding 4 Staff finds the application inconsistent with Criteria 4. CONCLUSION: The subject site is located within an area that seems to be experiencing transition. The review of the encroaching, higher intensity, and higher density Restricted Commercial FLUM Page 10 1 11 PZAB File 1D 2699 10 The subject site is located within an area that seems to be experiencing transition. The review of the encroaching, higher intensity, and higher density Restricted Commercial FLUM designation in half -block segments throughout the southern portion of SW 7 Street is suggestive that the area merits a more comprehensive planning study of the corridor. The approval of one more half -block section of the more dense, more intense Restricted Commercial FLUM designation on the street is to give way to a slow, unplanned, transition that can yield results of a questionable nature, with outcomes that needlessly displace vulnerable residents. An alternative approach could be utilized in which a careful study of the area could be undertaken, in consultation with stakeholders, to discern optimal land use and design recommendations. Such a study would recognize that the area is facing transition, and instead of yielding to piecemeal changes, a study with recommendations could embrace the transition in such a way that optimizes the forces at work. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Department recommends DENIAL of the requested FLUM amendment as proposed in favor of reviewing the application as part of a larger study area, for consideration as part of a planning study, and potential FLUM changes upon completion of that study. Ja qu- ner Ellis Ch _ `of Land Development EST 8/28/2017 Page 11 l 11 PZAB File ID 2699 11 ATTACHMENT A Miami T Little Havana Route SW 8T Hours: Mon --Sat 6:30 AM to 11 00 P Sunday 8:00 AM to 8:00 PM Frequency: Approximately every 20 min Points of Interest Magic City Casino 0 Trail Theater Waodlawn Park Comelary Miami Dade College ink - lnteramerican Campus go Tower Theater! Domino Park Bay of Pigs Monument Brickell Metrorail Station `Far L.91ore Information: www.miamitrolley.com SW 7TH ST SR 836 OFF RAMP E Jose Marti Gym Jose Marti Park Miami River Greenway Lincoln -Marti Schools Plaza de la Cubanidad Miami Senior High School Miami -Dade County Auditorium ATTACHMENT B Financial Management Number. 432639-6-22-01 Federal Aid Project Number: 0202-054-P Efficient Transportation Decision Making Number: 14230 111111111.1 Project Development & Environment (PD&E) Study SR 90 (SW 8th Street and SW 7th Street) From SR 9/SW 27th Avenue to SR 5/US-1/Brickell Avenue JUNE 22, 2017 PAG Concerns ✓ Facilitator ✓ Room set-up ✓ Copies of presentation ✓ Innovative solutions ✓ Evaluate construction impacts FDOT SW 8t" Street/SW 7th Street PD&E Study 2 Project Status • Traffic analysis • Alternative analysis FDOT SW 8t" Street/SW 7th Street PD&E Study 3 Alternatives • No Build • Transportation Systems Management and Operations (TSM&O) Build Alternatives • Alternative 1 • Alternative 2 • Alternative 2A • Alternative 3 • Alternative 3A • Alternative 4 Two lane - Two way + Turn lane Two lane - Two way + Transit Two lane - Two way + Bikes Two lane - One way Two lane - One way + Shared parking Three lane - One way FDOT SW 8t" Street/SW 7th Street PD&E Study Forecasted Traffic Volumes SW 8TH STREET AND SW 7TH STREET 2045 TRAFFIC FORECAST Location 2015 Existing Traffic esrgn Three Lanes One WAIL "`erna Two Lanes One Way r e - - orecast Two Lanes T illi East of 1-95 SW 8 Street 21100 23800 20100 22000 SW 7 Street 12000 15300 14500 13300 Total SW 7 & 8 Street 33100 39100 34600 35300 Total Increase from 2015 18% 5% 7% Volume Difference (Traffic Diversion) N/A 4500 3800 12% 10% West of 1-95 SW 8 Street 21300 28400 19400 22000 SW 7 Street 17000 24100 16400 18400 Total SW 7 & 8 Street 38300 52500 35800 40400 Total Increase from 2015 37% -6% 5% Volume Difference (Traffic Diversion) N/A 16700 12100 32% i 23% Diversion: Traffic that will seek alternate routes FDOT SW 8th Street/SW 7th Street PD&E Study No Build Alternative NO BUILD ALTERNATIVE — SW 8TH/SW 7TH STREET I65 PAR-Kf7rc5) 7I' a 17 PARKING 16.5' - 75') SW 8th Street 17' SW 7th Street ALI NO EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS BENEFITS • Maintenance of traffic • Environmental CONCERNS - NO IMPROVEMENTS • Safety • Multimodal level of service (LOS) • Access improvements • Complete streets . ■ SW 8 Street/SW 7 Street PD&E Study 6 No Build Alternative SW 9 STREET w if(! 10 STREET NO BUILD ALTERNATIVE —1-95 BENEFITS • Maintenance of traffic • Environmental CONCERNS - NO IMPROVEMENTS • Safety • Multimodal level of service (LOS) • Access improvements • Complete streets FDOT SW 8t" Street/SW 7th Street PD&E Study TSM&O Alternative TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS (TSM&O) ALTERNATIVE - SW 8TH/SW 7TH STREET SW 8TH STREET ',AK1MG .. 11. y rti S - }R.5') 11' PARKfNG t t SW 7TH STREET r BENEFITS • Minor safety improvements • Multimodal level of service (LOS) Improvements to automobiles • Maintenance of traffic • No environmental impacts CONCERNS • No access improvements at 1-95 FDOT SW 8t" Street/SW 7th Street PD&E Study 8 TSM&O Alternative TSM&O ALTERNATIVE -SW 8TH/SW 7TH STREET • UPGRADE/NEW SIGNALIZATION ELEMENTS • Next generation traffic controller • Advanced Traffic Management System (ATMs) • Video detection • Cabinets • UPGRADE/NEW ITS ELEMENTS • CCTV cameras • Arterial Dynamic Message Signs (ADMS) • Travel Time System (TTS) • Fiber optic cable/wireless communications system • EVALUATE APPLICABILITY • Adaptive Signal Control Technology (ASCT) • Connected Vehicles Technology —Signal Phase and Timing (SPaT) • Information systems • Transit ITS FDOT SW 8t" Street/SW 7th Street PD&E Study 9 Build Alternatives BUILD ALTERNATIVES - SW 8TH/SW 7TH STREET TWO WAY ALTERNATIVES NEW SIGNALS - CONCERNS • May require right-of-way • Pedestrian accessibility • Environmental impacts • Utility conflicts • Construction impacts FDOT SW 8t" Street/SW 7th Street PD&E Study Build Alternatives BUILD ALTERNATIVES — SW 8TH/SW 7TH STREET TWO LANES - TWO WAY Access impacts due to the lack of gaps on oncoming traffic BENEFITS • Access off peak hour CONCERNS • Access peak hour • Safety • Traffic diversion • Right-of-way • Environmental impacts • Construction impacts • Parking 1 FDOTSW 8th Street/SW 7t" Street PD&E Study ter- . Build Alternatives .5' Curb 1I 5 6.5' Gutter SW 8TH STREET TM &WI 11' ALTERNATIVE #1 TWO LANES - TWO WAY 11' 11' 6.51.5' Gutter 49 Feet Varies 65-75 Feet SW 7TH STREET I1t ,S loomailaw. 11' 1.5' Gutter 11' 11' 1.5' Gutter 4 36 Feet .5' Curb 50 Feet • 2 through lanes + 1 two way left turn lane • Traffic flow: Two-way • Maintains pavement width • Parking: Not modified • Sidewalk: Not modified • Improvements at 1-95 Requires change in the historic designation law FDOT SW 8t" Street/SW 7th Street PD&E Study 12 Build Alternatives ALTERNATIVE #1 - TWO LANES - TWO WAY I I II I I lil l 111 1 1 II I I II I "iniinntinnuirmi BENEFITS • Access off peak hour • No impacts to parking CONCERNS • Access peak hour • Safety • Traffic diversion • Minor right-of-way • Environmental impacts • Construction impacts FDOT SW 8t" Street/SW 7t" Street PD&E Study Build Alternatives ALTERNATIVE #2 TWO LANES - TWO WAY + TRANSIT SW 8TH STREET 49 Feet S Varies 65-75 Feet SW 7TH STREET IN MI s s t S MINSIMIERE 36 Feet 50 Feet 4 • 2 through lanes + 1 transit only lane • Traffic flow: Two-way • Maintains pavement width • Parking: Reduces number of spaces • Sidewalk: Not modified • Improvements at 1-95 Requires change in the historic designation law FD0T1 SW 8 Street/SW 7 Street PD&E Study 14 Build Alternatives ALTERNATIVE #2 - TWO LANES - TWO WAY + TRANSIT WITH LEFT TURNS 1111111111111111111111 ,01uunul mg 1 #1161111'r lllIII! lip y44 I fr BENEFITS • Access off peak hour • Improves transit operations A11111111111I. EIIIIIIIIk CONCERNS • Access peak hour • Safety • Traffic diversion • • Reduces parking by 60% • Minor right-of-way • Environmental impacts • Construction impacts FDOT SW 8th Street/SW 7th Street PD&E Study Build Alternatives ALTERNATIVE #2 - TWO LANES - TWO WAY + TRANSIT WITH LEFT TURNS IIII IIIII I411II I IIII I I Via 1 _ '1- :_?_..;11111111I111111%1111I lllllllll. �II111IY 'lllll,IIIIIIYII II 11111111/ JIIIIb - - 111111111111II LEGEND —1 Right -of -Way Acquisition BENEFITS • Access off peak hour • No impacts to parking Improves transit operations CONCERNS • Access peak hour • Safety • Right-of-way business/ residential impacts • Environmental impacts • Traffic diversion • Construction impacts SW 8t" Street/SW 7th Street PD&E Study Build Alternatives ALTERNATIVE #2 - TWO LANES - TWO WAY + TRANSIT WITH LEFT TURNS I P llll , IIIII@IIIIL_ IIII IIIII I411II I IIII I I Vila - el111111M1111fildr, 111111111. ormiwirkleakalilk �11111IY 'lllll�,IIIII,, II I��� ��-.- ..._., . AINIIIIIIMI A li LEGEND —1 Right -of -Way Acquisition nr ��\�f�N"' BENEFITS • Access off peak hour • No impacts to parking Improves transit operations CONCERNS • Access peak hour • Safety • Right-of-way business/ residential impacts • Environmental impacts • Traffic diversion • Construction impacts SW 8t" Street/SW 7th Street PD&E Study Build Alternatives ALTERNATIVE #2A TWO LANES - TWO WAY + BIKE SW 8TH STREET OP Y 11 Varies 65-75 Feet SW 7TH STREET 50 Feet • 2 through lanes + 1 bike lane • Traffic flow: Two-way • Narrows pavement width • Parking: Reduces number of spaces • Sidewalk: Wider • Improvements at 1-95 Requires change in the historic designation law 5W 16TH ST� Build Alternatives Miami -Dade County, FL Overview Map tn r 1 �' Le)Yi • •+ H< ,'� ,,y . *•$ • • a.` .¢••` . 11101•' r MI } SW 7Tms �±� ,. ,=_ i`_SWBTHHS$T Fsr , ST °' @! Gr ,.▪ . Ca * 0 Q� .0 0 1 0 t 'n U CI f I P 5W 22N0�, .LI VT _ 0 �S 0 W FLAGLER Si SE 157 Si SE3RC'� E••••• gppeyb. Q w. ... e2 v11 WO* te- .. L... 41 •....... a.. 6....... - Wan v * • Fu441 tea... n... I I 6my Little Havana Bicycle/Pedestrian Mobility Plan prepared for the City of Miami and the Miami -Dade Transportation Planning Organization (TPO) in June 2016 RECOMMENDED BICYCLE LANE CORRIDORS Corridor SW1st Street LImits SW 6th Avenue to South River Drive SW 6th Street SW 27111 Avenue to SW 4th Avenue SW 3rd Avenue Scuih Dixie Hiier y to SW 12th Avenue SW 22nd Avenue 1aVFF5I Flagler !reel 1Q Svc 22nd 3trRp1 SW 22nd Avenue load Su' gin Street to West Flagler Strut SW 17th Avenue •yvust t I,rglr. r SlreEl la S4 i 1s1 Avenuti FDOT SW 8t" Street/SW 7th Street PD&E Study Build Alternatives WIDER SIDEWALKS - CONCERNS • Drainage impacts • Utility conflicts • Construction impacts FIJ SW 8t" Street/SW 7th Street PD&E Study 20 Build Alternatives ALTERNATIVE #2A - TWO LANES - TWO WAY + BIKE win numb, i 4115 IIIIII; 'llllllllllllllllllllll BENEFITS • Access off peak hour • Wider sidewalks • Improvements to bikes CONCERNS • Access peak hour • Safety • Traffic diversion • Drainage • Construction impacts • Reduces parking by 60% • Environmental impacts SW 8th Street/SW 7t" Street PD&E Study Build Alternatives ALTERNATIVE #3 TWO LANES - ONE WAY SW 8TH STREET 1.5'.5' I 11' I 11' 3 4' 1 6.1.5' 45 Feet 4 Varies 65-75 Feet SW 7TH STREET AMM 1.5' ..I 4' 5' Gutter 3. .5' 4' Curb 32 Feet 50 Feet • 2 through lanes + 1 bike lane • Traffic flow: One-way • Narrows pavement width • Parking: Not modified • Sidewalk: Wider • Improvements at 1-95 Requires change in the historic designation law FDOT SW 8t" Street/SW 7th Street PD&E Study 22 Build Alternatives ALTERNATIVE #3 - TWO LANES - ONE WAY INIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII .11711111141'IJ"I1'ly`I1 ` �- IIII !I Ir un▪ or 1 - E BENEFITS • No impacts to parking • Wider sidewalks • Improvements to bikes \IIIIIIIPIIII1V IIIIIlI, CONCERNS • Safety • Traffic diversion • Drainage • Utility impacts • Construction impacts SW 8 Street/SW 7 Street PD&E Study Build Alternatives 1 .S -�- -MI .. • ALTERNATIVE #3A THREE LANES - SHARED PARKING AND TRAVEL LANE SW 8TH STREET . • P t P 16.5' .5' 1.5' Curb Gutter 11' N 4' • 2.5' 1.5' .5' Gutter Curb 49 Feet �1 S Varies 65-75 Feet SW 7TH STREET i iv iv 36 Feet i s 11 50 Feet • 2 through lanes + 1 bike lane on SW 8th Street • Traffic flow: One-way • Maintains pavement width • Parking: Allowed during off peak hour • Sidewalk: Not modified • Improvements at 1-95 FDOA SW 8 Street/SW 7 Street PD&E Study 24 Build Alternatives ALTERNATIVE #3A THREE LANES - SHARED PARKING AND TRAVEL LANE Arlington, VA Las Olas Boulevard, Ft. Lauderdale, FL FDOT SW 8t" Street/SW 7th Street PD&E Study 25 Build Alternatives ALTERNATIVE #3A — THREE LANES - SHARED PARKING AND TRAVEL LANE 1111111111111111111111 111111plpp11111111W --awe... /11111111k BENEFITS • Travel lane during peak hour • Improvements to bikes • No right-of-way Impacts CONCERNS • Reduces parking by 50% during peak hour • Pedestrian mid -block crossings Build Alternatives • • SW 8TH STREET IN IN ALTERNATIVE #4 THREE LANES - ONE WAY �. .—. . . . t t t 16.5' .5' 1.5' Curb Gutter 4 6.5' 1.5' .5' Gutter Curb .1 49 Feet 11' .5' 1.5' Curb Gutter Varies 65-75 Feet SW 7TH STREET 11' 11' 1.5' .5' Gutter Curb 36 Feet s 50 Feet • 3 through lanes • Traffic flow: One-way • Maintains pavement width • Parking: Not modified • Sidewalk: Not modified • Improvements at 1-95 FDOT SW 8t" Street/SW 7th Street PD&E Study 27 Build Alternatives ALTERNATIVE #4 - THREE LANES - ONE WAY 1111,11.01I I R71 BENEFITS CONCERNS • No impacts to parking • No right-of-way impacts • No improvements to • Minor construction impacts bikes or transit SW 8 Street/SW 7 Street PD&E Study 28 Build Alternatives FD01, SW 8" Street/SW 7th Street PD&E Study Build Alternatives ALTERNATIVE #1 TWO LANES - TWO WAY ALTERNATIVE #2 TWO LANES - TWO WAY + TRANSIT Build Alternatives ALTERNATIVE #2A TWO LANES - TWO WAY + BIKE SW 7 STREET 5d1 8 STREET FIJ SW 8t" Street/SW 7th Street PD&E Study 31 Build Alternatives ALTERNATIVE #3 TWO LANES - ONE WAY SW 3 AVENUE FFREE-ELOW LANE \\\ ALTERNATIVE #3A & #4 THREE LANES - ONE WAY FD01, SW 8" Street/SW 7th Street PD&E Study 32 Build Alternatives ALTERNATIVE #3 ALTERNATIVE #3A & #4 TWO LANES - ONE WAY THREE LANES - ONE WAY SW 4th AVE 1 :I II II II III /1a SW 6 STREET SW 7t1 STREET SW 3rd AVE SW 8th STREET FDOT SW 8t" Street/SW 7th Street PD&E Study 33 Alternative Analysis SAMPLE EVALUATION MATRIX Safety Environmental Impacts Community Input Parking Access Construction Impacts + Enhanced At.#2 Alt. #3 Alt. #3A Alt. #4 0 No Improvements/No Impacts — Impacts FDOT SW 8t" Street/SW 7t" Street PD&E Study Next Steps • Alternatives Public Workshop September 2017 • Selection of Recommended Alternative October 2017 • Public Hearing January 2018 • Location Design Concept Acceptance (LDCA) May 2018 .ACTIVITY kiMiil'i 2016 i..I.INIniir. 2017 MI.IMIII'IQISIDIMI.aIIIF1i1 21028 M Notice to Proceed Public Involvement Engineering Data Cgollection -- Environmental Data Collection Environmental Analysis Engineering Analysis Public Kick-off Meeting Alternatives Public Workshop Engineering Reports Public Hearing Location Design Concept Acceptance FDOT SW 8t" Street/SW 7th Street PD&E Study 35 Questions / Comments ONE TEXT OR CALL COULD 'WRECK - IT ALL Bao-Ying Wang, P.E. Project Manager Consultant Management Office Florida Department of Transportation — District Six 1000 NW 111 Avenue, Room 6251 Miami, Florida 33172 Phone: 305-470-5211 Email: BaoYing.Wang@dot.state.fl.us Vilma Croft, P.E. Project Manager H NTB Corporation Phone: 305-222-1457 Email: VCroft@hntb.com nr' CLICK IT Dfl TICKET www.fdotmiamidade.com/CalleOchoStudy.html FDOT SW 8t" Street/SW 7th Street PD&E Study ATTACHMENT C Proposal No. Date: 2699 9/20/17 Concurrency Management Analysis City of Miami Planning & Zoning Department Impact of Proposed Amendment to Future Land Use Map AMENDMENT INFORMATION Applicant: MAR 704 LLC; MIAMI AUTOMOTIVE RETAIL INC; MAR 716 SW 7TH ST LLC; MAR 720 SW 7TH STREET LLC; MAR 734 SW 7TH STREET LLC Address: 704 SW 7 AV; 712, 716, 720, & 734 SW7 ST Boundary Streets: North: South: SW 8 ST West: SW 8 AV Proposed Change: From: Medium Density Restricted Commercial To: Restricted Commercial Existing Designation, Maximum Land Use Intensity Residential 0.9300 acres @ 65 DU/acre Peak Hour Person -Trip Generation, Residential SW 7 ST East: SW 7 AV Proposed Designation, Maximum Land Use Intensity Residential 0.9300 acres @ 150 DU/acre Peak Hour Person -Trip Generation, Residential Net Increment With Proposed Change: Population Dwelling Units Peak Hour Person -Trips Planning District County Wastewater Collection Zone Drainage Subcatchment Basin Solid Waste Collection Route Transportation Corridor Name 60 39 140 74 203 79 35 Little Havana 309 J1 221 SW7ST DU's DU's RELEVANT MCNP GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES Land Use Goal LU-1 Land Use Objective LU-1.1 Land Use Policy 1.1.1 Capital Improvements Goal CI-1 Capital Improvements Objective CI-1.2 Capital Improvements Policy 1.2.3 a - g (See attachment 1) CONCURRENCY ANALYSIS RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE Population Increment, Residents 203 MCNP Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Policy PR1.1.4 requires a 10-minute (defined as 1/2 mile) barrier -free walk to a park entrance. Concurrency Checkoff OK POTABLE WATER TRANSMISSION Population Increment, Residents Transmission Requirement, 95 g/r/d Excess Capacity Before Change Excess Capacity After Change Concurrency Checkoff 203 19,300 >2% above demand >2% above demand OK SANITARY SEWER TRANSMISSION Population Increment, Residents Transmission Requirement, 95 g/r/d Excess Capacity Before Change Excess Capacity After Change Concurrency Checkoff 203 19,300 See Note 1. See Note 1. WASD Permit Required STORM SEWER CAPACITY Exfiltration System Before Change Exfiltration System After Change Concurrency Checkoff On -site On -site OK SOLID WASTE COLLECTION Population Increment, Residents Solid Waste Generation, 1.28tons/resident/yl Excess Capacity Before Change Excess Capacity After Change Concurrency Checkoff 203 260 800 540 OK TRAFFIC CIRCULATION Population Increment, Residents Peak -Hour Person -Trip Generation LOS Before Change LOS After Change Concurrency Checkoff 203 35 A A OK NOTES: Permit for sanitary sewer connection must be issued by Miami -Dade Water and Sewer Authority Department (WASA) Excess capacity, if any, is currently not known. ASSUMPTIONS AND COMMENTS Population increment is assumed to be all new residents. Peak -period trip generation is based on ITE Trip Generation, 5th Edition at 1.4 ppv average occupancy for private passenger vehicles. Transportation Corridor capacities and LOS are from Table PT-2(R1), Transportation Corridors report. Potable water and wastewater transmission capacities are in accordance with Miami -Dade County stated capacities and are assumed correct. Service connections to water and sewer mains are assumed to be of adequate size; if not, new connections are to be installed at owner's expense. Recreation/Open Space acreage requirements are assumed with proposed change made. ATTACHMENT D • CoStar LoopNet Apartments.comTM f�� 44. tJ ja, 1 JO Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing NAAHL & ULI Symposium I October 11, 2016 Slicing And Dicing Rental Housing U.S. Rental Housing Inventory By Units Rent Subsidized 3.3 Million 8% Market Rate. Market/Affordable rt 16.0 Million 37% Sources: U.S. Census Bureau; CoStar Portfolio Strategy 1-4Units 23.5 Million 55% As of August 2016 # CoStar Slicing And Dicing Rental Housing U.S. Rental Housing Inventory By Units 1&2Star 5.6 Million 13% Sources: U.S. Census Bureau; CoStar Portfolio Strategy # CoStar As of August 2016 page 3 One- And Two -Star Rating Criteria CoStar Building Rating System (BRS) • CoStar i DEFINITION Architectural Design Exterior Materials/Facade Fenestration/Glazing/Views Overall Aesthetics 4* structure/Systems Purely functional. Amenities Unit Amenities/Design Site Amenities Site/Landscaping Back, stucco, EIFS, precast concrete, siding with noticeable aging_ Small, seemingly inadequate windows. Average. functional. Below average finishes, inefficient use of space. Likely only one or no on -site shared facilities. Minimal or no landscaping, no exterior spaces_ Certifications Unlikely a certified/labeted green and energy efficient building. Practically uncompetitive with respect to typical multi -family investors, may require significant renovation, possibly functionatty obsolete. page 4 Three -Star Rating Criteria CoStar Building Rating System (BRS) # CoStar DEFINITION Architectural Design Structure/Systems Exterior Materials/Facade Fenestration/Glazing/Views Brick, stucco, EIFS, precast concrete, vinyl or fiber cement siding, possibly 4 Star materials with signs of age. Punched windows, fair mix of glazed and opaque surfaces that provide adequate natural tight. Overall Aesthetics Average with respect to background buildings, contextually appropriate. Likely smaller and older with Less energy -efficient and controllable systems. Amenities Unit Amenities/Design Average quality finishes, layout conducive to compact lifestyle Site/Landscaping Certifications Site Amenities but not necessarily an open floor plan. A few on -site shared facilities and spaces such as a Clubhouse/Party Room, Fitness Center, Business Center, Pool, Laundry Facilities, etc. Modest landscaping and likely_ small or no exterior spaces. Possibly a certified/labeled green and energy efficient building. page 5 Four -Star Rating Criteria CoStar Building Rating System (BRS) • CoStar GROUP EFINI + N 4-Star buildings are constructed with higher end finishes and specifications, providing desirable amenities to residents and designed/built to competitive and contemporary standards. Architectural Design Structure/Systems Amenities Site/Landscaping Certifications Exterior Materials/Facade Fenestration/GlazingNiews Overall Aesthetics Durable materials, well -detailed and constructed metal panel, wood veneer or terracotta cladding; possibly exhibiting minor signs of weathering and wear. Large windows, great natural day lighting and views_ Representing recent trends and standards in design and/or of a timeless, perhaps an historic quality. Likely to have some 5 Star ualities, or of a prior generation of buildings_ Includes some high quality finishes such as hardwood floors, Unit AmenitieslDesign granite countertops, stainless steel appliances, bay windowisi, crown molding, a balcony/patio and in -unit washer/dryers. Also ma have an o en floor Lan and hi h/vaulted ceilings_ Site Amenities Several on -site shared facilities such as a Clubhouse/Party Roorn, Fitness Center, Business Center, Pool, Concierge, etc_ Well maintained landscaping where applicable; likely to have exterior gathering spaces, roof terrace or courtyard. Possibly a certified/labeled green and energy efficient building. page 6 Five -Star Rating Criteria • CoStar CoStar Building Rating System (BRS) RATI c GROUP DEFINITION A A 5-Star building represents the luxury end of multi -family buildings defined by finishes. amenities, the overall interior/exterior design and the highest levet of specifications for its style (garden, low-rise, mid -rise. or high-rise/. Architectural Design Exterior Materials/Facade High -quality durable materials - natural stone, glass, well detailed and constructed metal panel, wood veneer. or terracotta cladding; accentuating lighting_ Fenestration/Glazing/Views Large windows. abundant natural day lighting, generally available exterior views. high efficient glazing specification. Overall Aesthetics Structure/Systems Amenities Representing current trends and standards in design and/or of a timeless, perhaps a historic quality_ Aesthetically exceptional arrangement of forms, massing and materials. Possibly designed by a notable or signature architect. High ceilings; modern energy -efficient. central HVAC, individually controlled systems. high- speed elevators. likely new or newly renovated. Unit Amenities/Design Site Amenities Requires numerous high quality finishes such as hardwood floors, granite countertops, stainless steel appliances, bay window's). crown molding, a balcony/patio and in -unit washer/dryers. Also typically has an open floor plan and high/vaulted ceilings of 9'+ Requires plentiful on -site shared facilities including a clubhouse/party room, fitness center, business center, pool, concierge, etc. Site/Landscaping Continually maintained Landscaping where applicable; exterior gathering spaces, roof terrace or courtyard. Certifications Possibly a certified/labeled green and energy efficient building. page 7 CoStar Building Rating System EXTERIOR 1 Star 2 Star 3 Star 4 Star .1ANT* **" 5 Star ** ** 4. tax CoStar- INTERIOR R page 8 Affordability Issues More Significant At Top End Of Market lb C Rent As A % Of 100% Area Median Income By Star Rating 28% Rent As A % Of Income 26% 24% 22% 20% 18% 16% 14% 12% 10% 2013 2014 1 & 2 Star 3 Star —4 & 5 Star Source: CoStar Group 2015 2016 As of 16Q2 page 9 1 & 2 Star Rents Remain Affordable In Most Metros `ior CoStar- 1 & 2 Star Apartment Rents As A Percent Of 100% Area Median Income 1 & 2 Star Rent As A % 4f Income I<15% 15% - 16% 16% - 17% 17% - 20% Sources: ESRI; CoStar Portfolio Strategy As of 16Q2 page 10 1 & 2 Star Represents A Major Portion Of The Market Number Of Units By Star Rating 22.3% 3,393,118 36.2% 51501,144 41.5% 6,310,441 1 & 2 Star 3 Star • 4 & 5 Star Source: CoStar Group As of August 2016 • • CoStar The Vast Majority Of Multifamily Properties Are 1 & 2 Star ttCostar Number Of Properties By Star Rating 1 &2Star r3Star •4&5Star Source: CoStar Group As of August 2016 page 12 1 & 2 Star Properties Can Be Found Almost Anywhere 1 & 2 Star Units By Metro . %kw CoStar- • • • • • • • • • • • • •. • • •• • • • • • • • • • • •+ • • • • 1• • • • • • Ili • ...• • • • • • •• S • • • • `•t• • ▪ • • • •• • • • • • • •• • • ••A• •• ••• • • ,4w. ;OD: • • UN1f n #▪ .• .. •• ••O• •• •„ a •• + • . • • • ♦ • • • • . .Iµ • • •• • • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •* • • i• • • •• • O. • • • • ••• • • • �• • • • • • 0 • • • • • • • • •• � • • • • • • • •• • ••• • •• • • •• • ••• . 6' •• • •• • • • • • • ••• • • • • • • • • ♦ ♦ • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 11. • • • • • • • • • • 0 • OA ii #b • • •• Cora Based Statistical areas 1 a 2 Star Units • 100 10000 • 10 000-50.000 50000 100000 100 000 206,000 000 I.rfb .tui • • • • • • • •_�1.I •11 ,n,. A[E 1('() .1'r lsrr_ Ss+rrcrs:iss.IlIRi 0eLDrme lwiw saP. ec•emen! 4 Corp GibCc USGS rAc, 1 pod*. 1 !. 3ealast 1011 14dasearllL, ttal•ance :Wnay. 13e1•P er, 1f ETI EsnChu* 410a11e OnI1 P• •pnrrin!•, ai•i * 40 #011#4040.11 set th• GIS Y w Coo mossy Sources: ESRI; CoStar Portfolio Strategy As of 16Q2 page 13 Los Angeles And New York Dominate 1 & 2 Star Properties By Metro 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Number Of Properties (000s) 18.4% 11.6% 4.3% 1 3.7% 2.9% Source: CoStar Group San Francisco 2.6% 2.0 % m Ca in 2 2.0% 1.9% 1.7% ° 14 / IIii° Orange County # CoStar 1.4% 1.4% 1.3% 1.3% 1.2% 1.1% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% •.Uu..... Inland Empire a) 0 c0 Portland OR Fort Lauderdale Northern NJ 0 o 0 0) (>B As of August 2016 page 14 Almost Half Of 1 & 2 Star Inventory In 50+ Unit Buildings Number Of Units By Building Size And Star Rating 4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 Number Of Units (Millions) 1 1 5-9 Units 10-19 Units 20-49 Units 1& 2 Star 3 Star ■ 4& 5 Star Source: CoStar Group As of August 2016 # CoStar 50-99 Units 100-199 Units 200+ Units page 15 Most Units Built More Than 35 Years Ago 1 &2 Units By Building Age 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 Number Of Units (Millions) # CoStar 1900-09 1910-19 1920-29 1930-39 1940-49 1950-59 1960-69 1970-79 1980-89 1990-99 2000- Source: CoStar Group As of August 2016 page 16 1 & 2 Star Properties Spread Out Around The D.C. Area Washington, DC 1 & 2 Star Inventory # CoStar Washington D.C. Apartment Inventory • 1 & 2 Star Properties • • Silver Spring/ • Silver Spring White Oak • • Bethesda • •r • r • • Con ecticutAv- Northwestr— Georgetown! p Wisconsin Avei • Arlington County • •t•' • l Balls on • ! • • • • • • • 9 Hyattsville • •• . • " • Adams Morgya•`f • Brightwoo Colu mei Walt his Fort Totten • • u llres' isv And Crystal City/ Pentagon City • • • • A lex andria/1495 • • • •• 1 +>t9► Greenbelt •! • 4 • • • • • Lowey Neartheas • • s Capitol Hill • • 4 t• Sout wrest! Anacostial Navy Yard ••S•outheast • i• 6 • 1• So throe tl • • • Navy Yar1Hy old Town/ i_ P to+mac Yar • • xan • (i • •• • Branch Ave • Capitol Heights/ Largo 4 -ri, HERE. DeLorme, U805, rmap, increment P Corp., RCAN, Esri Jagan, NET!, ETD ong Kong). E frailantl `* apmrylndia, O OpenStre etMap contributors, and the GIS User n'ty Sources: ESRI; CoStar Portfolio Strategy As of 16Q2 page 17 High Vacancy Properties Are Few And Far Between Washington, DC 1 & 2 Star Vacancy Rates . %kw Costar - Washington D.C. Apartment Inventory Vacancy 2 • < % q 2%- 4% 4% - 6% q 6°% - 8% • >3% Silver Spring! Silver Spring White Oak Bethesda 0 Connecticut A Northwest q Georgetown! Wisconsin Ave. Arlington County Hyattsville q • 041 Brightwood! Fort Totten, Lower Northeast H Street/NoMA q lii ower Northeast • �osslyn ��• 7T • q Capitol Hill q Ballon: Ahwe5tr outhwsstl• Capitol Heights/ Largo r4 IV Anacostia! ,'•_.�' (Y Navy Yard a•Southee7- o..) •r • i i 0q '411 r Greenbelt Alex andriall395 Downtown Crystal City Pentagon City • OO�d Towni P tornac Yar q q 0 1,7 So thwe Navy Yar f 8 ri. HERE. DeLorme, US3S. ono Kong). E hailer! Branch Ave rmap, increment P Corp., NRC:AN, EsriJapar . METI. Esri art India, @ dpenStreetMAap contributors. and the GIS User Sources: ESRI; CoStar Portfolio Strategy As of 16Q2 page 18 1 & 2 Star Large Part Of Inventory In Close -In SubmarketsoStar 1 & 2 Star Construction As A Percent Of Inventory '! & 2 Star Product As a % Of Inventory 0% - 5% 5%- 10% 1 D% - 20% 20% - 50% 50% 0 25 Gaithersburg Reston/Herndon Corridor McLean/Great Falls ans Corner e Arlington CounNoMA Lower}lortheast Downtown - ,�� F assl t Capitol 1-i+ll— - Fairfax Cit /Oakt Falls Church/Vienna Ilst , � sottthwt'sti Y __,avy Anacostial `ram — r Rockville Bethesda Silver Sprin0 Silver Spring' White Oak Greenhe r Outlying Fairfax County 10 Miles Annandale Hyattsville Connetlicut i]ittwood! ly.ttithwes FortT ien Adams Morgan/ Coh4tnhiaHeights N. I owerNor heast II `Street/ Yard Crystal Cs .. Y d Southeast - t Pentdgou City c , , Alexandria+l-395 Potor�iafc' • HuntingtaniSpringfield North Prince ' Georges County •a - Capitol Heights ;cargo _ Branch Ave South Prince Georges County 0penStreetMay, fand) contributors. C IC. BY. SR Sources: ESRI; CoStar Portfolio Strategy As of 16Q2 page 19 Vacancies Show The Effect Of Construction Average Vacancy By Star Rating Vacancy Rate 9% 8% 7% 6% 5% 4% 3% 2% 1% 0% 2013 1 &2Star Source: CoStar Group 2014 2015 2016 3 Star —4 & 5 Star # CoStar As of 16Q2 page 20 Rent Spread Has Widened Slightly Average Asking Rent By Star Rating $1,500 $1,400 $1,300 $1,200 $1,100 $1,000 $900 $800 $700 $600 Average Asking Rent 2013 2014 2015 2016 1 & 2 Star 3 Star —4 & 5 Star Source: CoStar Group # CoStar As of 16Q2 Core Coastal Metros Are The Priciest 1 & 2 Star Average Asking Rent By Metro $3, 000 Average Asking Rent $2,500 $2,000 $1,500 $1,000 $500 $0 1 1 1 .�oo�oc78cna4_ -E�c� � � �cnoo�lc� cccn� L O ocmO 1 1 1 1 1 < ca c _lc O co (B J - Oco •South East Source: CoStar Group �Nara�L�I♦♦att�C_aJ�cc_000cna"�v0.c ' L W L L'�--r L V -"'� — U ° c —c >a0°cnocjcaor>� c,_Uca� a) � E o EE a� 0__ a� o E (B c0__D ' Ez �J J ca„o �u) 2 4 a) O — u_ Midwest West • CoStar c ca = (DI) O X CD >� cn cn cn--+ >ticn OccOOoc— C'ccII cn }'� c ca> cDE As of 16Q2 page 22 But On A Comparative Basis May Be Relatively Cheap 1 & 2 Star Apartment Rents As A Percent Of Market Rent 1 & 2 Star Rent As A % Of Market Rent = 75% 75% - 77.5% 77.5%--80% 111 80% - 82.5% >82.5% Sources: ESRI; CoStar Portfolio Strategy # CoStar As of 16Q2 Strong Long -Term Rent Growth In 1 & 2 Star Segment Average Rent Growth By Star Rating 8% Rent Growth 5.0% 4.3% 5.6% 6.4% 3.0% 1& 2 Star 3 Star 4& 5 Star • Average Annual Rent Growth Since 2013 Y/Y Rent Growth # CoStar Source: CoStar Group As of 16Q2 page 24 Lower Vacancies Levels The Playing Field Average Rent Growth By Star Rating 8% Rent Growth 5.60% • 5.96% I. I 1 & 2 Star 3 Star ■Average Annual Rent Growth Since 2013 Y/Y Rent Growth • Average Annual Economic Rent Growth 5.80% • 4&5Star # CoStar Source: CoStar Group As of 16Q2 page 25 Lower Vacancies Levels The Playing Field Average Rent Growth By Star Rating 8% Rent Growth 1& 2 Star 3 Star 4& 5 Star ° Average Annual Rent Growth Since 2013 Y/Y Rent Growth • Y/Y Economic Rent Growth Source: CoStar Group # CoStar As of 16Q2 page 26 Market Capitalization Of 1 & 2 Star Inventory $180 $160 $140 $120 $100 $80 $60 $40 $20 $0 Market Capitalization (Billions) # CoStar .I._■ ■��___�__ San Francisco O 0) a) 0 c (a U) Orange County >, a) c) 0 (a (1) (a u) O) O O m U (B to 0_ 0_ -= U(n mO aW Co co c_ 0 Washington, DC Portland OR Inland Empire Northern NJ Dallas - FW Sacramento Fort Lauderdale 0 O E (B c (B Source: CoStar Portfolio Strategy As of 16Q2 page 27 Pricing Plays A Role In Values Market Capitalization Of 1 & 2 Star Inventory $180 $160 $140 $120 $100 $80 $60 $40 $20 $0 Market Capitalization (Billions) San Francisco Orange County > N O O c (a ' (1) (a u) O) O E O m -3 CO % 0_(Q -U(n mO aW Co co c_ 0 Washington, DC Portland OR # CoStar Average Price Per Unit (000s) $350 Inland Empire Northern NJ Dallas - FW Sacramento Fort Lauderdale Source: CoStar Portfolio Strategy As of 16Q2 $300 $250 $200 $150 $100 $50 $0 page 28 Pricing Plays A Role In Values Market Capitalization Of 1 & 2 Star Inventory $180 $160 $140 $120 $100 $80 $60 $40 $20 $0 # CoStar Market Capitalization (Billions) Average Price Per SF AAA AAAAA AA 4 San Francisco Orange County > N O O C (a (1) CO u) 0) O O m CO (a to 0_ 0_ WCI3t= U (n m- a O Co co c _ a_ 0 Washington, DC Portland OR Inland Empire Northern NJ Dallas - FW Sacramento Fort Lauderdale 92 O E (a m (a Source: CoStar Portfolio Strategy As of 16Q2 $400 $350 $300 $250 $200 $150 $100 $50 $0 page 29 Cap Rate Spreads Are Narrowing Cap Rates By Star Rating 9.0% 8.5% 8.0% 7.5% 7.0% 6.5% 6.0% 5.5% 5.0% 4.5% 4.0% Average Cap Rate # CoStar Spread (BPS) 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 & 2 Star Cap Rate —4 & 5 Star Spread Source: CoStar Group Historical Average (2005-Present) 3 Star Spread As of 16Q2 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 (50) (100) (150) page 30 More Attractive Spreads Outside Of New York And L.A. Cap Rates By Star Rating Excluding New York And Los Angeles 9.0% 8.5% 8.0% 7.5% 7.0% 6.5% 6.0% 5.5% 5.0% 4.5% 4.0% Average Cap Rate # CoStar Spread (BPS) 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 & 2 Star Cap Rate —4 & 5 Star Spread Source: CoStar Group Historical Average (2005-Present) 3 Star Spread As of 16Q2 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 (50) (100) (150) page 31 Ownership Concentrated In Regional And Local Players Top Owners Of 1 & 2 Star Properties 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 Units Edward Rose & Sons f Princeton Enterprises Morgan Management Hendersen-Webb Pangea Real Estate Elon Property Management Regional Management • Units Properties 4 1 Pama Management Warren Properties Kushner Companies Monarch Investment Hartman & Tyner J.K. Residential Services ROCO Real Estate New Life Multi -Family Mgmt The Peterson Companies Western National Group Morgan Properties Estates NY Real Estate Services Goldberg Realty Associates # CoStar Properties 200 Source: CoStar Group As of 16Q2 160 120 80 40 0 page 32 •• CoStar Shaw Lupton slupton@costar.com Ethan Vaisman evaisman@costar.com page 33 1.i CoStar- Appendix CoStar Building Rating System # CoStar Mt1Lii•FAMILY [tiling Detinition A II A 5-Star building represents nttd•rise. or IMgft.d..) ArahIwCRMM Andvari/ Design Structte 1 SSSestr the Iwury end of rmaMFlamrey billings . Edema Mah+Ide r Fe*,Hgf , Fenestration r Glazing ' Wen "G � defined by flnhPM, ameollin.s, the overall interio0exlenor design end the highest level of soecibcellona for its style (garden, low -Ilse, -quality durable motorists - nehlrol Mon a Jlass, wen detained,end constructed metal penal, woodnee ver, ce 'weep% dedding naenludlrig Ulcalrfdr)Ay, abundant nab►til day l ears aurae* eatery eleven, esprianl n rG° g�� � h! � � epearkalra Repesnntlnp current kvnde red slendal'ds ei damn G or of a timeless perhaps a Nitric quaky Mlltte.cllty exceptional erterge Isms d lame messing and melanin Preeibty doomed by a notebee Or signature *refuted HVAC. di reely cc/Moiled spiking, high -egad etrrrtors, Bang now or newly nrwaeled _ Numerous hmh tlnlaties hardwapd loom Marrwl.I bey Qalcc1. l]Yelf� H9n ailing*. modern ennywllaent 14 14 '14 AMMO Sao/ Laney-MON Z;er1YCstluM . Unit AntanaafrM I Dee41l quarily ouch eS g coirrtert ipf Steel applle4ICs.t einrkrtrie) aces* molting, a and Irt.0 d warherhyyere Also qpcali nee flco p n and hcriOusdied oehnQs • Animatesan_opsn SalAnimates roesnlaliy rr iritwrr.rl Iirrrdsratl-rrl P . Ly,, . .,1 r!, ,II' 11,1,1,a.I,•1,•rly,'Ir _ . - P1mnlbl i n i inered ladenaM epelatt Inckidrrig a clubltoue rkterty rrr."rt, linwriy r nniM ri ii e s Canter peril tox'1t ciq nk: Owen Aitrncii?n, rrrnrnr vilf'norg lisnan ir.2.04 lerraoo or cn,rrirerd r 11',11.111r 1.3ter buildinga are comit' ucted with higher end finishes and ArChlld teal Malhelk Exterior Material' i Facade AnSmn . Ftlrsellranon ' 01112irg ! View! . Overall Aes.w c1 5auctlre .1 Systerne , trkMy In hare %Ante 5 Sid/ quanlwtc, Unit Amenities ! Deign Amen/tee Site Amenities Site ! Lamtscao►ig Wol m.intei'tnd Landscaping wtrere rtdratrnn. Prieertol a :anderd r iDDelnd flrvrrt speuhction*, providing nexrable simnel"' to residents and desjredlleuil to competitive and coM.mporary.tanderde Dunatie materiels wef dirt/liedarea ccrisno led Intel panel, wood veneer or lerr000a tte addtng. pass tit) etnibibrrg minor signs of wain inrrj err.} veneer Large madame greet natural day lightrg and worn Representing noent trends and standards in deegn indict d a armlets. prows S an natarac quality pon1 Iy alai oklrrr %misfile Ir,c ud MM nigh 501 quitkv metres mr'deta as benod Mori, prMtMufts cQrtops. Wrnle's steel appsnxx*Moots).s. bay *Moots). f wIl *norm lI a beicorip,petto and n unfl wnehenbrycne Also may flare an open floor plan and IUgheaurted cortege Several on -silo shared *OW and wile F WO as a ClubhotaesParty Rcoin f runes Censer Business Center. Pboi. Gorocrp, etc appltoab e, likely to hens extarler gotten r(l Tberracs or ccurttard _speceli and energy Mltknwit baildeil __ re i - ds►dtrrdl AaSUISIiC ! or, Laura , Systems r },rJ r..:iie.Laikwu Exterior MaUrlais f Furred. Ferwtrabon ! Glaring t Mews Over*, A.aeNrlp , Likely ernalow end cider with lealu Unit Ammer ! Design . Sits Amanrtes . IA3dres1 landscaping rand IMnq snail Poeyby a swanned 1 lapgsod green r Brim stucco E IFS. pieced concrem le oil or Leer Deent sdrng, pcesrbty higher qualify (4 Slav materwls with sirs at age Punched windows, lilt rein cal glared anal r;peque Sufaces IhaI provides marque* netua i tight _ Avenge wtlh reaped .lo.badi9round t;uidegu ccnbxbuiIty sppropnale. energp•elsclanl splintssplintsrHi 1 Average quietly finishes, layout corduUve to compel destye r but not nre t onseray en open floor pin , A Inv on eels snared Inclines and spices etiCi'I 411 I Clubtouma'P.t1y Roam, Fitness Canter1fgusin.... Center. Pool, Laundry learner, Mc rr no exlrr<Inx spoons red miaow etlOonl building .� W 11d:lurni AealtenC 1r !rdsUna " D1 I' ' I.Andecaping '.Nine . Exuma !Apiarists , Far�de Feneetranon 1 Glaring r Views ( eterfAee►INca Purely Puncitutun Al1enaes ! Design Sine Amenities IM. , thorns& or na Ills{tsupn'9, na exterior L'nlMelr a cabinet! latotidi green I Brie* stucco EIFS, precast concrete acing *MI reAlosable prig ` Smelt owning iredequlle wlntlaMs , Averagetii'dmi j Below average finishes. h.11rprnt one tat span i Leary only one or no an Iran vinnrd 1ac>Lsn% epaon and nnrrny ethr.nnt bunling 1 1,.ticailly woortpelllMe wen reseed ID Typical rrnrlU-fenlly et , may requite smnifichM ranoreltan, marbly !undone* obsolete. page 35 Average 1 & 2 Star Asking Rents By Metro Rank Metro Name Average Asking Rent 1 2 3 East Bay 4 New York $ 5 Honolulu $ San Francisco $ San Jose $ 6 Long Island $ 7 Orange County $ 2,589 2,188 1,973 1,763 1,742 1,696 1,551 8 Boston 1,484 9 Los Angeles I$ 1,477 10 San Diego $ 1,362 11 Washington, DC $ 1,321 12 Northern NJ $ 1,249 13 Miami $ 1,180 14 Seattle $ 1,103 15 Fort Lauderdale $ 1,094 16 Stamford $ 1,060 17 Denver $ 1,042 18 Inland Empir $ 1,034 19 Portland OR $ 1,030 20 Hartford $ 1,012 21 Austin $ 991 22 Baltimore I $ 987 23 Palm Beach $ 987 24 Philadelphia $ 975 25 Sacramento $ 26 Chicago MI $ 27 Minneapolis $ 950 898 882 # CoStar Rank Metro Name Average Asking Rent 28 29 30 Minneapolis Nashville Raleigh 882 875 860 31 Norfolk $ 841 32 Orlando $ 840 33 Pittsburgh $ 835 34 Salt Lake City $ 821 35 New Orleans $ 806 36 Tampa $ 805 37 Dallas - FW $ 796 38 Houston $ 795 39 Atlanta $ 794 40 Richmond $ 765 41 Detroit $ 761 42 Milwaukee $ 761 43 Charlotte $ 729 44 San Antonio $ 729 45 Phoenix $ 713 46 Jacksonville $ 702 47 Kansas City $ 682 48 Cleveland $ 677 49 Saint Louis $ 670 50 Las Vegas $ 646 51 Indianapolis $ 645 52 Columbus OH $ 635 53 Cincinnati $ 635 54 Oklahoma City $ 610 Source: CoStar Group As of 16Q2 page 36 # ; CoStar These CoStar Portfolio Strategy materials contain financial and other information from a variety of public and proprietary sources. CoStar Group, Inc. and its affiliates (collectively, "CoStar") have assumed and relied upon, without independent verification, the accuracy and completeness of such third party information in preparing these materials. The modeling, calculations, forecasts, projections, evaluations, analyses, simulations, or other forward -looking information prepared by CoStar and presented herein (the "Materials") are based on various assumptions concerning future events and circumstances, which are speculative, uncertain and subject to change without notice. You should not rely upon the Materials as predictions of future results or events, as actual results and events may differ materially. All Materials speak only as of the date referenced with respect to such data and may have materially changed since such date. CoStar has no obligation to update any of the Materials included in this document. You should not construe any of the data provided herein as investment, tax, accounting or legal advice. CoStar does not represent, warrant or guaranty the accuracy or completeness of the information provided herein and shall not be held responsible for any errors in such information. Any user of the information provided herein accepts the information "AS IS" without any warranties whatsoever. To the maximum extent permitted by law, CoStar disclaims any and all liability in the event any information provided herein proves to be inaccurate, incomplete or unreliable. © 2016 CoStar Realty Information, Inc. No reproduction or distribution without permission. page 37 AERIAL FILE ID: 2699 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT ADDRESSES: 704 SW 7 AV; 712, 716, 720, & 734 SW 7 ST 0 137.5 275 1 i I 550 Feet FUTURE LAND USE MAP (EXISTING) FILE ID: 2699 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT Low Density Restricted Commercial Low Density Multifamily Residential Duplex - Residential N SW 6TH ST 1- 0 Medium Density Restricted Commercial 1- w Medium Dens ty Multifamily Residential Medium Density Restricted Commercial 704 SW 8TH ST lap ADDRESSES: 704 SW 7 AV; 712, 716, 720, & 734 SW 7 ST 0 125 250 I i I 500 Feet FUTURE LAND USE MAP (PROPOSED) FILE ID: 2699 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT Low Density Restricted Commercial Low Density Multifamily Residential —Duplex - Residential N SW 6TH ST 1- 0 Medium Density Restricted Commercial w Medium Dens ty Multifamily Residential Medium Density Restricted Commercial 704 SW 8TH ST lap ADDRESSES: 704 SW 7 AV; 712, 716, 720, & 734 SW 7 ST 0 125 250 I i I 500 Feet