TOD Market Dreams + Realities The station is in, the riders are coming and the development has been proposed. Now everybody wants retail. But is there a market for it? Will it be supported? Or would other uses be more appropriate and generate additional riders? Everyone expects TOD to generate a mix of uses -- to create a 24/7 environment at every station. How do market realities change that equation? Learn what it takes to support that mixed-use environment that everyone expects; how to assess the market and what residents really want; and how to manage expectations if the market doesn't deliver. Moderator: William M. Velasco, Chair of Board TOD Committee, DART, Dallas, Texas Christine Maguire, AICP, EDFP, Senior Manager, Development Planning and Finance Group, Austin, Texas Anne B. Ricker, Principal/Owner, Ricker Cunningham, Centennial, Colorado John Breitinger, Vice President, Investment and Development, United Properties, Bloomington, Minnesota Michael Horsting, AICP, Principal Analyst, Regional Transportation Authority, Chicago, Illinois

1. Development
Scenario
Workshop
Corridor
Wide
Infrastructure
Recommenda3ons
to
Accelerate
Private
Investment
Summary
Hosted by: FOR:

2. Development
Scenario
Workshop

3. Development
Scenario
Workshop
Data
Support
Provided
by:
• Cushman
Wakefield/Northmarq
• Marque@e
Advisors

4. Targeted
Infrastructure
and
Development
public policy +
infrastructure
investments
Targeting
Priority
Development
Areas
State, regional,
local policies
and $$
• Met Council
• Utilities
• Water Districts
• Counties
• Municipalities

5. Purpose
Southwest LRT Corridor Community Works and ULI Minnesota engaged an
independent panel of local and national developers, economists, and designers to
work with the Technical Implementation Committee and provide corridor and station
recommendations with a particular focus on five key SW LRT Corridor station areas:
– Penn
– Beltline
– Blake
– Golden Triangle
– Mitchell Road
The intended outcome is to identify key
development opportunities, barriers and
strengths related to land use and station location,
and identify critical infrastructure improvements
for consideration by the Cities and SW Project
Office linking land use and engineering with
market knowledge.

7. 30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Timing
Disconnect
Between
Transit
and
Developer
Decisions
Private
Land
Development
Coordinate
District
Infrastructure
Final
Design
Construc)on
Preliminary
Engineering
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Year
Land
price
premium
Transit
Infrastructure
Timeline
Hypothe3cal
Land
Price
Impact
Alterna)ves
Analysis
Preliminary
Poli)cs
Opera)on
Source:
Emerson,
Donald;
“Successfully
Naviga3ng
the
FTA
New
Starts
Process”;
PB
Consul3ng,
2006

8. TOP
TEN
TOD
STRATEGIES

9. 1. IdenNfy
specific
corridor-­‐wide
targets
for
both
community
benefits
and
economic
development
Artsit’s
Studios
Workforce
Housing
Belmar,
CO
TOD
3.0
Strategies

10. 2. Incorporate
market
and
development
criteria
TOD
3.0
Strategies

11. Cost
Assump3ons
Construction HARD Cost Estimates for SW Corridor
Pat John Stacie
Site Work
Site Prep/Demo/Landscaping $6.00 6 4 psf Assumes structures on site and includes removal of surface parking
Parking
Surface Parking $3,000.00 3500 2500 3000 psf incl. landscape and lighting
Structured Parking $16,666.67 12500 17500 20000 psf Structured parking
Below Grade Parking $23,333.33 27500 25000 17500 psf
Retail
Concrete Podium Construction $102.50 100 105 psf
Masonry (CMU) Construction $75.00 90 60 psf Standard retail strip center, dependent upon size
Steel Frame Construction $60.00 60
Storefront $1,050.00 1050 plf
Retail Tenant Fit-Out $85.00 85 psf Depends on end user. Restaurants can have significant higher costs
Office
Multistory Concrete Construction $110.00 110 psf
Steel Frame Construction $105.00 105
Office Tenant Fit-Out $50.00 40 60 psf Depends on end user. Medical office can have significant higher costs
Residential
Single Family Wood Frame Construction $ 60.00 psf Will's best guess
Townhouse Wood Frame Construction $ 80.00 psf Will's best guess
Multifamily Wood Frame Construction $120.00 105 135 psf Includes const profit. overhead, city fees, etc.
Multifamily Concrete Construction $138.00 psf
Industrial
Concrete Tilt-up Construction $45.00 45 psf
Masonry (CMU) Construction $50.00 50 psf

12. Rent
Assump3ons
Rent and Vacancy Estimates for SW Corridor
Premium Mitchell Golden
Triangle Blake Beltline Penn
Residential
Vacancy Rate 2.3% 2.3% 3.2% 2.0% 1.9%
Vacancy Rate 10% 2.3% 2.3% 3.2% 2.0% 1.9%
Average Size 1,016 1,021 944 902 698
$/SF (month) $1.11 $1.10 $1.04 $1.32 $1.49
$/SF (month) 50% $1.66 $1.65 $1.56 $1.98 $2.23
Office
Vacancy % 2.61% 17.81% 21.37% 7.83% 12.29%
Vacancy % 10% 2.6% 10.0% 10.0% 7.8% 10.0%
Ave Net Rent (yr) $12.83 $12.84 $10.56 $13.09 $12.18
Ave Net Rent (month) $1.07 $1.07 $0.88 $1.09 $1.02
Ave Net Rent (month) 50.0% $1.60 $1.61 $1.32 $1.64 $1.52
Retail
Vacancy % 1.97% 6.45% 7.97% 7.38% 18.40%
Vacancy % 10% 2.0% 6.5% 8.0% 7.4% 10.0%
Ave Net Rent (yr) $19.67 $17.87 $12.45 $16.45 $13.76
Ave Net Rent (month) $1.64 $1.49 $1.04 $1.37 $1.15
Ave Net Rent (month) 50.0% $2.46 $2.23 $1.56 $2.06 $1.72

13. Project
Feasibility
Analysis
Building
Type
ConstrucNon
Type
Podium
Parking
Mitchell
Golden
Triangle
Blake
Beltline
Penn
RESIDENTIAL
Low
Density
Wood
No
Surface
1
1
1
1
1
Medium
Density
Wood
No
Structure
0
0
0
1
1
High
Density
Concrete
No
Below
Grade
0
0
0
0
1
MIXED-­‐USE
Medium
Density
-­‐
ResidenNal
Wood
Yes
Structure
0
0
0
0
1
High
Density
-­‐
ResidenNal
Concrete
Yes
Below
Grade
0
0
0
0
0
MIXED-­‐USE
OFFICE
Medium
Wood
Yes
Structure
1
1
0
1
1
High
Concrete
No
Below
Grade
0
0
0
0
0
OFFICE
Low
Cinder
block
No
Surface
1
1
1
1
1
Medium
Concrete
No
Structure
1
1
0
1
1
High
Steel
No
Below
Grade
1
1
0
1
1

14. 3. Extend
mobility,
access,
connecNons
to
place
Hop
ShuRle
-­‐
Boulder,
CO
TOD
3.0
Strategies

15. 4. Derive
the
staNon
influence
area
and
specific
boundaries
TOD
3.0
Strategies

16. 5. Enable
market
metrics
to
shape
staNon
area
land
uses
Mid-­‐rise
Freight
Project
–
Denver,
CO
office
–
Woburn,
MA
TOD
3.0
Strategies

17. 6. Street
designs,
pedestrian
networks
and
open
spaces
=
transit
infrastructure
CASE STUDY: Creating an Urban Boulevard – Alameda Ave.
Alameda Ave
Lakewood, CO
TOD
3.0
Strategies

18. CASE STUDY: Creating an Urban Boulevard – Alameda Ave.
Alameda Ave
Lakewood, CO
TOD
3.0
Strategies

19. CASE STUDY: Creating an Urban Boulevard – Alameda Ave.
Alameda Ave
Lakewood, CO
TOD
3.0
Strategies

20. CASE STUDY: Creating an Urban Boulevard – Alameda Ave.
Alameda Ave
Lakewood, CO
TOD
3.0
Strategies

21. 7. Avoid
over
planning
specific
development
design
MIXED
USE
OFFICE
RESIDENTIAL
INDUSTRIAL
TOD
3.0
Strategies

22. 8. Phase
incremental
infrastructure
improvements
Industrial/Residen3al
–
Boulder,
CO
TOD
3.0
Strategies

23. 9. Emphasize
shared
parking
faciliNes
15th
and
Pearl
Parking
Garage
Boulder,
CO
TOD
3.0
Strategies

24. 10. Create
a
long-­‐term
district
organizaNon/organizer
Federal
Major
Employers
Small
Businesses
TOD
3.0
Strategies
State
Local/County
Governments
METC
District
Coordinator
Real Estate
Developers
Investors
Metro Transit

25. For
Discussion
• Process
for
Metro
Transit
to
provide
opera3ng
and
capital
cost
data
for
alterna3ves
early
in
the
PE
process;
• Ability
to
assemble
land
for
cataly3c
projects
and
workforce
housing;
• Legisla3ve
enabling
language
to
fund
infrastructure
• Coordina3ng
en3ty
to
focus
on
system
wide
infrastructure
and
placemaking