tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11302996.post114139939142790455..comments2023-10-25T11:01:13.802-04:00Comments on Save Our Sarasotaâ„¢: Downtown Density "Bonus"SOS1http://www.blogger.com/profile/06892243531071920272noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11302996.post-1141536174846494112006-03-05T00:22:00.000-05:002006-03-05T00:22:00.000-05:00Hope you don't mind me putting in my 2 cents worth...Hope you don't mind me putting in my 2 cents worth, and I'm speaking for myself, not the editorial board here...<BR/> I'd encourage anyone interested in this subject to read the ERA report, which is on the city's web site (sarasotagov.com).<BR/> Downtown construction imposes formidable expense issues. For example, it costs $25,000 just to provide a structured parking space to serve an attainable unit.<BR/> As i understand the report, it says developers will generally not take on the risk of a project unless they can get at least a 20% profit -- and even big density bonuses won't provide that profit level unless developers get free land or various other breaks. Here are a couple of excerpts from the ERA report:<BR/>from exec summary:<BR/>"This analysis leads to the conclusion that under current and foreseeable market conditions, even a significant density bonus is unlikely to result in new development of attainable units downtown.<BR/>The primary factors behind this situation are the high land and construction costs in downtown compared to other areas of Sarasota...which has had a strong negative impact on development profit."<BR/> The next excerpt explores the problem further (from p. 38):<BR/>"This analysis leads to the conclusion that under current and foreseeable market conditions, even a significant density bonus is unlikely to result in new development of attainable units downtown. Furthermore, as attainable housing requirements are imposed and increased, the development profit decreases and new development becomes less and less probable.<BR/> "However, if developers have some sort of advantage versus current market conditions in the downtown, then a density bonus program could be effective in creating attainable housing. Such an advantage could be due to a range of factors, such as reduced development costs (such as reduced land or construction costs, or even as a function of city financial support or actions), increased sales revenues, or a lower minimum development profit level. In addition, non-profit housing developers may be in a better position to take<BR/>advantage of a downtown housing density bonus, articularly when combined with other development tools, such as below market interest rates or low-income housing tax credits."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11302996.post-1141494931614878892006-03-04T12:55:00.000-05:002006-03-04T12:55:00.000-05:00I was encouraged to hear at the CRA Advisory Board...I was encouraged to hear at the CRA Advisory Board meeting that the ERA consultant was trying to discourage the use of an in lieu of option in regard to the work force housing issue. I do not believe the provision for an in lieu of payment for increased density does anything to reinforce the concept of diversity in the downtown- something Andres Duany spoke of many times. <BR/><BR/>Having watched the concept of the Downtown Residential Overlay District or DROD be quickly taken advantage of by the developers- all it produced was more high end residential units. While the purpose of the DROD was not to necessarily solve for the issue of affordable housing, its inception was discussed in the spirit that increased density in and of itself could bring diversity to the downtown.<BR/><BR/>I believe allowing increased density- that was intended to be for attainable housing- and then allowing an in lieu of fee will accomplish very little in the way of keeping the downtown a healthy and vibrant mix of people that are able to live side by side. <BR/><BR/>The City currently has the ability to introduce attainable housing into the property Sarasota owns on Palm Avenue- the sight of several failed development attempts in the quest for public parking. City staff elicited input on the idea in our CRA Advisory Board meeting spoken of earlier by a previous blogger, and I was encouraged to hear several members support the concept of its inclusion. I think if the City Commission wants to create a difference and begin to address this social issue it can begin right now.<BR/><BR/>In lieu of payments may generate large amounts of money to create projects farther out of the city center as some have pointed out, but the only thing it really accomplishes in my opinion is a further erosion of the concept of what living in a cosmoploitan area is all about. Sarasota's downtown should not be turned into a gated community.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11302996.post-1141493446023909742006-03-04T12:30:00.000-05:002006-03-04T12:30:00.000-05:00Please wake up and smell the coffee. Condominiums ...Please wake up and smell the coffee. Condominiums downtown, on the beaches and on the bay are listed for $500-$1,000/square foot. Inland, they go for $200/square foot. Furthermore, like it or not, people who pay $500 or more/square foot are not used to living next door to the help. Realtors and developers know this. "Affordable housing" downtown, on the beach or on the bay ain't gonna happen folks. I don't care what kind of incentive you offer the developer.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com