teska green bay road land use study | vok

Village of Kenilworth Green Bay Road Land Use Study

September 16, 2015

Informational Purposes Only

Not a Planning Document Concept Not Formally Approved by Village Board

DISCUSSION O

NLY

Discussion Outline

• Summary of Findings

• Neighborhood/Aesthetic Considerations • Traffic Studies • Design Options

• Scenario Analysis



DISCUSSION O

NLY

Summary of Findings

• Scale of development is determined by lot size • Building size and height is limited by parking • Parking is limited by lot size and cost • Development is constrained by Skokie Ditch • Financial feasibility based on development type

and market conditions



DISCUSSION O

NLY



DISCUSSION O

NLY

Green Bay Land Use: View from Wayland Ave to Green Bay Road



DISCUSSION O

NLY

Green Bay Land Use: Neighborhood view of existing Pavlik Building



DISCUSSION O

NLY

Green Bay Land Use: Neighborhood view of existing condo building



DISCUSSION O

NLY

Green Bay Land Use: Neighborhood view of existing Sherwin Williams building



DISCUSSION O

NLY

Green Bay Land Use: Neighborhood view of existing bank building



DISCUSSION O

NLY

Traffic Studies



DISCUSSION O

NLY

Traffic Studies: Option 1



DISCUSSION O

NLY




DISCUSSION O

NLY


SITE ELEMENTS:

-ALLOWS CIRCULATION NORTH TO GREEN BAY

-PROVIDES FOR SAFE GREEN BAY ROAD INTERSECTION

-SHALLOW LOT DEVELOPMENT

-PIPED SKOKIE DITCH

-MAINTAINS ALLEY



DISCUSSION O

NLY

SITE ELEMENTS:

-PROHIBITS CIRCULATION NORTH TO GREEN BAY


-DEEPER LOT DEVELOPMENT

-CUL-DE-SAC TAKES AWAY LAND FROM DEVELOPMENT PARCEL

-PIPED SKOKIE DITCH

-MAINTAINS ALLEY

SITE INFORMATION:

-TOTAL SITE AREA: 30,300 SF

-UNDEVELOPABLE AREA: 9,600 SF

-TOTAL DEVELOPABLE AREA: 20,700 SF

Site Diagram: Option 1



DISCUSSION O

NLY

SITE ELEMENTS:



-DEEPER LOT DEVELOPMENT

-OPPORTUNITIES FOR COMMUNITY GATEWAY AT STERLING

-PIPED SKOKIE DITCH

-MAINTAINS ALLEY

SITE INFORMATION:







DISCUSSION O

NLY

SITE ELEMENTS:



-SHALLOW LOT DEVELOPMENT

-PIPED SKOKIE DITCH

-MAINTAINS ALLEY

SITE INFORMATION:







DISCUSSION O

NLY

Methodology • Make assumptions

• Costs • Revenue (capitalized annual rent or sales price) • Market rate returns that use revenue to create estimated value

• Calculate the funds available to pay for “ready to develop” land • Revenue based valuation • Is it different using replacement cost or comparable sales?

• Estimate costs to create “ready to develop land” • Property value will be determined later

• Today we are talking about the value of estimated income stream • Could be replacement cost

• Demolition • Test sensitivity to market changes



DISCUSSION O

NLY

Assumptions Building Costs per SF or Space Office $179.98 Retail $137.98 Restaurant $335.92 Apartment SF $173.38 Condo N/A Surface Parking $6,000 Covered Parking $15,000 Underground Parking $30,000

Annual Revenue per SF or Price Office $40.00 Retail $30.00 Restaurant $30.00 Apartment SF $30.00 $2.50 Condo $750,000

Investment Return Inputs Apartment Cap Rate 7% Retail/ Restaurant Cap Rate 9% NOI % of Rent 75% Land % of Condo Price 17% Property Tax % of Value 2%

Sales per square foot $375

• Sensitivity • Micro-market rents are high • Costs are based on sub-region average that could be too low • Uncertain economy/financing could change cap rates



DISCUSSION O

NLY

Parking and the Market

• Why residential parking works at 1.3 per unit • Transitioning spouses only have one car • Single people only have one car • Snowbirds typically have one car

• Why office needs 5 spaces per thousand • Typical space per worker in new shared environment is 150 SF • Convenience for visitors

• Why coffee shops want drive thru • Increases business by 30% • Alternate may be convenient quick spots



DISCUSSION O

NLY

Green Bay Land Use: Option 3



DISCUSSION O

NLY

Version 3 Analysis: Basic

Revenue Based Value $19,324,000 $13,575,000 $11,010,536 $18,000,000 Contribution to Land and Prep Costs $4,539,299 $4,702,042 $3,273,322 $3,060,000* Annual Sales Tax $13,125 Annual Property Tax $386,480 $271,500 $220,211 $360,000

Concept 3A: Office & Condos

Concept 3B: Office & Bistro

Concept 3C: 40 Apartments

Concept 3D: Condos

Office SF 12,972 38,100 Restaurant SF 3,500 Apartment SF 40,300 Condo Units 20 24 Surface Parking Spaces 20 Covered Parking Spaces 20 50 Underground Parking Spaces 24 29

Notes: Concepts 3A & B are short parking *If Concept 3D sells condos for $1,000,000, the contribution is $4 Million. Necessary project contribution would be reduced by the cost paid by Village for road relocation



DISCUSSION O

NLY

Sensitivity Analysis: Lower Revenue Concept 3A:

Office & Condo Concept 3B:

Office & Bistro Concept 3C:

40 Apartments Concept 3D: 24 Condos

Revenue Based Value $13,243,000 $10,108,333 $8,808,429 $12,000,000 Contribution to Land and Prep Costs $2,608,299 $1,235,375 $1,071,215 $2,040,000 Annual Sales Tax $13,125 Annual Property Tax $264,860 $202,167 $176,169 $240,000

Annual Revenue per SF or Price Office $30.00 Retail $20.00 Restaurant $20.00 Apartment SF $24.00 $2.00 Condo $500,000



DISCUSSION O

NLY

Sensitivity Analysis: Higher Cost

Building Costs per SF or Space Office $215.98 Retail $165.58 Restaurant $403.10 Apartment SF $208.06 Condo N/A Surface Parking $7,200 Covered Parking $18,000 Underground Parking $36,000

Concept 3A: Office & Condo

Concept 3B: Office & Bistro

Concept 3C: 40 Apartments

Concept 3D: 24 Condos

Revenue Based Value $19,324,000 $13,575,000 $11,010,536 $18,000,000 Contribution to Land and Prep Costs $4,072,359 $2,927,450 $1,725,879 $3,060,000 Annual Sales Tax $13,125 Annual Property Tax $386,480 $271,500 $220,211 $360,000



DISCUSSION O

NLY

Comments

• Visitors using street parking is critical • A premium priced “micro-market” is key to project viability • Land value would be influence by how owners participate

• Can current tenants occupy new space? (only 3A and 3B create enough office) • What is the basis for property appraisal? • What would the Village pay for the road land? Is it a trade?

• This is not a project that would attract regional or national developer • “You can sell a little bit of anything…”



DISCUSSION O

NLY




DISCUSSION O

NLY

Version 1 Analysis: Basic Informational Purposes Only


DISCUSSION O

NLY




DISCUSSION O

NLY


Revenue Based Value $1,250,000 $9,575,000 $8,539,286 $14,582,222 Contribution to Land and Prep Costs -$681,600 $2,105,000 $4,186,168 $6,704,994 Annual Sales Tax $18,750 $8,625 $7,875 Annual Property Tax $25,000 $181,035 $170,786 $291,644

Option 2A: Restaurant

Option 2B: Condos & Coffee Shop

Option 2C: Apartments & Coffee Shop Option 2D: Office

Office SF 38,600 Restaurant SF 5,000 2,100 Retail (no kitchen) 2,300 Apartment SF 22,000 Condo Units 12 Surface Parking Spaces 42 8 9 20 Covered Parking Spaces 13 16 Underground Parking Spaces 18 19

Notes: *If Concept 2B sells condos for $1,000,000, the contribution is $2.6 Million. Option 2B assumes $50/sf cost to reuse current buildings for coffee shop Option 2D is short parking Necessary project contribution would be reduced by the cost paid by Village for road relocation



DISCUSSION O

NLY




DISCUSSION O

NLY


Revenue Based Value $1,050,000 $7,866,667 $7,760,952 $12,702,222 Contribution to Land and Prep Costs -$510,864 $1,338,779 $3,976,702 $6,567,302 Annual Sales Tax $15,750 $8,625 $12,000 Annual Property Tax $21,000 $157,333 $155,219 $254,044

Option 4A: Restaurant

Option 4B: Condos/Office

Option 4C: Apartments & Coffee Shop

Option 4D: Office & Coffee Shop

Office SF 5,600 30,800 Retail (no kitchen) 2,300 3,200 Restaurant SF 4,200 Apartment SF 19,200 Condo Units 8 Surface Parking Spaces 25 23 Covered Parking Spaces 10 10 Underground Parking Spaces 18 18

Notes: *If Concept 4B sells condos for $1,000,000, the contribution is $1.7 Million. Option 4D is short parking Necessary project contribution would be reduced by the cost paid by Village for road relocation



DISCUSSION O

NLY

Village of Kenilworth Green Bay Road Land Use Study

September 16, 2015



DISCUSSION O

NLY

teska green bay road land use study | vok

Documents