032387-Workshop Session268
MINUTES
City Commission, Sanford, Florida
March 23,
19 87
The City Commission of the City of Sanford, Florida, met in Workshop Session in
the City Manager's Conference Room of the City Hall in the City of Sanford, Florida, at 4:30
o'clock P. M. on March 23, 1987.
Present: Mayor-Commissioner Bettye D. Smith
Commissioner Whitey Eckstein
Commissioner John Y. Mercer
Commissioner Bob Thomas
Commissioner A. A. McClanahan
City Manager Frank A. Faison
Acting City Clerk Janet Donahoe
Absent: City Attorney William L. Colbert
City Clerk H. N. Tamm, Jr.
Also Present: Florida Center for Urban Design and Research
Picot B. Floyd, Administrator
David Crane, Principal Investigator
Frank Setzer, Project Manager and Senior Urban Designer
The meeting was called to order by the Chairman.
The Chairman announced the purpose of this workshop was the presentation of
"WESTSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD STRATEGY" (WINS) from members of the Florida Center for Urban Design
and Research.
The City Manager introduced Picot B. Floyd, the Academic Administrator in the
Florida Center Core Staff and who also holds Associate positions in the University of South
Florida's Center for Public Affairs and Policy Management and the Center for Applied
Anthropology. In the WINS project he will provide expertise for collection and analysis of
socio-economic data (including the resident interviews) and provide other advice on
regulatory, administrative, and financial planning aspects of the project. Also, Mr. Floyd
brings a wide range experience in federally-assisted community improvement, urban services
and technology, city and county government administration, and has held the senior
administrator posts in Savannah, Georgia, Clearwater, Florida; Hillsborough County, Florida;
and Temple Terrace, Florida.
Mr. Floyd introduced David A. Crane, FAIA, AICP, the Director of Florida Center
and a Professor of Architecture at the University of South Florida in Tampa, who in the WINS
project, will serve as overall Principal-in-Charge, the chief representative of the team, as
well as generally overseeing the work of all team members and being ultimately responsible
for all the team's recommendations.
And further, Mr. Crane has served with distinction in local government, private
consulting practice, and professional schools in leading universities; and of particular
value to the WINS process will be Mr. Crane's extensive experience in the following areas:
urban redevelopment planning and project execution management; intown housing and
neighborhood preservation and revitalization strategies; industrialized housing innovations;
and state-of-the-art techinques for "public-private partnership" development organization
and financing.
Mr. Crane referred to excerpts of information in the Florida Center report
entitled "Proposed for the Westside Neighborhood Strategy", Sanford, Florida.
That based upon contacts in Sanford and understandings of how the Westside project
has evolved as a current City development priority, Florida Center sees the WESTSIDE
NEIGHBORHOOD STRATEGY plan as a pilot action program of wide significance to the City's
MINUTES
City Commission, Sanford, Florida
March 23,
269
19 87
future ability to compete for economic activity and investment. The Westside opportunity
site can be viewed as the obvious starting place for different types of intown housing and
neighborhood livability programs over the long-term, both for their intrinsic resident
benefit merits and for their infusion of strength to economic development efforts in the
Central Business District (CBD), the airport area, and across the City.
Knowledgeable public and private leaders believe that City government and private
industry must do more to provide decent and affordable housing choices for the lower income
groups. They are particularly concerned about housing and socio-economic conditions in the
poor/Black concentration areas around the CBD. They know that the increasingly dynamic
private housing market of the region is concentrated on the I-4 urban growth corridor, and
the lower-income, minority residents are not being served by that market. Just as
important, they feel, is the fact that the City's chances of capturing the economic base and
tax revenues growth associtaed with the I-4 corridor will be adversely affected by the
current negative perceptions of the general public concerning the livability and/or safety
of Sanford's downtown neighborhoods.
It has been emphasized to us that Sanford presently has a substantial inventory of
low-income public housing units which were produced over the years using heavy subsides from
the federal government. We agree with concerned leaders who feel that more of the same in
the close-in neighborhood would only worsen the problem of low-income and minority groups
concentration.
The current direction of thinking is to look for ways to assist private
construction and financing of living units of acceptable quality and deliver them within the
intown areas at varied prices (or rents) affordable to a diverse range of household
offerings which could cover a range from small, middle-income households without children to
households of more varied size in the moderate and low-income sectors. The key concern, or
area of innovation in traditional housing market offerings and delivery systems, must be the
creation of homeownership opportunities for people in the lower income brackets. This will
be a key to the search for neighborhood stability and maintenance. Various forms of
ownership must be explored, including fee simple, condominiums, and cooperatives.
Sanford's search for new solutions to previously unmet lower income housing needs,
unfortunately, must be conducted without the traditional support of the federal government.
Most private developers who have served the low and moderate-income housing markets in the
last thirty years were enabled to do so by U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD) subsidy programs for developers or tenants, such as mortgage rate reduction programs
or low income rental subsidy program. However, since 1981, many such housing assistance
programs have been eliminated, or are funded at low levels; other important HUD financial
assistance for local community development such as Urban Renewal, Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG), and Urban Development Action Grant (UDAG), have also been dropped or
greatly reduced. Most knowledgeable observers of our national urban policy believe that
Washington's disengagement from housing and community development assistance will continue
indefinitely regardless of which party is in power.
Therefore, Sanford must go on to tackle its housing and neighborhood problems with
27O
MINUTES
City Commission, Sanford, Florida
March 23,
19 87
a new configuration of sponsors and financial resources is self-evident to some, if not all,
Sanford leaders. Some might think of pursuing state government alternatives; certainly, the
tax-exempt housing mortgage revenue bond program of the Florida Housing Finance Agency is an
important tool to be considered.
However, all of the signals point to the need for greater local commitments of
resources and leadership through a new "public-private partnership" delivery system. Within
such a partnership delivery system, the City of Sanford could obviously play a very
influential role. Its contributions would include legislative, financial, and managerial
powers and capacities for redevelopment, land assembly, zoning and other private development
controls, public improvements, and direct financial aid to builders or users of affordable
housing. However, our own national experience with this type of intown housing development
suggests that WINS will certainly fail if the City and such willing homebuilders as it may
find are left to carry the costs and risks all alone.
WINS can only succeed if it is supported more broadly within the community. One
vital ingredient will be the involvement of a group of committed and progressive banks and
thrift institutions who will share the lending risks for both developer and homeowner
financing, and be willing to create unusually favorable financing terms by taking good
advantage of the available public assistance. It is also quite likely that some elements in
Sanford's affordable housing delivery and management system will need charitable sources of
leadership, expertise and/or dollars.
Efforts to organize the existing and new neighborhood residents and housing
occupants for cooperative activity will be another important aspect of creating viable
partnerships for action.
During preliminary discussions between City officials, representatives of Cardinal
Industries, Inc. indicated substantial interest on the part of the company in playing a role
in the affordable housing strategy. Based in Sanford, Cardinal Industries is a leading
manufacturer of modular housing products, and it has acquired a strong reputation for
quality site development and management of single story housing, for both single-family and
multi-family users.
We assume that Cardinal Industries might participate in the WINS project at
several levels. First, as a leading corporate citizen of Sanford, representatives of the
company could join other private leaders in forming the housing action partnership with the
City, for instance, by providing advice on housing policy and strategies, as well as making
other civic-interest contributions to be determined.
Second, the company would have potential contractual business relationships with
the City and/or intermediary housing sponsors for the delivery of prefabricated components,
builiding installations, and site improvements; if Cardinal products were used for multi-
family rental projects, the company's experienced managemetn division would be a potential
contractor. The specific sites and circumstances in which future contractual negotiations
will be conducted should be determined later on in the light of the overall housing needs,
urban design planning, and economic feasibility of the project to be investigated during the
work program.
MINUTES
City Commission, Sanford, Florida
March 23,
19 87
Florida Center will work closely with Cardinal Industries (on behalf of the City)
to devise appropriate housing units and site design standards, as well as jointly evaluating
the conditions of units delivery, tenure, and management that will guarantee lasting quality
and livability of the product. A high quality outcome is important to the company's
reputation, as well as the ultimate success and widespread application of the affordable
housing prototypes to be defined in this work.
Mr. Crane explained a substantial effort had been made to tailor an in-depth
investigation of a pioneering housing strategy to address Sanford's special need and
circumstances, and described the proposed plan of work in terms of a 4-phase planning and
implementation process for WINS and the scope of tasks and products offered by Florida
Center as follows:
FIGURE I' WORK PROGRAM TASKS, PRODUCTS & PHASING
Legend:
INTERIM REVIEW/PRESENTATION-
ORAL, MEMO fi/or INFORMAL GRAPHIC
ILLUSTRATED FINAL REPORT
TASKS & PRODUCTS
2../CONGER T_. P__L.ANNLN_g_G. OES_IGN a.
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY'
2A. ORBAN DESIGN PLAN-ALTERNATIVES
CONCEPTS ~ FINAL PLAN
OELIVEHY SYSTEM
~'.~.. URBAN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
PtAN {DRAFT VERSION)
2.D. WES I $IOE NEIGHI~ORHOOD
iNPROVEmENT $ fRATEGY
~./._LMP. L_E_ ~g N.T__AT__I9 N____ A C!IO N
.~OGRAM
PHASE l-5w~,~
PRELIMINARY
STUDIES
FINAL PRODUCT REVIEW DRAFT
WRITTEN fi/or GRAPHIC
PHASE 2 -12 wkJ.
CONCEPT PLANNING. DESIGN fi
DE?E~_OP?E,NT , ST, RAIEG~Y , , ,
-- Or,,Or,,~ FINAL PRODUCT- WRITTEN
&t/or GRAPIIIC
- ---I~ ADVISORY SERVICES AS NEEDED
~HASE ~-II wks.
IMPLE MEN TA]'IO,",/ ACTION
ph{OGi(AM,_ _ _ .... t , ,
ASS~ S T_~.~_C_ E :__
0
o o <>---< ,>
o o o
o
O (,>
PHASE 4
IMPt.,E MEN'[ATION
272
MINUTES
City Commission, Sanford, Florida
March 23,
19 87
Tasks/Phases 1 and 2, involving activities in a period of just over four months,
represents the principal front-end process of research, analysis, conceptual planning and
design, and feasibility testing of the project's implementation strategy requirements, costs
and benefits. A factual foundation of preliminary on-site surveys, analyses, and mapping
relating to existing conditions and planning/design opportunities/constraints is created in
Task 1/Phase 1. In Task 2/Phase 2, work progresses to a series of WINS plan and program
components which are developed interactively in parallel sub-phasing. Alternative "sketch
plans" and programs are offered for local review in the early phase components of Task
2/Phase 2; final recommendations are then developed within the framework of locally
preferred alternatives.
By the end of Task 2/Phase 2, some planning and design components and all
feasibility studies will be in final form. However, the official redevelopment plan will
require broader public review and will be in semi-fianl review draft form. The conclusion
of Phase 2 will represent a major milestone decision for the City; the project could be
terminated, delayed, or pressed forward from this point depending on the demostrated
economic feasibility and prospects for financing.
Task 3/Phase 3, which involves a work period of just under three months, is a time
for shifting from the planning/study mode to activities in preparation for formal Urban
Redevelopment Plan approval and implementation. Broad, concensus-building reviews and
refinements of the draft plan will be undertaken, while the City's independent financial
advisers would evaluate specific options for public financing. Advice and support would be
provided to local leaders for their organizational and capacity-building efforts. Since
Florida Center's product obligations will be at a reduced level in this period, the overall
timetable of Phase 3 will be determined by local review and approval circumstances.
Task 4/Phase 4 represents a long-term period of redevelopment, construction, and
marketing activities. Depending on the nature of implementation issues to be dealt with by
the City and the established partnership development organizations, Florida Center would
offer periodic expertise and support services for successful execution of the project. We
would like to see the total project to successful completion and would make appropriate
personnel commitments.
The City Manager introduced Frank Setzer, Senior Urban Designer in the Florida
Center Core staff. He will serve as the Project Manager for the WINS project. In this
capacity, he will have the most freguent contact with Sanford officials and senior staff,
provide day-to-day coordination of the research and consulting team, and play the lead urban
design and physical planning role for which he has distinguished talents.
Mr. Setzer is a highly qualified architect with specialized graduate training and
experience in urban design. He has had substantial residential unit and site design
experience through his current outside practice and previous firms. Of special relevance to
the Sanford situation is the five years of urban design and planning consulting work
performed with the City of Milwaukee's Department of City Development; he had extensive
involvement with urban redevelopment and related tax increment bond financing procedures in
this period. Mr. Setzer and Mr. Crane have previously collaborated in major projects in the
Southwest.
Mr. Floyd reported other key Senior Professionals were as follows:
Dr. Charles E. Connerly, PhD, an Associate Professor in the Departmentof Urban and
Regional Planning at Florida State University, Tallahassee. He will function in the WINS
project as a Senior Housing Adviser, taking lead responsibilities for studies to assess
housing needs/market forces, options for financial and technical assistance for developers
and users of affordable housing, and strategies for meeting various types of low-and-
moderate-income household needs, as different forms of ownership, financing, management,
etc.
Thomas Martineau is the Director of the Institute for Building Sciences and is
affiliated to the School of Architecture at Florida A & M University, Tallahassee, Florida.
The building and technology research performed by members of that faculty is coordinated by
Mr. Martineau. For the WINS project Mr. Martineau will participate as a Senior Housing
Adviser, along with Dr. Connerly. Based on experience in housing users surveys, Mr.
Martineau will advise on the design of the resident surveys. He will go on to offer advice
and review on housing facilities programming, site and units design and technology, and
methods of organizing residents for cooperative activities.
John Jernigan is a Senior Architect in the Florida Center Affiliated Staff, and he
has an independent architectural practice in Tampa. For the WINS project he will contribute
specialized expertise in single-and multi-family housing design and related redevelopment
criteria; he will review and guide illustrative and prototypical unit and site design work
by the Graduate Interns.
MINUTES
City Commission, Sanford, Florida
March 23,
273
19 87
John J. Lesniak, ASLA, is a Senior Landscape Architect in the Florida Center
Affiliated Staff and has his own independent practice of landscape architecture in Tampa.
In the WINS project he will provide review and oversight of design staff work pertaining to
site and area environmental analysis, site development and landscaping plans in the
redevelopment area, and concepts for Westside area street and open space beautification.
There was discussion Of recreation facilities/open space, funding for streets
roads, water and sewer, and issuance of bonds.
Persons appearing in support of the WESTSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD STRATEGY redevelopment
were as follows:
David Farr, Executive Director of the Greater Sanford Chamber of Commerce.
Ms. Thelma Mike, 1710 West 15th Street.
Amefika Geuka, representing Cardinal Industries, Inc.
The Commission authorized same to be considered at the next regular meeting.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.