Urban planning community

+ Reply to thread
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Replacing old apartments with new-TDR?

  1. #1
    Member
    Registered
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    68

    Replacing old apartments with new-TDR?

    Do you know of any cities that have used Transferable Development Rights or similar schemes to encourage the removal or renovation of "blighted" properties?

    The southern half of our city is littered with apartments of widely varying quality. Many serve the lower income levels of the community and help us provide our "fair share" of affordable housing in the region.

    Another part of our city is very "high end" and will soon be the site of a series of light rail stops. There is very little multifamily housing in the area, but there is plenty of vacant land, a strong market for housing, developer's clamoring to build it, and strict land use controls enforced by the private sector on all properties in the area.

    Multifamily provides 60% of our housing stock, which makes many in the city very nervous. Additionally, the bulk of this stock is in the southern, lower income portion of the city and much of that stock has a "run down" appearance.

    In 1997, we passed a comprehensive plan which capped multifamily for our city...there are not enough allowable units under the cap to support a series of transit oriented developments along the proposed rail stops, so we have been asked to find ways to justify allowing high end multifamily in the TOD areas.

    One thought would be that we keep the caps in place, but after the cap is met, we could allow a private developer to build new multifamily in exchange for either removing or rehabilitating old multifamily in the southern portion of the city. Maybe allow five new units per one old unit retired.

    Of course, this puts us over the cap, and potentially elminates affordable housing. If the old apartment is rehabed, it will rent for a higher rate, if it is elminated, we can't build enough single family homes on the abandoned lot to house the people displaced from the aparatments, even if they could afford a subsidized downpayment and mortgage payment.

    This idea seems to resemble a TDR scheme, but there is no restriction on building something new in the "sending" zone (as long as it's not low end, thirty year old aparatments). Has anyone heard of such a scheme being used for redevelopment rather than open space preservation?

  2. #2
    Cyburbian jordanb's avatar
    Registered
    May 2003
    Location
    City of Low Low Wages!
    Posts
    3,236
    ^-- Just a thought. Could you rewrite the cap to only apply to rental units? If high-end TND is going to be built it'll be built as condominums.
    Reality does not conform to your ideology.
    http://neighborhoods.chicago.il.us Photographs of Life in the Neighborhoods of Chicago
    http://hafd.org/~jordanb/ Pretentious Weblog.

  3. #3
    Member
    Registered
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally posted by jordanb
    ^-- Just a thought. Could you rewrite the cap to only apply to rental units? If high-end TND is going to be built it'll be built as condominums.
    That's another thought that had come to mind. But can you require that a unit remain owner occupied? How do you do that? Through zoning, deed restriction, or some other tool? Any examples of where its been done?

    We have many townhomes in the city, that are now rental units rather than the owner occupied structures that developers told us they would be.

    Finding a way to convert existing multifamily to owner occupancy, and making new multifamily owner occupied might solve a number of "poor maintenance" related issues.

  4. #4
    Cyburbian nerudite's avatar
    Registered
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    5,503
    I think one of the best examples of a well-run TDR program is King County, Washington. They partner with some of the municipalities to allow for protection of rural areas and transfer of density/development rights to the blighted or redeveloping areas of the incorporated cities. Here's a good example.

  5. #5
    (for now) Frozen Caveman Planner mendelman's avatar
    Registered
    May 2003
    Location
    Staff meeting
    Posts
    8,707
    I'm not really answering your question, but maybe you could go in a completely different direction. maybe you should just make all the new development near the stations into very dense detached single famliy residential (15-20 units/acre with small setbacks, etc.). This could get you closer to the desired TOD densities, but may be more palatable to the community, and more in-line with the provisions of your Comp Plan. Seems like your community is a little hypocritical in its thinking.

    Good luck.
    I'm sorry. Is my bias showing?

    The ends can justify the means.

  6. #6
    Member CosmicMojo's avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2006
    Location
    I'm not sure where I am...or where I want to be
    Posts
    543
    Quote Originally posted by troy
    That's another thought that had come to mind. But can you require that a unit remain owner occupied? How do you do that? Through zoning, deed restriction, or some other tool? Any examples of where its been done?
    I believe HUD financing assistance for developers requires the building stay rental for 5 years and that the owner offer current tenants first right of refusal when it goes condo.

  7. #7
    Member
    Registered
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    68
    The HUD requirements might be something to look at. I know that if we use CDBG/HOME for homebuyer assistance, we can attach strings regarding owner occupancy and longevity in the unit. While such funds would not be used in the proposed new developments, examining the legal mechanisms that create such obligations might be helpful.

    King's County appears to focus on preserving open space. If I remember correctly, I have studied their system before, and it is one of the best in the country. I'm just hoping to stumble across something more applicable to our situation.
    Last edited by troy; 09 Mar 2006 at 3:06 PM. Reason: to get back on topic

+ Reply to thread

More at Cyburbia

  1. Replies: 17
    Last post: 14 Jan 2013, 3:25 PM
  2. Replacing density
    Design, Space, and Place
    Replies: 11
    Last post: 20 Oct 2010, 10:11 AM
  3. Replacing mall anchors with big box stores??
    Economic and Community Development
    Replies: 4
    Last post: 08 May 2005, 11:02 PM
  4. Replies: 29
    Last post: 06 Jan 2005, 2:21 PM
  5. Replies: 15
    Last post: 18 Jan 2004, 4:38 PM