what a difference a plan makes master planning and realignment of marinas pacific coast congress...
Post on 12-Jan-2016
215 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
What a Difference a Plan MakesMaster Planning and Realignment of Marinas
Pacific Coast CongressApril 13, 2006Julie Bassuk, AICP, partner, MAKERSPaul Sorensen, principal, BST Associates
architecture urban design
3
Case Study
Oak Harbor Marina Master Plan An unexpected solution
Saved the community millions Built political will to fund marina reconstruction Generated broad-based community support Will result in a first class marina & long term
community asset
4
Orientation
Northeast side of Whidbey Island
90 miles north of Seattle
5 upland & 24 in-water acres
5
History
Formerly a Navy base & seaplane ramp Site transferred to City of Oak Harbor Marina built in 1974 with the promise
that no City funding would be used Dave Williams, a former Air Station
Captain, is the current harbormaster
6
The Marina Today
350 permanent tenants, 24 – 50 foot slips 130 covered slips
Breakwater dock w/ 50 transient slips Boat ramp, monorail, fuel dock Constrained upland
Wedged between Navy, Yacht Club, & boat repair yard
Contains a small harbormaster’s office, storage sheds, auto & trailer parking, a small park….
7
The Problem
Oak Harbor Marina is a community asset in danger of becoming a liability
Slip mix does not meet demand There is no capital replacement
fund
8
The Core Team
Blaine Harbor
Marina Master Planning Experience: PND: 25 years MAKERS: 35 years BST: 30 years
Cap Sante,Anacortes
Fishermen’s Terminal
Edmonds
Des Moines
9
Achieving Success
Balancing objectives Thorough background
research &independent analysis
Exhausting alternate solutions
Building support
10
Address critical maintenance issues
Dredge Upgrade electric Repair existing docks Reconfigure slips to meet market
demand If you can,
Expand the marina
Balancing Objectives: The Harbormaster
11
Increase community activity & the value of the marina to the community
Improve a key site of the City’swaterfront redevelopment program
Balancing Objectives: The City
12
Address in-water facilities first Retain covered moorage Increase slip sizes to meet market Provide a separate multi-use / fishing
float Improve link to downtown Include boater services
Balancing Objectives: The Stakeholders
14
Research & Analysis: Existing Conditions
After over 30 years of service, floats are nearing the end of their useful life
Siltation is causing float damage at low tide Electric service is at capacity & many service
connections/pedestals are in poor condition Many structural elements are in poor
condition Fire protection system is not code compliant
15
Competitive Assessment Demand Forecasts
Existing performance Existing market area Waitlist trends Demand forecasts Industry & Tenant input Capture rate Iterative process to select optimal slip mix
Research & Analysis: Market Analysis
16
Market Analysis Competitive Assessment
Too many small slips, too few large slips
0%
25% 25%
17%
23%
1%
7%
0% 0% 0%0% 0%
35%
14%
31%
4%
12%
0%3%
1%1%
8%
29%
10%
29%
6%9%
0%
6%
2%0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
Lessthan 20
feet
21 to 25feet
26 to 30feet
31 to 35feet
36 to 40feet
41 to 45feet
46 to 50feet
51 to 55feet
56 to 60feet
Morethan 60
feet
Oak Harbor Skagit County Northern Sound
17% - 25% more small slips than other area marinas
17
Market Analysis Vacancy Rate – Small Slips
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2001 2002 2003 2004
Vacancy Rate for small slips has been growing each year.
18
Market Analysis Vacancy Rate – Large Slips
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2001 2002 2003 2004
Vacancy Rate for large slips (36 and up) has been stable.
19
Market Analysis Waitlist
05
1015202530354045
32 36 40 50
Length of Slip
Num
ber o
f Ves
sels
Covered Open
Waitlist at 104 boats, strongest in longer slips.
20
!
!
!
!
!
B e l l i n g h a m
A n a c o r t e s
O a k H a r b o r
C o u p e v i l l e
E v e r e t tM a r i n a O w n e r s
N o O w n e r s 1 o r 2 O w n e r s 3 t o 5 O w n e r s 6 t o 1 0 O w n e r s 1 1 t o 2 0 O w n e r s 2 0 + O w n e r s
Market Analysis Location of Current Tenants
About 80% of owners from Whidbey Island, 12% from Central Puget Sound, rest from other parts of Washington state and outside the state.
21
Market AnalysisDemand Forecast
Year 21-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50 51-55 56-60 Over 60' TotalPrimary & Secondary Markets2004 10,809 4,771 2,539 1,977 1,040 517 187 101 159 22,100 2020 13,102 5,783 3,745 2,916 1,684 837 322 174 392 28,956 CAGR 1.2% 1.2% 2.5% 2.5% 3.1% 3.1% 3.5% 3.5% 5.8% 1.7%Other Washington2004 10,960 5,239 1,993 1,392 567 132 60 18 33 20,394 2020 14,103 6,741 2,759 1,927 857 200 98 29 61 26,775 CAGR 1.6% 1.6% 2.1% 2.1% 2.6% 2.6% 3.1% 3.1% 3.9% 1.7%Washington Total2004 21,769 10,010 4,532 3,369 1,607 649 247 119 192 42,494 2020 27,266 12,538 6,498 4,831 2,531 1,022 417 201 411 55,716 CAGR 1.4% 1.4% 2.3% 2.3% 2.9% 2.9% 3.3% 3.3% 4.9% 1.7%Other (Outside Washington)2004 132 199 125 82 25 15 4 2 3 587 2020 165 249 179 118 39 24 7 3 6 791 CAGR 1.4% 1.4% 2.3% 2.3% 2.9% 2.9% 3.3% 3.3% 4.9% 1.9%Total2004 21,901 10,209 4,657 3,451 1,632 664 251 121 195 43,081 2020 27,432 12,787 6,678 4,948 2,571 1,046 423 204 417 56,506 CAGR 1.4% 1.4% 2.3% 2.3% 2.9% 2.9% 3.3% 3.3% 4.9% 1.7%
New Boats 5,531 2,578 2,021 1,497 939 382 172 83 222 13,425
New boats in Washington State
Based on Regression Analysis
23
Analysis revealed Retaining existing docks increases
maintenance expense & vacancies Spending less now means spending more
later Building fewer slips reduces bond capacity Eliminating covered moorage & public facilities
reduces costs, but, does not meet tenant needs & reduces community benefits
Building a solely market-based slip mix does not accommodate many existing tenants
Exhausting Alternative Solutions
24
Research & Analysis: Developing a Recommended Slip Mix
Market analysis, existing tenant profile, and stakeholder input used to develop a recommended slip mix
covered slips
total slips
27
Cost Estimate
$18.6 M for in-water projects Plus $3.5M – $4.5M in upland improvement projects
Reality Sinks In!
28
The Oak Harbor Marina has been self-sustaining since its construction in 1974
No capital replacement fund is available Primary funding source is revenue bond
RevenueBond Capacity: $ 8.1 M (with existing moorage rates)
$ 9.7 M (with increased rates)
Project Cost: $ 18.6 M (in-water elements only) Shortfall: $ 10.5 M with existing rates
$ 8.9 M with increased ratesAssumptions: • 25 year bond• Interest rate at at 4.5% • Debt service coverage factor of 1.25
Marina’s Funding Capability
29
Building Support
To make finding additional funds a City priority, the Team:
Emphasized community benefits & meeting of City goals Minimized costs where possible Identified potential additional funding sources Focused on the positive
Effective communication is
critical!
30
New slip mix generates approx. $5.2 M per year in direct revenue = $156 M in revenue over 30 years
Includes public access elements Supports community programs Creates a signature waterfront destination
* Estimate based on surveys of permanent and transient boaters conducted in 2005
Building Support:Community Benefit
31
Builds in a single construction phase Pursues partial grant funding Eliminates “band-aid” costs Reduces dredge volume by accounting for varying
vessel drafts (power boats vs. sail boats) Allows for clamshell dredge (vs. hydraulic) Removes creosote piles and sunken barges (debris
barrier), which may also be considered as mitigation
Building Support:Minimizing Costs
32
General obligation bonds and / or other city funding Grant funding for public use dock or public access
improvements Park impact fees for park improvements Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) Interfund loan New revenue producing uses (long term)
Building Support:Identifying Alternate Funding Sources
33
Building Support:Focus on the Positive
Generates approx. $5.2 M per year in direct revenue Improves the waterfront per the City’s plans Ensures the marina
remains an asset Meets market
demand Minimizes cost Builds a quality
facility Benefits the
community
34
The Result of Planning
A well received plan thatis City’s top priority
An unexpected solution that Saved the community millions Built political will to fund marina
reconstruction Generated broad-based community
support Will result in a first class marina and
long term community asset
top related