MARKET ANALYSIS Residential Market Potential

Transcription

MARKET ANALYSIS
Residential Market Potential
Downtown Buffalo Study Area
City of Buffalo
Erie County, New York
December, 2004
Conducted by
ZIMMERMAN/VOLK ASSOCIATES, INC.
6 East Main Street
Clinton, New Jersey 08809
6 East Main Street
908 735-6336 • 908 735-4751 facsimile
www.ZVA.cc • info@ZVA.cc
Research & Strategic Analysis
S TUDY C ONTENTS
Market Analysis
1
Introduction
1
Market Potential
Where will the potential market for housing in the City of Buffalo
move from?
3
The Downtown Buffalo Study Area
How many households are likely to move within or to
the Downtown Buffalo Study Area?
6
4
8
Table 1: Potential Housing Market
9
How fast will the units lease or sell?
13
Target Market Analysis
Who is the potential market?
Table 2: Downtown Residential Mix By Household Type
Downtown Market-Rate Rents and Price Ranges
What is the market currently able to pay?
Table 3:
Table 4:
Table 5:
Table 6:
Table 7:
Optimum Market Position
Target Groups for Rental Lofts/Apartments
Target Groups for For-Sale Apartments
Target Groups for For-Sale Townhouses/Rowhouses/Live-Work
Target Groups for Urban Houses
The Current Context
Table 8: Summary Of Selected Rental Properties
Table 9: Summary Of Selected Re-Sale Attached Properties
Downtown Housing Types
Courtyard Apartment Building
Loft Apartment Building
Maisonette Apartment Building (Townhouse Over Flat)
Mansion Apartment Building
Townhouse/Rowhouse
Live-Work
Urban House
15
15
19
22
22
24
26
28
30
31
32
33
38
42
42
42
43
43
43
44
44
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page ii
City of Buffalo, Erie County, New York
December, 2004
Downtown Housing Strategies
45
1. Designate Areas for Residential Development
2. Ensure Appropriate Urban Design
3. Market and Monitor the Downtown
Additional Considerations
46
50
51
53
Urban Amenities
Mixed-Income Development
53
54
Policies and Programs
56
1. Policies and Programs
Adaptive Re-Use Handbook
Adaptive Re-Use “Ombudsman”
Sales and Income Tax Incentives
Gap Financing Pool
“Live Where You Work”
City-Owned Land
2. Best Practices
Smart Growth Zoning Codes: A Resource Guide
Form-Based Zoning Codes
56
56
57
57
57
58
59
59
59
59
Methodology
61
Assumptions and Limitations
Copyright
71
72
o
6 East Main Street
908 735-6336 • 908 735-4751 facsimile
MA RKET AN A LYS I S
December, 2004
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this study is to identify the depth and breadth of the market for newly-introduced
market-rate housing units—created both through the adaptive re-use of existing non-residential
buildings as well as through new construction—to be leased or sold within the Downtown Buffalo
Study Area. For the purposes of this study, the boundaries of the Study Area have been delineated
as Porter and North Streets to the north, Michigan Avenue to the east, the Buffalo River and Lake
Erie to the south, and Lake Erie and the Niagara River to the west. The Study Area includes all
of several planning neighborhoods—the CBD, Columbus, Lakeview, Waterfront, and Allen—and
portions of the First Ward, Front Park, Medical Campus and Willert Park planning
neighborhoods.
The extent and characteristics of the potential market for Downtown housing units were identified
using Zimmerman/Volk Associates’ proprietary target market methodology. This methodology
was developed in response to the challenges that are inherent in the application of classical
supply/demand analysis to urban development and redevelopment. Supply/demand analysis
ignores the potential impact of newly-introduced housing supply on settlement patterns, which can
be substantial when that supply is specifically targeted to match the housing preferences and
economic capabilities of the draw area households.
In contrast to classical supply/demand analysis, then—which is based on supply-side dynamics
and baseline demographic projections—target market analysis determines the depth and breadth
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 2
December, 2004
of the potential market derived from the housing preferences and socio-economic characteristics of
households in the defined draw area.
Because it considers not only basic demographic
characteristics, such as income qualification and age, but also less-frequently analyzed attributes
such as mobility rates, lifestyle patterns and household compatibility issues, the target market
methodology is particularly effective in defining a realistic housing potential for urban
development and redevelopment.
In brief, using the target market methodology, Zimmerman/Volk Associates determined:
•
Where the potential renters and buyers for new housing units in the Downtown
Buffalo Study Area are likely to move from (the draw areas);
•
Who currently lives in the draw areas and what they are like (the target markets);
•
How many have the potential to move to the Study Area if appropriate housing
units were to be made available (depth and breadth of the market);
•
What their housing preferences are in aggregate (rental or ownership, multi-family
or single-family);
•
What their alternatives are (new construction or existing housing stock in Downtown
Buffalo and in other areas of the city);
•
What they will pay to live in Downtown Buffalo (market-rate rents and prices); and
•
How quickly they will rent or purchase the new units (absorption forecasts).
The target market methodology is described in detail in the M ETHODOLOGY section at the end
of this study.
N OTE : Tables 1 through 7, included in this document, contain summaries of the market potential
and optimum market position for new market-rate housing units created through adaptive re-use o f
existing buildings and/or new construction within the Downtown Buffalo Study Area, City o f
Buffalo, Erie County, New York. Tables 8 and 9, also included in this document, outline the
relevant supply-side context. The appendix tables contain migration and target market data
covering the appropriate draw areas for Downtown Buffalo and are published in a separate volume.
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 3
December, 2004
M ARKET P OTENTIAL
American households, perhaps more than any other nation’s, have always demonstrated
extraordinary mobility. In 2004, depending on region, between 16 and 18 percent of American
households moved from one dwelling unit to another. Household mobility is higher in urban
areas; a higher percentage of renters move than owners; and a higher percentage of younger
households move than older households.
Analysis of migration, mobility and geo-demographic characteristics of households currently
living within defined draw areas is therefore integral to the determination of the depth and
breadth of the potential market for market-rate housing units within the Downtown Buffalo Study
Area.
Analysis of Erie County migration and mobility patterns from 1998 through 2002—the latest
data available from the Internal Revenue Service—shows that the county continues to experience
net migration losses, although at a significantly lower number in 2002 than in 1998 .
(See
Appendix One, Table 1.)
At the beginning of the study period, in 1998, nearly 13,100 households a year moved out of the
county, compared to the 8,740 households that moved into the county that year, for a net loss of
nearly 4,350 households. By 2002, however, the number of households moving out of Erie County
had dropped to 11,055, and the number moving in had risen to 9,715, with the net loss down to
1,340 households. Approximately 15 percent of the out-migration is to Niagara County, although
collectively, the majority of out-migration is to other urban areas in the United States.
However, even though net migration provides insights into a city or county’s historic ability to
attract or retain households compared to other locations, it is those households likely to move into
an area (gross in-migration) that represent that area’s external market potential.
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 4
December, 2004
This study therefore identifies the depth and breadth of the potential market for market-rate
housing units within both the City of Buffalo and the Downtown Buffalo Study Area, including
those households already living in the city and those households that are likely to move into the
city if appropriate housing options were to be made available.
Where will the potential market for housing in the City of Buffalo move from?
—The Draw Areas—
The depth and breadth of the potential market for market-rate housing units in the City of Buffalo
was determined through migration, mobility and target market analyses of households currently
living within defined draw areas. Based on the migration analysis, the draw areas for the City of
Buffalo have been delineated as follows:
•
The local (internal) draw area, covering households currently living within the Buffalo city
limits, as well as those currently living in the balance of Erie County. Between 11 and 15
percent of the households living in the city move to another residence within the city each
year. Between five and seven percent of the households living in the balance of Erie County
move to a residence within the city each year.
•
The regional draw area, covering households with the potential to move to the City of
Buffalo from Niagara and Monroe Counties. Households moving from these two counties
comprise approximately 20 percent of total Erie County in-migration.
•
The New York City draw area, covering households with the potential to move to the City
of Buffalo from New York (Manhattan), Kings (Brooklyn) and Queens Counties.
Households moving from these three counties comprise approximately three percent of
total Erie County in-migration.
•
The national draw area, covering households with the potential to move to the City of
Buffalo from all other U.S. counties. Approximately 1,200 households, with the financial
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 5
December, 2004
capacity to rent or purchase market-rate dwelling units, move into the City of Buffalo
from elsewhere in the United States each year; a small additional number are households
moving from outside the United States.
As derived from migration, mobility and target market analysis, then, the draw area distribution
of market potential (those households with the potential to move within or to the City of Buffalo
and with the financial capacity to rent or purchase market-rate dwelling units) would be as follows
(see also Appendix One, Table 10):
Market Potential By Draw Area
City of Buffalo (Local Draw Area):
Balance of Erie County(Local Draw Area):
Niagara and Monroe Counties (Regional Draw Area):
New York City Draw Area:
Balance of US (National Draw Area):
42.5 percent
38.9 percent
4.7 percent
2.1 percent
11.8 percent
Total:
100.0 percent
SOURCE: Zimmerman/Volk Associates, Inc., 2004.
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 6
December, 2004
THE DOWNTOWN BUFFALO STUDY AREA
The City of Buffalo is an attractive and historic city of approximately 284,000 people; the city is
renowned for its architectural heritage, with major works by Louis Sullivan (the Guaranty
Building), Daniel Burnham (Ellicott Square Building), H.H. Richardson (the now vacant Buffalo
State Hospital), Frank Lloyd Wright (several residences, including the Darwin Martin House
complex), and Eliel and Eero Saarinen (Kleinhans Music Hall). Buffalo also retains much of its
Frederick Law Olmsted-designed parks system, encompassing six city parks connected by
parkways and traffic circles.
Buffalo’s location at the confluence of the Buffalo and Niagara Rivers and Lake Erie provided the
impetus for the development of the city as a transportation hub. Although transportation no longer
holds the same importance in the city’s economy, Buffalo continues to be the cultural and
economic center of western New York. The city has several miles of frontage along the Buffalo
and Niagara Rivers and Lake Erie, and has undertaken a number of initiatives to redevelop the
waterfront.
In addition to the core Downtown (the Central Business District), Downtown Buffalo, as defined
for this analysis, also includes several recognized in-town neighborhoods and districts—the
Allentown Historic District, the Theatre Historic District, the Joseph Ellicott Historic District,
the Cobblestone Historic District and the West Village Historic District, the Erie Canal Harbor
District, Waterfront Village, the Lower West Side, Buffalo Niagara Medical Campus, Fruit Belt,
and the Elm Oak Corridor.
The core Downtown, for purposes of this study defined by Edward and Goodell Streets to the
north, Michigan Street to the East, Lake Erie to the south, and Elmwood Avenue to the west, is the
location of most of the county and city’s civic buildings, the Buffalo Convention Center, a number
of churches, several banks, hotels, mixed-use and residential buildings, and the Erie Community
College City Campus. Downtown Buffalo also offers such urban amenities as several theaters and
performing arts venues, an ice skating rink, well as a range of local and unique establishments,
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 7
December, 2004
including the eating and drinking establishments in the Chippewa Entertainment District, and the
gift shops, art galleries and antique shops, financial services, office supplies, ice cream parlors and
coffee shops along Main, Pearl and Franklin Streets. For the sports-minded, Downtown Buffalo is
also home to the Dunn Tire Park minor league baseball stadium, and HSBC Arena, which is a
major concert venue as well as home to a major league hockey team.
An emerging, but strong residential market has begun to be tapped by several creative developers
in the core Downtown. Immediately surrounding the core are the in-town neighborhoods of
Allentown to the north, Fruit Belt to the east, Waterfront Village to the south, and the Lower West
Side and the West Village to the west.
Both Allentown and the West Village have strong
neighborhood centers that have attracted an eclectic mix of commercial uses. Waterfront Village
has some of the highest-value residential units in the Study Area, although the development pattern
is more suburban than urban. In part because of its proximity to the Buffalo Niagara Medical
Campus, Fruit Belt is undergoing substantial infill development. All of these neighborhoods,
including the core Downtown, could be further strengthened if a wider range of appropriate
housing options were to be made available.
The target market methodology identifies those households with a preference for Downtown and
in-town neighborhoods. After discounting for those segments of the city’s potential market that
have preferences for suburban and/or rural locations, the distribution of draw area market potential
for new and existing units within the Downtown Buffalo Study Area would be as follows (see also
Appendix One, Table 11):
D OWNTOWN B UFFALO STUDY A REA
48.6 percent
33.5 percent
2.8 percent
5.4 percent
9.7 percent
Total:
100.0 percent
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 8
December, 2004
The Buffalo and New York City draw areas represent considerably larger proportions of market
potential for new housing in Downtown than for the city as a whole. Conversely, Erie, Niagara,
and Monroe Counties, as well as the national draw area, represent a somewhat smaller segment of
market potential for Downtown than for the city as a whole.
How many households are likely to move within or to the Downtown Buffalo Study Area?
As determined by the target market methodology, which accounts for household mobility within
the City of Buffalo and the balance of Erie County, as well as mobility patterns for households
currently living in all other cities and counties, in the year 2004, up to 3,550 younger singles and
couples, empty nesters and retirees, and family-oriented households currently living in the draw
areas represent the potential market for new and existing market-rate housing units within the
Downtown Buffalo Study Area.
The housing preferences of these draw
area
households—according to tenure (rental or for-sale) and broad financial capacity—can be arrayed
as follows (see also Table 1):
Potential Market For New Housing Units
NUMBER OF
HOUSEHOLDS
P ERCENT
OF T OTAL
Multi-family for-rent
1,070
30.1%
Multi-family for-sale
720
20.3%
Single-family attached for-sale
500
14.1%
Low-range single-family detached
460
13.0%
Mid-range single-family detached
420
11.8%
High-range single-family detached
380
10.7%
Total
3,550
100.0%
HOUSING T YPE
Table 1
Potential Housing Market
Derived From New Unit Purchase And Rental Propensities Of Draw Area Households
With The Potential To Move To The Study Area In 2004
The City of Buffalo, Erie County, New York
The City of Buffalo; Balance of Erie County; Niagara and Monroe Counties, New York;
New York City Metro*; All Other US Counties
Draw Areas
Total Target Market Households
With Potential To Rent/Purchase In
10,150
Total Target Market Households
With Potential To Rent/Purchase In
The Downtown Buffalo Study Area
3,550
Potential Housing Market
Multi. . . . . . Family . . . . . .
Single. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Family . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . Attached . .
Total Households:
{Mix Distribution}:
. . . . . . . . . . . . . Detached . . . . . . . . . . . . .
For-Rent
For-Sale
All Ranges
Low-Range
Mid-Range
High-Range
Total
1,070
30.1%
720
20.3%
500
14.1%
460
13.0%
420
11.8%
380
10.7%
3,550
100.0%
Downtown Residential Mix
(Excluding Large-Lot and Suburban Single-Family)
Multi. . . . . . Family . . . . . .
Total Households:
{Mix Distribution}:
Single. . . . . . Family . . . . . .
. . Attached . .
. . Detached . .
For-Rent
For-Sale
All Ranges
Urban
Total
1,070
37.4%
720
25.2%
500
17.5%
570
19.9%
2,860
100.0%
NOTE: Reference Appendix One, Tables 1 through 13.
SOURCE: Claritas, Inc.;
Zimmerman/Volk Associates, Inc.
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 10
December, 2004
These 3,550 households comprise approximately 35 percent of the approximately 10,150
households that represent the potential market for all of the City of Buffalo, a share of the total
market that is consistent with Zimmerman/Volk Associates’ experience in other cities.
For
example, in recent analyses, the downtown market was found to represent approximately 23
percent of the city’s potential market in Birmingham, Alabama and Atlanta, Georgia; 26 percent
in Norfolk, Virginia, Redding, California, and Toledo, Ohio; 30 percent in Detroit and Grand
Rapids, Michigan, Spokane, Washington, and Baltimore, Maryland; 35 percent in Lexington,
Kentucky; and 36 percent and 38 percent in Louisville, Kentucky and New Haven, Connecticut,
respectively.
As in Buffalo, many of these cities are in regions where the majority of any increase in the number
of households has typically occurred outside the city limits. In most cases, the introduction of
newly-created, appropriately-positioned housing units within the city limits, particularly in the
downtown, has had an impact on settlement patterns by providing appropriate new housing options
for households that previously had none in the region.
The market potential numbers therefore indicate the depth of the potential market for new housing
units within the Study Area, not housing need and not projections of household change. These are
the households that are likely to move within or to Downtown i f appropriate housing options were
to be made available.
From the perspective of draw area target market propensities and compatibility, and within the
context of the new housing marketplace in the Downtown Buffalo market area, the potential
market for new housing units within the Study Area could include the full range of housing types,
from rental multi-family to for-sale single-family detached. However, new construction should
concentrate on higher-density housing types, which support civic and commercial urban
development and redevelopment most efficiently and include:
•
Rental lofts and apartments (multi-family for-rent);
•
For-sale lofts and apartments (multi-family for-sale);
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 11
December, 2004
•
Townhouses, rowhouses, live-work (single-family attached for-sale); and
•
Houses on urban lots (single-family detached for-sale).
The residential re-use of existing non-residential structures is one of the most beneficial downtown
redevelopment types because it creates and enhances a pedestrian-oriented street environment at a
familiar, and often historic, urban scale. In downtown locations, buildings that contain more
potential adaptive re-use square footage than can be absorbed for housing within a feasible time
frame can be redeveloped with a mix of uses, including retail and office.
The creation of “loft” dwelling units through adaptive re-use of existing buildings has been
instrumental in the establishment of successful residential neighborhoods in or near the downtowns
of numerous American cities, from Louisville, Kentucky, where the first loft apartment building
was successfully introduced and leased in 2002, to Saint Louis, Missouri, where, over the past three
years, more than 900 loft apartments in the Washington Avenue Loft District have been completed
and occupied, are under construction, or are in development. In addition to the major cities of
New York, Boston, San Francisco and Chicago, other cities where loft development has occurred
or is underway include Albuquerque, Atlanta, Baltimore, Birmingham, Charlotte, Dallas, Denver,
Detroit, Lexington, Louisville, Grand Rapids, Minneapolis, Richmond, Nashville, New Orleans,
Portland, Roanoke, Saint Paul, and Toledo.
The raw space version of a loft, or “hard” loft, is adaptable for a wide range of non-residential
uses, from an art or music studio to a small office, as well as residential living areas. The loft is
not dependent upon building form, other than that it is almost always within a multi-unit
building.
Although lofts can accommodate work space, the live-work units are typically attached buildings,
each with only one principal dwelling unit that includes flexible space that can be used as office,
retail, or studio space, or as an accessory dwelling unit. Live-work units could therefore be
developed through adaptation of a rowhouse or even the combination of two adjacent rowhouses.
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 12
December, 2004
The non-residential ground-floor uses could be helpful in establishing a daytime presence in
neighborhoods that are largely residential, thereby adding an element of security.
• • •
This analysis has determined that in the year 2004 up to 2,860 households currently living in the
defined draw areas represent the pool of potential renters/buyers of new market-rate housing units
(new construction and/or adaptive re-use of formerly non-residential structures), excluding
suburban single-family detached units, within the Downtown Buffalo Study Area (see again Table
1). As derived from the tenure and housing preferences of those draw area households, the
distribution of rental and for-sale multi-family and for-sale single-family attached and detached
housing types would be as follows:
Downtown Residential Mix
Market-Rate Higher-Density Housing Units
Multi-family for-rent
(lofts/apartments, leaseholder)
1,070
37.4%
Multi-family for-sale
(lofts/apartments, condo/co-op ownership)
720
25.2%
Single-family attached for-sale
(townhouses/rowhouses, fee-simple/
condominium ownership)
500
17.5%
Single-family detached for-sale
(houses, fee-simple ownership)
570
19.9%
Total
2,860
100.0%
Again, these numbers indicate the depth of the potential market for market-rate housing units
within the Downtown Buffalo Study Area i f appropriate housing options were available. These
households currently represent a “lost” opportunity for the city. Without an appropriate range of
available housing options throughout the Study Area, these households have either moved elsewhere
or have moved less frequently than their typical mobility rates would predict.
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 13
December, 2004
How fast will the units lease or sell?
—Market Capture—
After more than a decade’s experience in various cities across the country, and in the context of the
target market methodology, Zimmerman/Volk Associates has determined that an annual capture
of between 10 and 15 percent of the potential market, depending on housing type, is achievable.
Based on a 15 percent capture of the potential market for multi-family units, and a 10 percent
capture of single-family units, the Downtown Buffalo Study Area should be able to support up to
375 new units per year, as follows:
Annual Capture of Market Potential
HOUSING T YPE
NUMBER OF
HOUSEHOLDS
CAPTURE
RATE
NUMBER OF
NEW U NITS
Rental Multi-Family
(lofts/apartments, leaseholder)
1,070
15%
160
For-Sale Multi-Family
(lofts/apartments, condo/co-op ownership)
720
15%
108
For-Sale Single-Family Attached
(townhouses/rowhouses, fee-simple/
condominium ownership)
500
10%
50
For-Sale Single-Family Detached
(houses on small lots, fee-simple ownership)
570
10%
57
Total
2,860
375
Based on the migration and mobility analyses, and dependent on the creation of appropriate new
housing units, more than half of the annual market potential of 375 new dwelling units in the
Downtown Buffalo Study Area, or approximately 190 units per year, could be from households
moving from outside the City of Buffalo. Over five years, the realization of that market potential
could lead to an increase of up to 950 households living in the Downtown Buffalo Study Area that
moved from elsewhere in the region or the country.
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 14
December, 2004
This analysis examines market potential over the next five years. Because of the dramatic changes
in the composition of American households that occurred during the 1990s (see T HE T ARGET
M ARKETS below), and the likelihood that significant changes will continue, both the depth and
breadth of the potential market for downtown living is likely to increase. The experience of other
American cities has been that, once the downtown residential alternative has been established, the
percentage of households that will consider downtown housing typically increases.
N OTE : Target market capture rates are a unique and highly-refined measure of feasibility. Target market
capture rates are not equivalent to—and should not be confused with—penetration rates or traffic conversion
rates.
The target market capture rate is derived by dividing the annual forecast absorption—in aggregate and by
housing type—by the number of households that have the potential to purchase or rent new housing within a
specified area in a given year.
The penetration rate is derived by dividing the total number of dwelling units planned for a property by the
total number of draw area households, sometimes qualified by income.
The traffic conversion rate is derived by dividing the total number of buyers or renters by the total number
of prospects that have visited a site.
Because the prospective market for a location is more precisely defined, target market capture rates are higher
than the more grossly-derived penetration rates. However, the resulting higher capture rates are well within
the range of prudent feasibility.
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 15
December, 2004
T ARGET M ARKET A NALYSIS
Who is the potential market?
—The Target Markets—
The market for urban housing, particularly within downtowns, is now being fueled by the
convergence of the two largest generations in the history of America: the 82 million Baby Boomers
born between 1946 and 1964, and the 78 million Millennials, who were born from 1977 to 1996.
Boomer households have been moving from the full-nest to the empty-nest life stage at an
accelerating pace that will peak sometime in the next decade and continue beyond 2020. Since
the first Boomer turned 50 in 1996, empty-nesters have had a substantial impact on urban,
particularly downtown housing. After fueling the dramatic diffusion of the population into everlower-density exurbs for nearly three decades, Boomers, particularly affluent Boomers, are
rediscovering the merits and pleasures of urban living.
Meanwhile, Millennials are just leaving the nest. The Millennials are the first generation to have
been largely raised in the post-’70s world of the cul-de-sac as neighborhood, the mall as village
center, and the driver’s license as the main means of liberation.
As has been the case with
predecessor generations, significant numbers of Millennials are heading for the city. They are not
just moving to New York, Chicago, San Francisco and the other large American cities; often
priced out of these larger cities, Millennials are discovering second, third and fourth tier urban
centers.
The convergence of two generations of this size—each reaching a point when urban housing matches
their life stage—is unprecedented. This year, there are about 40 million Americans between the
ages of 20 and 29, forecast to grow to 44 million by 2015. In that same year, the population aged
50 to 59 will have also reached 44 million, from 36 million today. The synchronization of these
two demographic waves will mean that there will be an additional 12 million potential urban
housing consumers 11 years from now.
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 16
December, 2004
As determined by this analysis, then, the potential market for new and existing market-rate
housing units in the Downtown Buffalo Study Area can be characterized by general household type
as follows (see also Table 2):
Downtown Residential Mix By Household Type
P ERCENT
OF T OTAL
R ENTAL
M ULTI-FAM.
FOR-SALE
M ULTI-FAM.
FOR-SALE
ROWHOUSES
FOR-SALE
HOUSES
Empty-Nesters & Retirees
30%
32%
33%
26%
25%
Traditional &
Non-Traditional Families
7%
4%
3%
8%
14%
Younger Singles & Couples
63%
64%
64%
66%
61%
Total
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
HOUSEHOLD T YPE
•
The largest general market segment is composed of younger, mostly childless
households (younger singles and couples). These households typically choose to live
in neighborhoods that contain a diverse mix of people, housing types, and uses.
The largest potential markets for Downtown Buffalo in this segment are Urban Achievers,
University/College Affiliates, New Bohemians, Fast-Track Professionals and e-Types—
graduate students, teachers, or other higher-education affiliates; young professionals and
office workers, many in medical fields, who work at the Buffalo Niagara Medical
campus; small business owners; and artists or artisans. These households are true urbanites
who prefer to live downtown for its diversity, as well as for the availability of a variety of
activities, including employment and cultural opportunities, as well as restaurants and
clubs.
Younger singles and couples currently represent between 61 and 66 percent of the market,
depending on housing type, for market-rate housing units in Downtown Buffalo. However,
as noted above, the “Millennials” are likely to become an even larger market for
Downtown housing. If the preference for urban housing demonstrated by the leading edge
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 17
December, 2004
of this group is representative of the entire generation, the market potential from this
segment should increase significantly over the next decade.
•
The next largest market segment is comprised of older households (empty nesters and
retirees). A significant number of these households have children who have grown up
and moved away; another large percentage are retirees, with incomes from pensions,
savings and investments, and social security. Many of them are currently living i n
Buffalo’s suburbs.
These older households are quite dissimilar in their attitudes from either younger or
family-oriented households. They have different expectations, and paramount among
them is the perceived ease and convenience of single-level living, meaning a master suite on
the same floor as the living area, and few stairs in the unit. They want their dwelling units
to accommodate, to the fullest extent possible, their ability to age in place.
The largest potential market for Downtown Buffalo in this segment is Affluent Empty
Nesters, predominantly empty-nest couples (many of whom lived in Downtown Buffalo in
their youth and still retain strong emotional and cultural ties to the Downtown) who are
likely to be attracted to appropriately-designed housing in a vibrant downtown.
Additional significant empty-nester markets are Rowhouse Retirees, Active Retirees,
Nouveau Money and Post-War Suburban Pioneers. In other cities, these households have
been among the first to move into downtown units, particularly once larger and more
amenity-oriented condominiums have become available.
Empty-nest and retiree households currently represent between 25 percent and 33 percent of
the market for housing units in the Downtown Buffalo Study Area, depending on housing
type. However, as with the Millennial Generation, over the next several years this market
segment should substantially increase, because larger numbers of the “Baby Boom”
generation will be entering the empty-nest life stage. In 2004, the oldest Baby Boomers are
celebrating their 58th birthdays; in city after city across the country, a significant number
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 18
December, 2004
of Baby Boomers have already made the decision to move from detached houses in the
suburbs to rental or condominium apartments in or near downtowns, when those units have
been available. This will be a significant segment of the empty-nest market in Downtown
Buffalo.
•
The third, and smallest, general market segment is comprised of family-oriented
households (traditional and non-traditional families).
Non-traditional families,
which during the 1990s became an increasingly larger proportion of all U.S.
households, encompass a wide range of family households, from a single parent with
one or more children, an adult caring for younger siblings, a grandparent with grown
children and grandchildren, to an unrelated same-sex couple with children.
Traditional families contain a married man and woman with an average of two or
more children. These can also include “blended” families, in which each parent was
previously married to another individual and each has children from that marriage.
Households with school-age children have historically been among the first to leave a city
when one or all of three significant neighborhood elements—good schools, safe and secure
streets, and sufficient green space—are perceived to be at risk.
Although this is the
smallest market segment, the households within the four family groups—Full-Nest
Urbanites, Multi-Cultural Families, Black Urban Families and Latino Urban Families—are
households that have a preference for urban living. Most of the adults in these households
were raised in or near an urban center and have rejected the suburban alternative; most will
already have made appropriate school accommodations—public, charter, parochial or
private. This is an easier choice in Buffalo than in other older cities, as Buffalo has a
number of very highly-regarded public schools, particularly the City Honors High School,
Olmsted Middle School, and the Hutchinson Technical High School.
Depending on housing type, family-oriented households comprise between three and 14
percent of the market for housing units within the Downtown Buffalo Study Area.
Table 2
Downtown Residential Mix By Household Type
Derived From New Unit Purchase And Rental Propensities Of Draw Area Households
With The Potential To Move To The Study Area In 2004
Multi. . . . . . Family . . . . . .
Single. . . . . . Family . . . . . .
. . Attached . . . . Detached . .
Total
For-Rent
For-Sale
All Ranges
Urban
Number of
Households:
2,860
1,070
720
500
570
Empty Nesters
& Retirees
30%
32%
33%
26%
25%
Traditional &
7%
4%
3%
8%
14%
Younger
Singles & Couples
63%
64%
64%
66%
61%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 20
December, 2004
The primary target groups, their median and range of incomes, and median home values, are:
Primary Target Groups
(In Order of Median Income)
HOUSEHOLD
T YPE
M EDIAN
INCOME
BROAD INCOME
R ANGE
M EDIAN H OME
VALUE (IF OWNED )
$166,600
$111,900
$83,000
$82,800
$62,700
$51,800
$46,600
$42,000
$75,000–$300,000
$75,000–$250,000
$50,000–$175,000
$45,000–$150,000
$40,000–$100,000
$35,000–$90,000
$35,000–$85,000
$30,000–$75,000
$474,900
$390,100
$316,300
$276,400
$180,000
$233,100
$202,400
$184,300
$67,600
$45,300
$42,300
$40,200
$40,000–$100,000
$30,000–$80,000
$35,000–$75,000
$30,000–$70,000
$264,600
$165,000
$123,800
$119,400
$90,700
$84,500
$76,400
$63,800
$45,500
$44,500
$42,500
$50,000–$140,000
$45,000–$125,000
$40,000–$115,000
$40,000–$90,000
$35,000–$75,000
$30,000–$90,000
$25,000–$95,000
$397,000
$276,000
$210,500
$230,600
$171,500
$154,300
$143,100
Empty Nesters & Retirees
The Social Register
Nouveau Money
Urban Establishment
Post-War Suburban Pioneers
Affluent Empty Nesters
Middle-Class Move-Downs
Active Retirees
Rowhouse Retirees
Traditional & Non-Traditional Families
Full-Nest Urbanites
Multi-Cultural Families
Black Urban Families
Latino Urban Families
Younger Singles & Couples
Urban Elite
The VIPs
e-Types
Fast-Track Professionals
Urban Achievers
New Bohemians
University/College Affiliates
N OTE : The names and descriptions of the market groups summarize each group’s tendencies—as
determined through geo-demographic cluster analysis—rather than their absolute composition. Hence,
every group could contain “anomalous” households, such as empty-nester households within a “full-nest”
category.
The mix of general household types often progresses during the establishment of downtown living.
In city after American city, the successful establishment of new market-rate housing options in
previously non-residential areas has often been initially dependent upon “risk-oblivious”
households. “Risk-oblivious” households are mostly young singles and couples, often with a large
contingent of gays and a high percentage of artists and artisans seeking inexpensive live-work space.
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 21
December, 2004
These pioneers will typically begin neighborhood transformation by living illegally in
commercial space. Eventually, once the area becomes populated, restaurants, bars, clubs and
innovative or off-beat retail establishments begin to define the neighborhood character. At this
point, these neighborhoods become sought after by “risk-tolerant” households. “Risk-tolerant”
households are also usually young and almost always childless. The “risk-tolerant” includes those
willing to make investments in ownership housing—sometimes they are the former “risk
oblivious” seeking to recoup years of sweat equity.
In every case, however, the neighborhood established by these households has grown to encompass
more than simply housing; its flavor and tone has been reinforced by the non-residential
uses—avant garde shops, cutting-edge galleries, trendy clubs, and stylish eating and drinking
establishments—that follow the risk-oblivious and risk-tolerant households, make the
neighborhood acceptable for the “risk-aware” households that follow and contribute to the area’s
residential rent/price escalation and perceived economic stability.
The target market analysis indicates that there is a growing number of younger and older, singleand two-person households who already live within the Buffalo city limits, and a significant
market with the potential to move from other urban areas, particularly New York City.
(Reference APPENDIX T HREE , TARGET M ARKET D ESCRIPTIONS , for detail on each target
group.)
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 22
December, 2004
D OWNTOWN M ARKET-RATE RENT AND PRICE RANGES
What is the market currently able to pay?
—Rent and Price Ranges—
Based on the tenure preferences of draw area households and their income and equity levels, the
general range of rents and prices for newly-developed market-rate residential units that could
currently be sustained by the market is as follows (see also Table 3):
Rent, Price and Size Range
Newly-Created Housing
HOUSING T YPE
R ENT /PRICE
R ANGE
SIZE
R ANGE
R ENT /PRICE
PER SQ. FT.
Rental—
Hard Lofts*
$525-$1,100/month
450-1,000 sf
$1.10-$1.17 psf
Soft Lofts†
$625-$1,300/month
500-1,100 sf
$1.18-$1.25 psf
Luxury Apartments
$1,200-$2,500/month
900-2,000 sf
$1.25-$1.33 psf
Hard Lofts*
$75,000-$145,000
550-1,100 sf
$132-$136 psf
Soft Lofts†
$105,000-$175,000
700-1,200 sf
$146-$150 psf
Townhouses/Flats
$115,000-$195,000
750-1,300 sf
$150-$153 psf
Luxury Apartments
$275,000-$500,000
1,200-2,500 sf
$200-$229 psf
Rowhouses
$185,000-$315,000
1,100-2,000 sf
$158-$168 psf
Urban Houses
$135,000-$450,000
900-2,800 sf
$150-$161 psf
For-Sale—
*
Unit interiors of “hard lofts” typically have high ceilings and commercial windows and are either
minimally finished, limited to architectural elements such as columns and fin walls, or
unfinished, with no interior partitions except those for bathrooms.
†
Unit interiors of “soft lofts” may or may not have high ceilings and are fully finished, with the
interiors partitioned into separate rooms.
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 23
December, 2004
The above rents and prices are in year 2004 dollars and are exclusive of consumer options and
upgrades, or floor or location premiums. Significant premiums are typically achievable on units
that face squares, parks or greens, or are located on high floors with view potential. The rents and
prices will depend not only on location and adjacencies, but also on the number of new units
created in that location; the larger the number of units created, the greater the potential for a wider
range of values.
The above rents and prices are “market rates”—that is, within the economic context of both older
and more recently-constructed market-rate rental units in Buffalo and relative to price ranges and
prices per square foot of new construction elsewhere in the city.
As is typical in most downtowns that do not yet have a substantial number of residential units,
these initial “market-rate” rents and prices may leave a substantial “feasibility gap.”
Table 3
Optimum Market Position
December, 2004
Housing Type
Percent
Mix
Base
Rent/Price
Range*
Base
Unit Size
Range
Base
Rent/Price
Per Sq. Ft.*
Multi-Family For-Rent
Hard Lofts
60%
$525 to
$1,100
450 to
1,000
$1.10 to
$1.17
30%
$625 to
$1,300
500 to
1,100
$1.18 to
$1.25
10%
$1,200 to
$2,500
900 to
2,000
$1.25 to
$1.33
30%
$75,000 to
$145,000
550 to
1,100
$132 to
$136
30%
$105,000 to
$175,000
700 to
1,200
$146 to
$150
20%
$115,000 Flat
$195,000 TH
750 1 br
1,300 2 br
$150 to
$153
20%
$275,000 to
$500,000
1,200 to
2,500
$200 to
$229
$185,000 to
$315,000
1,100 to
2,000
$158 to
$168
$135,000 to
$450,000
900 to
2,800
$150 to
$161
Open Floorplans
Soft Lofts
Studios to 2-Bedrooms
Luxury Apartments
1 to 3-Bedrooms
Multi-Family For-Sale
Hard Lofts
Open Floorplans
Soft Lofts
1 and 2-Bedrooms
Townhouses Over Flats
1 and 2-Bedrooms
Luxury Apartments
2 and 3-Bedrooms
Single-Family Attached For-Sale
Rowhouses
2 and 3-Bedrooms
Single-Family Detached For-Sale
Urban Houses
2 to 4-Bedrooms
NOTE: Base rents/prices in year 2004 dollars and exclude floor, view or lot premiums,
options or upgrades.
SOURCE: Zimmerman/Volk Associates, Inc.
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 25
December, 2004
—Rental Distribution—
The market-rate rent range covers leases by households with annual incomes ranging between
$25,000 and $100,000 or more. A one-person household with an income of $25,000 per year,
paying no more than 30 percent of gross income for rent (the national standard for affordability)
and utilities could be qualified for a rent of $525 per month. A two- or three-person household,
with an income of $100,000 or more per year, paying no more than 30 percent of gross income for
rent and utilities, could be qualified for a rent of $2,500 per month or more.
Based on the target household mix (listed on Table 4) and the incomes of the target households, the
distribution by rent range of the 160 new rental units that could be absorbed each year over the next
five years in the Downtown Buffalo Study Area is as follows:
Loft/Apartment Distribution By Rent Range
M ONTHLY
R ENT R ANGE
N UMBER
OF U NITS
$500–$750
32
20.0%
$750–$1,000
42
26.3%
$1,000–$1,250
41
25.6%
$1,250–$1,500
24
15.0%
$1,500 and up
21
13.1%
160
100.0%
Total:
P ERCENTAGE
Table 4
Target Groups For Rental Lofts/Apartments
Empty Nesters
& Retirees
Number of
Households
At 15 Percent
Capture
Urban Establishment
Rowhouse Retirees
Nouveau Money
Active Retirees
20
100
20
30
120
10
40
3
14
3
5
17
2
6
Subtotal:
340
50
Full-Nest Urbanites
10
10
20
10
2
2
3
2
Subtotal:
50
9
Urban Elite
e-Types
Urban Achievers
New Bohemians
The VIPs
40
40
250
150
10
60
130
6
6
37
22
2
9
19
Subtotal:
680
101
Total Households:
1,070
160
Traditional &
Younger
Singles & Couples
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 27
December, 2004
—For-Sale Distribution—
The market-rate price range covers purchases by households with annual incomes generally ranging
between $30,000 and $150,000. A one-person household with an income of $30,000 per year,
paying no more than 25 percent of gross income for housing costs, including mortgage principal,
interest at current rates, taxes, insurance and utilities, could be qualified for a mortgage of
$65,000. A two- or three-person household with an income of $150,000 per year, paying no more
than 25 percent of gross income for housing costs, including mortgage principal, interest at current
rates, taxes, insurance and utilities, could be qualified for a mortgage of $375,000.
Based on the target household mix (listed on Table 5) and incomes of the target households, the
distribution by price range of the 108 market-rate for-sale apartments that could be absorbed each
year over the next five years in the Downtown Buffalo Study Area is as follows:
Loft/Apartment Distribution By Price Range
PRICE
R ANGE
N UMBER
OF U NITS
$75,000–$150,000
32
29.6%
$150,000–$225,000
38
35.2%
$225,000–$300,000
14
13.0%
$300,000–$375,000
12
11.1%
$375,000 and up
12
11.1%
108
100.0%
Total:
P ERCENTAGE
Table 5
Target Groups For For-Sale Apartments
Empty Nesters
& Retirees
Number of
Households
At 15 Percent
Capture
Urban Establishment
Rowhouse Retirees
Nouveau Money
Active Retirees
20
40
20
30
80
10
40
3
6
3
5
11
2
6
Subtotal:
240
36
10
10
2
2
Subtotal:
20
4
Urban Elite
e-Types
Urban Achievers
New Bohemians
The VIPs
20
30
150
100
10
40
110
3
5
22
14
2
6
16
Subtotal:
460
68
Total Households:
720
108
Traditional &
Younger
Singles & Couples
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 29
December, 2004
Based on the target household mix (listed on Table 6) and incomes of the target groups, the
distribution by price range of the 50 market-rate townhouses/rowhouse/live-work units that could
be absorbed each year over the next five years in the Downtown Buffalo Study Area is as follows:
Townhouse/Rowhouse/Live-Work Distribution By Price Range
PRICE
R ANGE
N UMBER
OF U NITS
$150,000–$200,000
23
46.9%
$200,000–$250,000
15
30.6%
$250,000–$300,000
6
12.3%
$300,000 and up
5
10.2%
50
100.0%
Total:
P ERCENTAGE
Based on the target household mix (listed on Table 7) and incomes of the target groups, the
distribution by price range of the 57 market-rate urban houses that could be absorbed each year
over the next five years in the Downtown Buffalo Study Area is as follows:
Urban House Distribution By Price Range
PRICE
R ANGE
N UMBER
OF U NITS
$125,000–$200,000
22
38.6%
$200,000–$275,000
15
26.3%
$275,000–$350,000
8
14.1%
$350,000–$425,000
6
10.5%
$425,000 and up
6
10.5%
57
100.0%
Total:
P ERCENTAGE
Table 6
Target Groups For For-Sale Townhouses/
Rowhouses/Live-Work
Empty Nesters
& Retirees
Number of
Households
At 10 Percent
Capture
Urban Establishment
Rowhouse Retirees
Nouveau Money
Active Retirees
10
50
10
10
40
10
1
5
1
1
4
1
Subtotal:
130
13
Full-Nest Urbanites
10
10
10
10
1
1
1
1
Subtotal:
40
4
e-Types
Urban Achievers
New Bohemians
The VIPs
20
140
50
10
20
90
2
14
5
1
2
9
Subtotal:
330
33
Total Households:
500
50
Traditional &
Younger
Singles & Couples
Table 7
Target Groups For Urban Houses
Empty Nesters
& Retirees
Number of
Households
At 10 Percent
Capture
Active Retirees
Rowhouse Retirees
20
60
10
20
30
2
6
1
2
3
Subtotal:
140
14
Full-Nest Urbanites
30
20
20
10
3
2
2
1
Subtotal:
80
8
e-Types
Urban Achievers
New Bohemians
The VIPs
10
140
30
10
50
110
1
14
3
1
5
11
Subtotal:
350
35
Total Households:
570
57
Traditional &
Younger
Singles & Couples
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 32
December, 2004
T HE C URRENT C ONTEXT
A wide range of rental properties—predominantly adaptive re-use of older buildings, although a
few were built since 1960—are located within the Downtown Buffalo Study Area and surrounding
in-town neighborhoods. (See Table 8.) Of the 15 properties in the survey, six are leasing a mix of
one- and two-bedroom apartments; five are also leasing studio/efficiency apartments.
The
majority of the available rentals are flats, although some of the units have “loft” or “mezzanine”
areas and a limited number are two-story units. In the Downtown Buffalo Study Area, the highest
rents currently being achieved are at The Bellasara (rents ranging from $1,155 to $2,495 per
month) and The Belesario (rents ranging from $1,495 to $2,245 per month).
Of the 15 properties covered in the survey, rents for studios range from $400 to nearly $500 a
month for units containing from less than 400 to approximately 500 square feet (a general range of
between $0.80 to $1.00 per square foot). Rents for one-bedroom apartments generally start at
about $550 and go up to nearly $1,800 a month for units ranging in size between 675 and
approximately 1,800 square feet (a general range of $0.70 to $1.25 per square foot, although a few
individual units fall below or above this rent-per-square-foot range). Rents for two-bedroom
apartments generally start at around $700 per month and can approach $2,500 a month (at The
Bellasara), for approximately 950 square feet to 2,000 or more square feet of living space (from
under a $1.00 to about $1.25 per square foot).
Several of the properties have a fitness center, exercise room or recreation area; a limited number
are providing high-speed internet access to their residents.
Currently, despite the soft market nationally, the larger rental properties (50 units or more)
included in the survey are maintaining vacancy rates above 90 percent; only the Fairfax, a high-rise
on Delaware Avenue, was reporting occupancy as low as 70 percent.
• • •
Table 8
Page 1 of 3
Summary Of Selected Rental Properties
October, 2004
Number
of Units
Property (Date Opened)
Address
Reported
Base Rent
Reported
Unit Size
Rent per
Sq. Ft.
Additional Information
. . . . . Downtown Study Area . . . . .
Ansonia Center (1980s)
712 Main Street
58
Studio
1BR/1BA
2BR/1BA
Townhome
479 Delaware Avenue (1892)
479 Delaware Avenue
8
Studio
1BR/1BA
2BR/1BA
The Ambassador &
The Mansion (1920s)
173-175 North Street
96
Studio
1BR/1BA
2BR/1BA
The Sidway (2004)
775 Main Street
67
1BR/1BA
2BR/1BA
3BR/2BA
Lofts - 2-level
Market Arcade (2001)
617 Main Street
10
1BR/1BA
2BR/1BA
$400
$575
$725
$725
$975
$1,100
500
725 to
975
975 to
1,200
1,800 to
2,000
$0.80
$0.74 to
$0.79
$0.74 to
$0.81
$0.55 to
$0.61
100% occupancy
Utilities included.
75% occupancy
$450
$550 to
$625
$695
99% occupancy
$485
$560 to
$775
$775 to
$800
$725
$825 to
$1,275
$1,700
$1,400 to
$1,900
675 to
775
930 to
1,200
1,600
1,200 to
1,600
$0.94 to
$1.07
$1.06 to
$0.89
$1.06
$1.17 to
$1.19
93% occupancy
Adaptive reuse.
Fitness center.
100% occupancy
$750
$850
950
950
$0.79
$0.89
Table 8
Page 2 of 3
October, 2004
Address
Number
of Units
Reported
Base Rent
Reported
Unit Size
Rent per
Sq. Ft.
. . . . . Downtown Study Area (continued) . . . . .
Ellicott Lofts (2002)
489 Ellicott Street
38
1- & 2-Story
Lofts
Lofts at Elk Terminal (1919; 2002)
72
Perry Street
1BR/1BA
2BR/1BA and Loft Units
The Bellasara (2001)
540 Delaware Avenue
14
1BR/1BA
2BR/2BA
1BR/1BA -Deluxe
2BR/2BA -Deluxe
The Belesario (5/04)
514 Main Street
28
1BR/1BA
2BR/2BA
$895
$1,250
to
$900
$1,395
$1,895
1,100
1,350
to
$0.81 to
$0.93
900 to
1,400
1,500 to
1,650
$1.00
$1.00
$1.15 to
$1.26
$1,155 to
$1,520
$1,350 to
$1,755
$1,520
$2,405 to
$2,495
840 to
1,100
939 to
1,219
1,220
1,963 to
2,025
$1.38
$1.38
$1.44
$1.44
$1.25
$1.23
$1.23
$1,495 to
$1,795
$1,698 to
$2,245
1,164 to
1,780
2,088 to
2,282
$1.01 to
$1.28
$0.81 to
$0.98
100% occupancy
Recreation area.
Gated.
92% occupancy
Adaptive reuse.
86% occupancy
Security system,
washer/dryer in unit.
In Lease-Up
Adaptive reuse.
Security system,
washer/dryer in unit,
high-speed internet,
concierge services.
Table 8
Page 3 of 3
October, 2004
Number
of Units
Address
Reported
Base Rent
Reported
Unit Size
Rent per
Sq. Ft.
. . . . . North of Study Area . . . . .
Gates Circle (1930s)
1290 - 1310 Delaware Avenue
155
Studio
1BR/1BA
2BR/2BA
Fairfax House (1927)
715 Delaware Avenue
142
Studio
1BR/1BA
Marina Vista (1970s; Rem.2004)
12 Hertel Avenue
192
1BR/1BA
2BR/2BA
Delaware Park (1939: 2003)
1975 Delaware Avenue
147
1BR/1BA
2BR/1BA
1217 Delaware Avenue (1963)
1217 Delaware Avenue
80
1BR/1BA
2BR/2BA
3BR/2BA
Executive Towers (1965)
849 Delaware Avenue
48
1BR/1BA
1BR/1.5BA
2BR/1.5BA
98% occupancy
$425
$500 to
$585
$650 to
$750
$485
$545 to
$645
na
550 to
850
700 to
1,000
382
522 to
734
$0.69 to
$0.91
$0.75 to
$0.93
$1.27
$0.88 to
$1.04
$517 to
$600
$624 to
$723
721
$700
$858
750
850
$0.93
$1.01
$750 to
$775
$965 to
$1,000
$975 to
$1,150
570
$1.32 to
$1.36
$1.16 to
$1.20
$1.14 to
$1.21
$795
$835
$1,050 to
$1,125
600
800
1,000
821
830
950
$0.72 to
$0.83
$0.76 to
$0.88
$1.33
$1.04 to
$1.05
$1.13
70% occupancy
High rise.
90% occupancy
Community center,
fitness center,
utilities included.
95% occupancy
Security system,
WiFi internet,
covered parking,
97% occupancy
High rise.
Security system.
Garages $75 mth.
Carports $55 mth.
Includes heat
and water.
High rise.
Garage $80 mth.
Utilities included.
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 36
December, 2004
Although there were no new condominium or townhouse projects under construction in the
Downtown Buffalo Study Area at the time of the field investigation in September 2004, there
were a number of individual units on the market in the Study Area and nearby cities. (See Table
9.) In downtown, fewer than 15 units are generally on the market at any given time. In September
and October, nearly all of the available units were priced under $200,000. Two units at City
Centre had asking prices of $254,900 and $325,000 and contained 1,000 and 1,451 square feet,
respectively ($255 and $224 per square foot); two larger units—1,900 and 1,532 square feet—at
the Bryant were priced at $214,900 and $239,900 ($113 and $157 per square foot, respectively).
At the Buffalo Waterfront, only two units on the market—1,532-square-foot floorplans at
Lakefront Commons—were priced below $200,000. Half of the resales were priced between
$229,000 and $369,000 ($115 to $167 per square foot) for two- and three-bedroom units
containing between approximately 1,500 and 2,250 square feet. All four units at Rivermist were
priced above $400,000, although the most expensive unit on the market along the Waterfront was a
nearly 3,000-square-foot three-bedroom unit priced at $599,000 at Gull Landing ($201 per square
foot).
Outside the City of Buffalo, asking prices for condominiums and townhouses are considerably
lower than those within the Downtown Study Area. Of the dozens of listings in Amherst, nearly
75 percent were priced under $200,000, with the least expensive prices starting at $61,000 for a
33-year-old, 1,000-square-foot two-bedroom unit with a single bath.
In general, the most
expensive attached units in Amherst were townhouses; the majority were priced above $250,000,
including several built since 2002. The newest townhouses range in size between1,700 and 2,800square feet, with prices per square foot falling between $156 and $195 per square foot.
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 37
December, 2004
A half dozen units were on the market in Cheektowaga at the time of the field investigation, with
asking prices ranging from just under $86,000 to nearly $230,000 for condominiums or
townhouses containing between 980 to 1,738 square feet ($88 to $132 per square foot). All were
two-bedroom units with two or two-and-a-half baths, and none had been built prior to 1994.
Another six units were on the market in West Seneca, of which half were newly-constructed
townhouses. The units were priced between $95,000 and $220,000 and contained between 1,175
and 1,800 square feet; the prices per square foot for these units ranged between $81 and $147.
Again, all but one were two-bedroom units, most with two baths.
Table 9
Page 1 of 4
Summary Of Selected Re-Sale Attached Properties
September/October, 2004
Property
Name
Housing
Type
Year Built
Listed
Price
Unit
Size
Price Per
Square Foot
Unit
Configuration
. . . . . Downtown and In-Town Buffalo . . . . .
Tudor Plaza
CO
$86,900
880
$99
2BR/1BA
900 Delaware
CO
1988
$89,000
$89,900
832
832
$107
$108
1BR/1BA
1BR/1BA
Bryant
CO
1928
$89,900
$96,000
$164,900
$214,900
$239,900
950
779
850
1,900
1,532
$95
$123
$194
$113
$157
2BR/1BA
2BR/1BA
2BR/1BA
3BR/3BA
2BR/2.5BA
City Centre
CO
1993
$149,000
$157,000
$179,000
$189,900
$254,900
$325,000
940
940
1,069
1,146
1,000
1,451
$159
$167
$167
$166
$255
$224
1BR/1.5BA
1BR/1.5BA
2BR/2BA
2BR/2BA
2BR/2BA
2BR/2.5BA
Park Lane
CO
1978
$179,900
1,901
$95
2BR/2BA
. . . . . Buffalo Waterfront . . . . .
Lakefront Commons
CO
1990
$195,000
$195,000
$239,900
$244,900
1,532
1,532
1,532
1,532
$127
$127
$157
$160
2BR/2.5BA
2BR/2.5BA
2BR/2.5BA
2BR/2.5BA
Breakwaters
CO
1988
1988
1985
$229,000
$229,000
$264,900
1,700
1,700
1,700
$135
$135
$156
2BR/2.5BA
2BR/2.5BA
2BR/2.5BA
Harbour Pointe
CO
1981
$259,900
2,258
$115
3BR/2.5BA
Portside
CO
2003
$369,000
2,212
$167
3BR/2.5BA
SOURCE: Multiple Listing Service;
Table 9
Page 2 of 4
Property
Name
Housing
Type
Year Built
Listed
Price
Unit
Size
Price Per
Square Foot
Unit
Configuration
. . . . . Buffalo Waterfront {continued} . . . . .
Rivermist
CO
1988
1982
1982
1982
$405,000
$499,000
$539,900
$569,000
2,185
2,300
2,185
2,185
$185
$217
$247
$260
3BR/3.5BA
3BR/3.5BA
3BR/3.5BA
3BR/3.5BA
Gull Landing
CO
1990
$599,000
2,973
$201
3BR/2.5BA
. . . . . Amherst . . . . .
Charter Oaks
CO
1971
$61,000
$62,500
$64,800
$92,500
1,015
1,015
1,015
1,152
$60
$62
$64
$80
2BR/1BA
2BR/1BA
2BR/1BA
2BR/1.5BA
Broadwalk
CO
1984
$66,900
868
$77
2BR/1BA
Cambridge Square
CO
1971
$74,900
$75,900
1,000
1,175
$75
$65
2BR/1.5BA
2BR/2BA
Audubon
TH
TH
1986
1992
$79,900
$149,900
978
1,572
$82
$95
2BR/1.5BA
2BR/1.5BA
Coventry
CO
1970
$80,000
1,175
$68
2BR/2BA
Chestnut Ridge
CO
1987
$84,900
995
$85
2BR/2BA
Georgian Village
CO
1968
$87,850
1,075
$82
2BR/2BA
Oak Brook
CO
1968
$76,500
$88,000
$89,900
$96,000
1,024
1,160
1,231
1,231
$75
$76
$73
$78
1BR/1BA
2BR/2BA
2BR/2BA
2BR/2BA
Chestnut Ridge
CO
1987
$89,900
932
$96
2BR/2BA
Table 9
Page 3 of 4
Property
Name
Housing
Type
Year Built
Listed
Price
Unit
Size
Price Per
Square Foot
Unit
Configuration
. . . . . Amherst (continued) . . . . .
Parks Edge
CO
1985
$90,000
1,062
$85
2BR/1BA
Park Place
CO
1985
1986
$109,900
$142,900
1,234
1,234
$89
$116
2BR/2BA
2BR/2.5BA
Burroughs
TH
1992
$110,000
$129,000
$129,000
1,190
1,190
1,190
$92
$108
$108
2BR/1.5BA
2BR/2.5BA
2BR/2.5BA
Dorchester
CO
1987
$120,000
1,010
$119
2BR/1.5BA
Hickory Hill
CO
1970
$129,900
1,670
$78
3BR/2BA
Wedgewood
TH
1979
$159,000
1,922
$83
3BR/2.5BA
Park Lane
TH
2004
2003
$169,900
$179,900
1,800
1,800
$94
$100
2BR/2BA
2BR/2BA
Eagles Trace
CO
1991
$209,900
1,780
$118
3BR/2.5BA
Hidden Ridge
TH
1987
1988
$249,900
$285,000
1,978
2,330
$126
$122
2BR/2.5BA
2BR/2BA
Hampton Hill
CO
1987
$279,000
Nottingham
TH
CO
2004
2004
$269,900
$282,900
1,730
1,802
$156
$157
3BR/2BA
2BR/2BA
Millrace
TH
1965
1969
$324,900
$329,900
2,500
2,653
$130
$124
3BR/2.5BA
3BR/2.5BA
Brompton
TH
2003
2002
2004
2002
$364,900
$384,900
$414,900
$539,900
2,300
2,330
2,503
2,765
$159
$165
$166
$195
2BR/2.5BA
2BR/2.5BA
2BR/2.5BA
3BR/2.5BA
2BR/2BA
Table 9
Page 4 of 4
Property
Name
Housing
Type
Year Built
Listed
Price
Unit
Size
Price Per
Square Foot
Unit
Configuration
. . . . . Cheektowaga . . . . .
Galleria Village
CO
1994
$85,888
980
$88
2BR/2BA
Brookfield
CO
1998
2002
$126,900
$129,900
1,299
1,250
$98
$104
2BR/2BA
2BR/2BA
Unionvale
TH
2004
$149,900
$154,900
1,600
1,600
$94
$97
2BR/2.5BA
2BR/2.5BA
Meadowbrook
TH
2004
2002
$174,900
$229,900
1,604
1,738
$109
$132
2BR/2BA
2BR/2.5BA
. . . . . West Seneca . . . . .
Victorian Springs
CO
1991
$95,000
1,175
$81
2BR/2BA
North Hillcrest
CO
1991
$154,900
1,742
$89
2BR/1.5BA
On the Green
CO
2000
$159,900
1,700
$94
3BR/2BA
Burchfield Village
TH
2004
$174,900
$213,900
$219,900
1,320
1,817
1,498
$133
$118
$147
2BR/2BA
2BR/2BA
2BR/2BA
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 42
December, 2004
DOWNTOWN HOUSING TYPES
Adaptive re-use of existing, non-residential buildings can yield either lofts or fully-finished
apartments. The lofts, whether for-rent or for-sale, new construction or adaptive re-use, should
include work space as a permitted use.
Building and unit types most successfully used in residential redevelopment or new residential
construction in other downtowns comparable in size and scale to Downtown Buffalo, include:
•
Courtyard Apartment Building:
In new construction, an urban, pedestrian-oriented
equivalent to conventional garden apartments. An urban courtyard building is four or more
stories, often combined with non-residential uses on the ground floor. The building should
be built to the sidewalk edge and, to provide privacy and a sense of security, the first floor
should be elevated significantly above the sidewalk. Parking is either below grade, at
grade behind or interior to the building, or in an integral structure.
The building’s apartments can be leased, as in a conventional income property, or sold to
individual buyers, under condominium or cooperative ownership, in which the owner pays a
monthly maintenance fee in addition to the purchase price.
•
Loft Apartment Building: Either adaptive re-use of older warehouse and manufacturing
buildings or a new-construction building type inspired by those buildings.
The new-
construction version is usually elevator-served with double-loaded corridors.
Hard Lofts: Unit interiors typically have high ceilings and commercial windows and are
minimally finished (with limited architectural elements such as columns and fin walls), or
unfinished (with no interior partitions except those for bathrooms).
Soft Lofts: Unit interiors typically have high ceilings, are fully finished and partitioned
into individual rooms. Units may also contain architectural elements reminiscent of “hard
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 43
December, 2004
lofts,” such as brick walls and iron railings, particularly if the building is an adaptive reuse of an existing industrial structure.
The building’s loft apartments can be leased, as in a conventional income property, or sold
to individual buyers, under condominium or cooperative ownership, in which the owner
pays a monthly maintenance fee in addition to the purchase price. (Loft apartments can
also be incorporated into multifamily buildings along with conventionally-finished
apartment units.)
•
Maisonette Apartment Building (Townhouse Over Flat): A three-story building with an
elevation that resembles a row of townhouses; the interior, however, combines single-level
and two-level apartments. Each unit has its own street entrance, and attached or detached
garage or open on-site parking, accessed from the rear of the building.
•
Mansion Apartment Building: A two- to four-story flexible-use structure with a street
façade resembling a large detached house (hence, “mansion”).
The building can
accommodate a variety of uses—from rental or for-sale apartments, professional offices,
any of these uses over ground-floor retail, a bed and breakfast inn, or a large single-family
detached house—and its physical structure complements other buildings within a
neighborhood.
Parking behind the mansion buildings can be either alley-loaded, or front-loaded served
by shared drives. The form of the parking can be in open lots, in garages with units above,
or integral to the building.
Mansion buildings should be strictly regulated in form, but flexible in use. However,
flexibility in use is somewhat constrained by the handicapped accessibility regulations in
both the Fair Housing Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act.
•
Townhouse/ Rowhouse: Similar in form to a conventional suburban townhouse except that
the garage—either attached or detached—is located to the rear of the unit and accessed
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 44
December, 2004
from an alley or auto court. Unlike conventional townhouses, urban townhouses conform to
the pattern of streets, typically with shallow front-yard setbacks. To provide privacy and
a sense of security, the first floor should be elevated significantly above the sidewalk.
•
Live-work is a unit or building type that accommodates non-residential uses in addition
to, or combined with living quarters. The typical live-work unit is a building, either
attached or detached, with a principal dwelling unit that includes flexible space that can be
used as office, retail, or studio space, or as an accessory dwelling unit.
Regardless of the form they take, live-work units should be flexible in order to respond to
economic, social and technological changes over time and to accommodate as wide as
possible a range of potential uses. The unit configuration must also be flexible in order to
comply with the requirements of the Fair Housing Amendments Act and the Americans
with Disabilities Act.
In New Urbanist developments that are currently under construction across the country, true
live-work units tend to be most successful in projects that have been underway for several
years, within an already established neighborhood or town center.
In most of the
developments for which information is available, live-work units are likely to be purchased
by households for use as dwelling units only, or purchased by investors. A resident investor
can lease the flex space for residential, retail or office use; a non-resident investor can lease
both the main residential space or the flex space. Since experience shows that it is
uncommon for retail operators to live above the store, live-work units must comply with
local codes permitting the legal separation of uses in order to maintain investor
flexibility.
•
Urban House: A two- to three-story single-family detached house on a narrow lot. The
garage is located to the rear of the house and accessed from an alley or auto court. Urban
houses also conform to the pattern of streets, typically with shallow front-yard setbacks or
dooryards.
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 45
December, 2004
D OWNTOWN H OUSING STRATEGIES
From the perspective of draw area target market propensities and compatibility, a broad range of
new construction as well as adaptive re-use of existing buildings will be required to support and
sustain residential diversity in the Downtown Buffalo Study Area.
An effective housing strategy to attract the target households should include:
•
The creation of a variety of housing types, both rental and for-sale, including
higher-value market-rate as well as affordable housing units, throughout the Study
Area;
•
The establishment of general neighborhood guidelines to assure the compatibility
of every scale and type of housing;
•
Preservation of the built environment: the restoration, repositioning and/or
adaptive re-use of existing buildings;
•
New residential construction: the introduction of housing types not currently
available or under-represented in Downtown Buffalo; and
•
Mixed-use development: the inclusion of a residential component within mixeduse buildings, either adaptive re-use or new construction.
The City of Buffalo should continue to encourage residential redevelopment of existing buildings,
particularly those of architectural merit, because of the demonstrated positive impact historic
rehabilitation has had on housing and neighborhood values nationally.
• • •
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 46
December, 2004
In order to achieve maximum positive impact of downtown housing, three elements—location,
design and marketing—must be carefully considered and executed.
1. Designate Areas For Residential Development
The Queen City Hub: A Regional Action Plan for Downtown Buffalo, a comprehensive vision and
implementation plan, identified five strategic areas for investment in Downtown: the Waterfront
and Erie Canal Harbor; the Financial District and Government Center; the Theatre District; the
Buffalo Niagara Medical Campus, and a new Downtown Education and Public Safety Campus,
anchored by Erie Community College. The Plan also identified four focus areas for mixed-use
housing: the 600-800 blocks of Main Street and throughout the Theatre District; Genesee Street
east of Main; the 500 Block of Main Street and the “Electric District;” and lower Main Street,
including the Cobblestone District. The Plan, which calls for at least one billion dollars in
downtown investment over this decade, has received the 2005 Outstanding Planning Award from
the American Planning Association, the world’s largest planning advocacy group.
Based on the recommendations of the Queen City Hub plan, and the inventory of potential housing
sites compiled by the City of Buffalo, Buffalo Place and UB through the Downtown Buffalo 2002
Implementation Campaign, potential areas for market-rate housing within the Downtown were
evaluated relative to the following criteria for successful urban housing development or
redevelopment initiatives:
(a) Advantageous adjacency.
It is critical to “build on strength,” not only to provide
maximum support for any proposed housing initiatives, but also, conversely, so that
housing initiatives will reinforce existing or proposed adjacent developments
(commercial, retail, or residential).
(b) Building and/or land availability. At present, several buildings or parcels within the
Downtown are underutilized or vacant. From the City’s perspective, poorly-located or
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 47
December, 2004
under-used surface parking lots are better utilized as sites for new infill mixed-use
development.
(c) Potential for expansion. Each housing initiative should be located in an area where, at the
successful completion of the initial project, adjacent or nearby buildings and/or land
appropriate for the continuation or extension of the neighborhood, either through new
construction or adaptive re-use would potentially be available. Each housing initiative
should be viewed not as a “stand-alone” project, but rather as a potential catalyst for
additional residential development in surrounding areas.
(d) Anchors/linkage. Each housing initiative must be seen as part of an overall urban strategy
to build a critical mass of both housing and related non-residential uses.
“Anchor”
locations establish the potential for economic activity in an underutilized area; “linkage”
locations build on the strength of two or more established, but disconnected assets.
Successful residential development/redevelopment in Downtown Buffalo will require the
establishment of residential “addresses,” leading to the creation of a downtown residential
neighborhood where none currently exists. A neighborhood is established when enough “mass” is
created—both in number of people and in number of residential buildings. Rental apartments in
particular are instrumental in the rapid establishment of “mass.” Rentals allow households to
experiment with living in a particular location without the commitment of home ownership; and
Downtown renters will form a pool of potential purchasers of ownership units that may be
developed at a later date. Several rental properties have been developed in the core Downtown
area since 2000, demonstrating the strength of a Downtown rental market.
The location and proximity to each other of various existing uses support the findings of the Queen
City Hub Plan and suggest at least three core mixed-use neighborhoods: the North Side—in
general, the blocks between Tupper and the Medical Campus, Michigan and Elmwood; the East
Village—the blocks between Washington and Michigan, Tupper and Broadway; and the South
Side—between Interstate 190 and Lake Erie, Michigan and Erie. These neighborhoods are in
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 48
December, 2004
addition to the full length of Main Street, where residential conversion of buildings with vacant or
under-utilized upper floors should be strongly encouraged by the City.
From a market perspective, then, the most promising areas for market-rate residential
development in Downtown Buffalo—including new construction as well as adaptive re-use of upper
floors of existing buildings—have been evaluated relative to the four criteria for successful urban
housing development or redevelopment initiatives:
The North Side—
•
Advantageous adjacency: This area is within walking distance of the Buffalo
Niagara Medical Campus, which is significant because multi-family housing, both
rental and for-sale, is typically successful when located in close proximity to
medical facilities. Residential uses are already proposed for the upper stories of
several buildings on Main Street, and the Sidway building anchors the corner of
Main and Goodell.
•
Building and/or land availability:
The Trico building is appropriate for
residential conversion, if commercial uses are ruled out. The parking lots flanking
Franklin Street between Tupper and Goodell represent a significant opportunity to
create new residential buildings with retail potential on the ground floors.
•
Potential for expansion: Several parking lots are located throughout the area.
•
Anchors/linkage: Residential development in this neighborhood will link the core
Downtown with Allentown.
The East Village—
•
Advantageous adjacency: This area is an emerging neighborhood and encompasses
Genesee Village, the Flower District and the Electric District.
Residential is
already expanding adjacent to the Ellicott Lofts.
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 49
December, 2004
•
Building and/or land availability: There are a number of buildings in this area that
are either vacant or under-utilized. Several very large parking lots are located
throughout the area.
•
Potential for expansion: There are several acres of cleared land that, once the
neighborhood is firmly established, represent an excellent opportunity for
expansion.
•
Anchors/linkage: A strong and vibrant East Village would become the anchor for
the east side of Downtown, with a positive impact on the East Side neighborhoods
east of Michigan.
The South Side—
•
Advantageous adjacency: Although this is also an emerging neighborhood from the
residential perspective—the Lofts at Elk Terminal is on Perry Street—this area
already has significant employment (New York State Offices, Buffalo News
offices, HSBC), the HSBC Arena, and, in the near future, Bass Pro which will
occupy the currently vacant auditorium west of Main Street.
•
Building and/or land availability: Several buildings have vacant or under-utilized
upper floors.
•
Potential for expansion: The acres of open parking lots are clearly intended to serve
the HSBC Arena and, shortly, Bass Pro. However, given that the presence of a Bass
Pro store has typically prompted additional retail demand, these parking lots
represent significant opportunities for mixed-use development that could also
include an additional parking deck.
•
Anchors/linkage: The South Side neighborhood would link the existing Waterfront
Village with the new development envisioned for the NFTA site.
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 50
December, 2004
2. Ensure Appropriate Urban Design
A neighborhood is the sum of a variety of elements: the configuration of the street and block
network, the arrangement of lots on those blocks, and the manner in which buildings are disposed
on their lots and address the street. A downtown residential neighborhood succeeds when its
physical characteristics consistently emphasize urbanity and the qualities of city life; conversely,
attempts to introduce suburban scale and housing types (or, indeed, suburban building forms in
general) into urban areas have invariably yielded disappointing results. Therefore, appropriate
urban design—which places as much emphasis on creating quality streets and public places as on
creating or redeveloping quality buildings—will be essential to success. The important elements
can be summarized in several practical inter-related guidelines:
(a) Preservation or restoration of the urban fabric. Emphasis should be on adaptive re-use, with
new construction used as infill among rehabilitated structures.
(b) Respect for the urban context. Major renovation and new infill construction should
maintain the building lot disposition and “build-to” line.
When building heights are
increased, the new floors should be set back from the historic cornice line. Pedestrian
entrances should always be from the sidewalk; automobile entrances should always be
minimized. Buildings should never present a blank wall to the street.
(c) Streets designed for pedestrian comfort. Automobiles are accommodated on great urban
streets; however, they are not given precedence over ease of pedestrian movement. The
emphasis on streets can have significant, long-term impact on both street safety (providing
“eyes on the street”) and usable parks and squares.
(d) Continuing improvement of the streetscape. Local artists can create a unique physical
environment which could be extended to the Downtown’s “street furniture”—additional
seating areas, public sculptures, and other small street amenities that make the difference
between an “automobile-oriented road” and a “neighborhood street.”
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 51
December, 2004
(e) Reduced parking requirements. Urban, rather than suburban, parking ratios should be
utilized, with 1.3 parking spaces per rental unit and 1.5 parking spaces per for-sale unit.
Although lack of parking is a recurring complaint in many cities, detailed analysis of
parking capacity typically reveals under-utilization of existing parking. A number of
cities have recently begun to shrink parking requirements. For example, Portland, Oregon
now exempts downtown residential development from required off-street parking;
Olympia, Washington has no minimum parking requirements in its downtown.
Parallel parking should be encouraged wherever possible not only to enhance pedestrian
safety but also to help meet residents’ parking needs. Resident parking on designated
streets should be ensured through a permit system; permits should be issued at the cost of
administering the program, including the added cost of enforcement.
Shared parking should be encouraged in the core Downtown. The overall number of
required parking spaces could be significantly reduced if businesses and residential
development shared parking facilities.
3. Market and Monitor the Downtown
A high-profile marketing program should be undertaken to promote the Downtown as a viable and
exciting housing alternative. An effective marketing program will require advertising and public
relations, merchandising and promotion. This could be undertaken as an adjunct to the marketing
of Downtown as a destination for shopping and entertainment.
(a) Advertising and public relations should include an “image” campaign that not only keeps
the Downtown within the public consciousness, but also reinforces the positive aspects of
urban living.
The City of Norfolk, Virginia adopted the slogan “Come Home to
Norfolk Now,” as the centerpiece of their marketing campaign that focuses on Downtown
and surrounding in-town neighborhoods. The campaign has been highly successful in
attracting new residents, not only to the Downtown but also to the city’s in-town
neighborhoods.
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 52
December, 2004
(b) Merchandising, which also includes consistent street amenities, such as lighting and trash
receptacles with uniform and distinctive designs, should be extended into the in-town
neighborhoods to emphasize the connections between the core Downtown and the
surrounding neighborhoods.
(c) Many cities sponsor annual downtown housing tours, which have been enormously successful
in familiarizing the public with the housing options available in the core downtown and intown neighborhoods. In Louisville, Kentucky, the first Downtown housing tour attracted
over a 100 people with minimal marketing; tours now require several buses to
accommodate the hundreds of participants. Many cities charge fees for the tours, with the
fees donated to downtown public or charitable organizations, ranging from arts
organizations to the public library.
Mayor Anthony Masiello has already led several “Seeing is Believing” walking tours,
designed to showcase new residential and development projects in Downtown Buffalo. T o
date, these walks have been enthusiastically received by the public, and are planned to be
continued in 2005.
(d) Buffalo Place has been quite successful in promoting a series of special events, including the
summer concert series and the Downtown Country Market, that attract large numbers of
households to the Downtown. These types of events are critical to establishing the
Downtown as the center for public activity.
Marketing efforts are most effective when they are constantly fine-tuned based on results, which
requires some means of monitoring marketing impact. In the City of Baltimore, Maryland, the
Downtown Partnership maintains a database of all existing residential properties located within
the Downtown.
The Partnership updates, on a quarterly basis, the monthly rents, vacancy and turnover rates at each
rental building; the values and sales of newly-developed units in new construction or adaptive reuse of existing buildings; and the values and frequency of resale activity within older
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 53
December, 2004
condominium buildings, to determine value escalation, if any. In addition, the Partnership
monitors the status of all new development proposals. This information is readily available to
potential developers via the Partnership’s website.
Downtown, and most of Baltimore’s in-town neighborhoods, are actively marketed through
another website, “Live Baltimore”, which is linked to the Downtown Partnership website. This
site describes in detail each neighborhood’s assets, from cultural institutions to architectural
characteristics, and also provides comprehensive listings of available rental and for-sale units (with
location, asking rent/price, unit size and photograph).
A DDITIONAL C ONSIDERATIONS
—Urban Amenities—
Since the diversity, and social and cultural amenities of the city are one of the attractions of urban
living, successful downtown housing is not necessarily dependent upon the creation of extensive
(and expensive ) recreational amenities.
However, locations that are within walking distance of parks and greenways, and entertainment
venues—such as theaters, clubs and restaurants, as well as provide convenient access to a variety of
retailers, including a grocery store—hold a significant market advantage.
Although Buffalo’s parks system was designed by Frederick Law Olmsted, which is an important
asset for the city, there are few small green spaces within the Downtown. Although beautiful,
Niagara Square and Lafayette Square are large-scale public spaces. Because of the high value
placed by the potential market on intimate urban green spaces, it is in the City’s interest to
undertake or encourage the development of small “pocket parks” or green spaces wherever possible
throughout the Downtown. Some of these parks could be specialized, such as “Bark Parks,” where
residents can take their dogs, or just a small green area, perhaps enhanced by a sculpture, but
including seating that is shaded by trees.
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 54
December, 2004
—Mixed-Income Development—
A number of states, counties and cities have addressed the issue of affordable housing through what
is known as inclusionary zoning policies. These policies take a number of different approaches, but
two of the most “successful” in terms of actually getting substantial numbers of affordable housing
units built, are in Montgomery County, Maryland and the State of New Jersey.
Montgomery County requires that at least 12 to 15 percent of the dwelling units proposed for a
new development of 50 or more units be affordable, which is defined as 60 percent of the area
median income.
The State of New Jersey requires that each municipality provides its “fair share” of affordable
housing, as determined by COAH, or the Council on Affordable Housing. The individual
municipality can achieve its fair share in a variety of ways:
•
By loans to residents to create accessory apartments that are affordable to low-income
households;
•
By developing and building the required number of units;
•
By paying “X” amount of dollars per unit, as determined by COAH, to another New
Jersey municipality that has a high proportion of residents living in substandard dwelling
units; and
•
By providing those units within new development projects, through density bonuses to the
developer.
However, successful development of mixed-income housing rests on several critical principles that
are common to the establishment of all healthy neighborhoods:
1. Buildings must be designed to enhance the public realm, facing well-defined, walkable
streets, to provide the “eyes on the street” that will ensure public safety.
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 55
December, 2004
2. The affordable and market-rate units should be interspersed throughout the building or
buildings, rather than located in single-use “pods.”
3. For new construction within existing neighborhoods, logical relationships between
densities and tenures must be established, from both the market perspective and the
property management perspective. In the case of Park duValle in Louisville, Kentucky,
this was achieved through a progression of density on the street, moving from a six-unit
apartment building on the corner to a rental duplex or triplex building to for-sale singlefamily detached houses in mid-block.
4. The occupants’ income level or tenure should not be discernible from the street. All units
should have the same exterior quality of materials and design.
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 56
December, 2004
POLICIES AND PROGRAMS
Impediments to Downtown residential development and redevelopment that typically discourage
the private sector include regulatory obstacles (zoning and code requirements), high asking prices
for existing, underutilized buildings and vacant land, and potentially high production cost relative
to the initial value of completed units. The cost problem may actually be more acute in adaptive
re-use, since the existing structure often complicates the design effort while costing nearly as much
as or, under some circumstances, more than new construction.
Strategies for Downtown housing should be supported by targeted policies and programs that are
coordinated for effective and efficient implementation. Policies and programs appropriate for
Buffalo and that have been effective across the country are outlined here.
1. Policies and Programs
The City of Buffalo has already introduced a number of incentives and reforms that will encourage
residential and mixed-use developments, including adoption of the Residential-Commercial
Urban Exemption Program; and permit reform, with a new fee structure and greater incentives for
homeowners to invest in real estate. If not already established, a reconciliation of the various
codes that apply to adaptive re-use and new construction in Downtown—local, state, and
international—should be completed to provide clear direction for the creation of new housing
units in Downtown.
—Adaptive Re-Use Handbook—
A handbook for developers and building professionals could be produced that summarizes the
code and, if applicable, typical trade-offs and variances required. Qualification for regulatory
relief should be presented clearly and unambiguously to assist in the evaluation of building
suitability. The handbook could be used in the redevelopment of other city neighborhoods, not
just the Downtown.
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 57
December, 2004
—Adaptive Re-Use “Ombudsman”—
Even with an appropriate and clearly-presented code for existing structures, given the wide variety
of conditions represented by existing buildings, it should be anticipated that an equally wide
variety of solutions to code compliance of adaptive re-use will be required. The coordination of
the regulatory process can be overwhelming. The City can smooth the process by appointing a
single code officer—an adaptive re-use “ombudsman”—to provide technical assistance to owners
and developers. The ombudsman’s oversight of all adaptive re-use would also assure an informed
and even-handed treatment of all cases. Again, depending on the volume of development, the
ombudsman could also oversee development and redevelopment in other city neighborhoods.
—Sales and Income Tax Incentives—
Revitalization of urban neighborhoods across the country has often been initiated by the arts
community. Since resident artists are critical to the establishment of a recognizable urban arts
district, they can be encouraged through targeted tax relief. The City of Providence, Rhode
Island has populated its DownCity Arts and Entertainment District by sales and income tax
exemptions. Artists and artisans in DownCity are exempt from state and local sales taxes; and
resident artists are exempt from personal state income tax. The program has been deemed so
successful that the Rhode Island General Assembly recently passed legislation to establish similar
districts in two other Rhode Island cities, Westerly and Pawtucket.
—Gap Financing Pool—
Compared to suburban locations, infill development opportunities within Downtown Buffalo are
likely to be small scale—in most cases, fewer than 50 units and usually fewer than 25. These
small properties lack development efficiency; since fixed costs are spread over fewer units, the
cost per unit is higher without any corresponding increase in market value. Small properties have
historically had difficulties attracting public capital assistance in any form; because of their small
size, they are generally not considered to have the potential for catalytic impact. (This is one of
the long-standing ironies of American urban initiatives: the properties that are large enough to have
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 58
December, 2004
gained government support are often self-contained and have significantly less impact on
surrounding uses than the same number of units in smaller, pedestrian-oriented properties.)
A revolving loan pool for subordinated, low-interest gap funding should be established to put the
financial feasibility of smaller Downtown properties on an equal footing with larger suburban
properties.
Gap funding should be available to both adaptive re-use and to new construction. The gap fund
should be very flexible in order to respond to the special needs of each small, highly-individual
property. Gap funding is typically structured as low-interest debt in a second or third position,
but can incorporate interest accrual or other features designed to address the short-term financing
impediments to residential developments that are essentially sound when viewed over the long
term.
The Greater Downtown Partnership of Detroit recently assembled a $23 million fund to provide
gap financing; the fund is currently being utilized to assist in the renovation and conversion of a
number of downtown buildings from commercial to residential use.
Smaller cities can be successful with smaller funds: Louisville, Kentucky matched the $3 million
dollars contributed by six downtown banks, the sum of which, when augmented by $1 million
from the State and local businesses, created a $7 million gap financing pool.
—“Live Where You Work”—
In order to increase homeownership opportunities, many cities have, in collaboration with local
employers, universities, and medical institutions, created employer-assisted housing benefit plans
for employees.
Through these initiatives, employers provide eligible employees with a
forgivable loan of a set amount—typically between $5,000 and $15,000, depending on local
housing costs—housing information and education, and innovative financing options.
These
initiatives are designed to promote urban revitalization by targeting dwelling units in the
downtowns and in-town neighborhoods.
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 59
December, 2004
—City-Owned Land—
City-owned land in key Downtown locations should be used to leverage residential development.
To ensure maximum beneficial impact, the city could require that each appropriately-located
development parcel include residential uses.
2. Best Practices
—Smart Growth Zoning Codes: A Resource Guide—
A publication of the California-based Local Government Commission, the guidebook is based on
research on more than 150 “smart growth” zoning codes from across the nation. The guidebook is
designed to encourage walkable, mixed-use neighborhoods and the revitalization of existing
places. Each chapter analyzes a critical issue—such as design, streets and parking—and highlights
exemplary codes from across the country. The guidebook comes with a CD -ROM that contains
copies of some of the beset zoning codes in the United States and other resources.
—Form-Based Zoning Codes—
Form-based zoning is a new system of zoning recently adopted in a wide variety of
municipalities, ranging from Arlington, Virginia to Waynesville, North Carolina, to Charleston,
South Carolina, to Contra Costa County, California. In contrast to Euclidian zoning models,
which regulate land use and only indirectly deal with the form of buildings and streets, formbased zoning deals directly with building form and sets only broad parameters for use. Formbased zoning regulates the size, shape and organization of streets and buildings to create a
walkable, transit-friendly collection of inter-connected streets and to foster the development of a
dense mix of housing and businesses.
Form-based zoning codes assert that a community’s physical form—its buildings—is its most
defining characteristic. As such, form-based codes avoid regulating development based on the use
of a tract of land, but rather make design of the buildings, streetscape and civic infrastructure the
central issue. Proponents of form-based coding claim that it regulates fewer elements than a
typical zoning ordinance because it does not encompass every combination of setback and density,
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 60
December, 2004
but prescribes upfront what types of developments are acceptable and then graphically illustrates
them to promote usability. Form-based codes seek to control only the most important physical
attributes of a group of buildings. This often includes their alignment on a street, the disposition
of space between them and their overall height. Typically, such controls are not expressed as
absolutes, but rather as ranges of acceptable values. For example, building heights along a street
can range from two to eight stories. The ultimate design objectives can vary from seeking an
absolutely consistent eave line, requiring nearly uniform building heights, to one that allows a
tower location that clearly rises above nearby buildings to “punctuate” a key location.
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 61
December, 2004
M ETHODOLOGY
The technical analysis of market potential for the Downtown Buffalo Study Area included
delineation of the draw areas and physical evaluation of the Study Area and the surrounding
context.
The delineation of the draw areas for housing within the Downtown Buffalo Study Area was based
on historic settlement patterns, migration trends for Erie County, and other market dynamics.
The evaluation of market potential for the Study Area was derived from target market analysis of
households in the draw areas, and yielded:
•
The depth and breadth of the potential housing market by tenure (rental and
ownership) and by type (apartments, attached and detached houses); and
•
The composition of the potential housing market (empty-nesters/retirees,
traditional and non-traditional families, younger singles/couples).
N OTE : The Appendix Tables referenced here are provided in a separate document.
D ELINEATION O F T HE D RAW A REAS (M IGRATION A NALYSIS)—
Taxpayer migration data provide the framework for the delineation of the draw areas—the
principal counties of origin for households that are likely to move to the City of Buffalo. These
data are maintained at the county and “county equivalent” level by the Internal Revenue Service
and provide a clear representation of mobility patterns.
Appendix One, Table 1.
Migration Trends
Between 1998 and 2002, the number of households moving into Erie County ranged between 8,740
households in 1998 to just over 9,700 households in 2002. A significant percentage of the county’s
in-migration is regional—households moving to the area from adjacent or nearby counties.
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 62
December, 2004
Approximately 20 percent of all households who move to Erie County move from Niagara or
Monroe Counties.
Over the study period, Erie County has experienced significant net migration losses, i.e.—the
county lost more households through out-migration than it gained through in-migration. However,
these losses have declined from more than 4,300 households in 1998 to approximately 1,340
households in 2002.
N OTE : Although net migration provides insights into the city’s historic ability to attract or retain
households compared to other locations, it is those households likely to move into the city (gross inmigration) that represent the city’s external market potential.
Based on the migration data, the draw areas for the City of Buffalo have been delineated as
follows:
•
The local (internal) draw area, covering households currently living within the Buffalo city
limits, as well as those currently living in the balance of Erie County. Between 11 and 15
percent of the households living in the city move to another residence within the city each
year. Between five and seven percent of the households living in the balance of Erie County
move to a residence within the city each year.
•
The regional draw area, covering households with the potential to move to the City of
Buffalo from Niagara and Monroe Counties. Households moving from these two counties
comprise approximately 20 percent of total Erie County in-migration.
•
The New York City draw area, covering households with the potential to move to the City
of Buffalo from New York (Manhattan), Kings (Brooklyn) and Queens Counties.
Households moving from these three counties comprise approximately three percent of
total Erie County in-migration.
•
The national draw area, covering households with the potential to move to the City of
Buffalo from all other U.S. counties. Approximately 1,200 households, with the financial
capacity to rent or purchase market-rate dwelling units, move into the City of Buffalo
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 63
December, 2004
from elsewhere in the United States each year; a small additional number are households
moving from outside the United States.
Anecdotal information obtained from developers, real estate brokers, leasing agents, sales persons,
and other knowledgeable sources corresponded to the migration data.
Migration Methodology:
County-to-county migration is based on the year-to-year changes in the addresses shown on the
population of returns from the Internal Revenue Service Individual Master File system. Data on
migration patterns by county, or county equivalent, for the entire United States, include inflows
and outflows. The data include the number of returns (which can be used to approximate the
number of households), and the median and average incomes reported on the returns.
T ARGET M ARKET C LASSIFICATION O F C ITY A ND C OUNTY H OUSEHOLDS—
Geo-demographic data obtained from Claritas, Inc. provide the framework for the categorization
of households, not only by demographic characteristics, but also by lifestyle preferences and socioeconomic factors. For purposes of this study, only those household groups with median incomes
that enable most of the households within each group to qualify for market-rate housing are
included in the tables. An appendix containing detailed descriptions of each of these target
market groups is provided along with the study.
Appendix One, Tables 2 and 3.
Target Market Classifications
Just 31 percent, or 36,855 households, of the estimated 118,990 households living in the City of
Buffalo in 2004 had the capacity to rent or buy market-rate housing. Median income within the
city was $25,800, nearly 45 percent lower than the national median of $46,500 in 2004. Median
home value within the city was $74,000, almost 48 percent below the national median of
$141,300. Up to 50.6 percent of Buffalo’s “market-rate” households are classified as younger
singles and couples, another 28.2 percent are traditional and non-traditional families, and the
remaining 21.2 percent are empty nesters and retirees. (See Appendix One, Table 2.)
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 64
December, 2004
Of the estimated 378,400 households living in Erie County in 2004, including those in the City of
Buffalo, approximately 61 percent, or 231,090 households, had the capacity to rent or buy marketrate housing. Median income within Erie County was $42,000, almost 10 percent lower than the
national median in 2004. Median home value within Erie County was $117,300, just under 17
percent below the national median. Approximately 45 percent of Erie County’s “market-rate”
households can be classified as empty nesters and retirees, up to 36.5 percent are traditional and
non-traditional families, and 18.7 percent are younger singles and couples. (See Appendix One,
Table 3.)
Target Market Methodology:
The proprietary target market methodology developed by Zimmerman/Volk Associates is an
analytical technique, using the PRIZM geo-demographic system, that establishes the optimum
market position for residential development of any property—from a specific site to an entire
political jurisdiction—through cluster analysis of households living within designated draw areas.
In contrast to classical supply/demand analysis—which is based on supply-side dynamics and
baseline demographic projections—target market analysis establishes the optimum market
position derived from the housing and lifestyle preferences of households in the draw area and
within the framework of the local housing market context, even in locations where no close
comparables exist.
In geo-demographic segmentation, clusters of households (usually between 10 and 15) are grouped
according to a variety of significant factors, ranging from basic demographic characteristics, such
as income qualification and age, to less-frequently considered attributes such as mobility rates,
lifestyle patterns and compatibility issues. Zimmerman/Volk Associates has refined the analysis
of these household clusters through the correlation of more than 500 data points related to housing
preferences and consumer and lifestyle characteristics.
As a result of this process, Zimmerman/Volk Associates has identified 41 target market groups
with median incomes that enable most of the households within each group to qualify for market-
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 65
December, 2004
rate housing. The most affluent of the 41 groups can afford the most expensive new ownership
units; the least prosperous are candidates for the least expensive existing rental apartments.
Once the draw areas for a property have been defined, then—through field investigation, analysis
of historic migration and development trends, and employment and commutation patterns—the
households within those areas are quantified using the target market methodology. The potential
market for new market-rate units is then determined by the correlation of a number of
factors—including, but not limited to: household mobility rates; median incomes; lifestyle
characteristics and housing preferences; the location of the site; and the competitive environment.
The end result of this series of filters is the optimum market position—by tenure, building
configuration and household type, including specific recommendations for unit sizes, rents and/or
prices—and projections of absorption within the local housing context.
D ETERMINATION O F T HE P OTENTIAL M ARKET F OR T HE C ITY O F B UFFALO (M OBILITY
A NALYSIS)—
The mobility tables, individually and in summaries, indicate the number and type of households
that have the potential to move within or to the City of Buffalo in the year 2004. The total
number from each city/county is derived from historic migration trends; the number of households
from each group is based on each group’s mobility rate.
Internal Mobility (Households Moving Within The City Of Buffalo)—
Zimmerman/Volk Associates uses U.S. Bureau of the Census data, combined with Claritas data,
to determine the number of households in each target market group that will move from one
residence to another within a specific jurisdiction in a given year (internal mobility).
Using these data, Zimmerman/Volk Associates has determined that more than 4,300 households,
currently living in the City of Buffalo and with the capacity to rent or purchase market-rate
housing, have the potential to move from one residence to another within the city this year. Up to
58.5 percent of these households are likely to be younger singles and couples (as characterized
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 66
December, 2004
within four Zimmerman/Volk Associates’ target market groups); another 23.9 percent are likely
to be traditional and non-traditional families (in four market groups); and the remaining 17.6
percent are likely to be empty nesters and retirees (in seven market groups).
External Mobility (Households Moving T o The City Of Buffalo From The Balance Of Erie
County)—
The same sources of data are used to determine the number of households in each target market
group that will move from one area to another within the same county. Using these data, up to
3,950 households, currently living in the balance of Erie County and with the capacity to rent or
purchase market-rate housing, have the potential to move from a residence in the county to a
residence in the City of Buffalo this year. Approximately 70 percent of these households are
likely to be empty nesters and retirees (in nine market groups); 23.8 percent are likely to be
younger singles and couples (in eight groups); and the remaining 6.3 percent are likely to be
traditional and non-traditional families (in three groups).
Appendix One, Tables 6 Through 10; Appendix Two, Tables 1 Through 4.
External Mobility (Households Moving T o The City Of Buffalo From Outside The County)—
These tables determine the number of households in each target market group and living in the
regional (Niagara and Monroe Counties), New York City (Kings, New York and Queens
Counties), and national draw areas that are likely to move to the City of Buffalo this year (through
a correlation of Claritas data, U.S. Bureau of the Census data, and the Internal Revenue Service
migration data).
Market Potential For The City Of Buffalo—
Appendix One, Table 10 summarizes Appendix One, Tables 4 through 9. The numbers in the
Total column on page one of this table indicate the depth and breadth of the potential market for
new and existing market-rate dwelling units in the City of Buffalo in the year 2004 originating
from households currently living in the draw areas. Up to 10,150 households with the potential to
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 67
December, 2004
rent or purchase market-rate housing have the potential to move within or to the City of Buffalo
this year. Empty nesters and retirees are likely to account for 42.4 percent of these households (in
11 market groups); nearly 41 percent are likely to be younger singles and couples (in 10 groups);
and 16.7 percent are likely to be traditional and non-traditional families (in six groups).
The distribution of the draw areas as a percentage of the potential market for the City of Buffalo
is as follows:
42.5 percent
38.9 percent
4.7 percent
2.1 percent
11.8 percent
Total:
100.0 percent
D ETERMINATION O F T HE P OTENTIAL M ARKET F OR T HE D OWNTOWN B UFFALO S TUDY
A REA —
The total potential market for the Downtown Buffalo Study Area also includes the local, regional,
New York City and national draw areas. Zimmerman/Volk Associates uses U.S. Bureau of the
Census data, combined with Claritas data, to determine which target market groups, as well as
how many households within each group, are likely to move to Downtown Buffalo in a given year.
Appendix One, Tables 11 Through 13.
Market Potential For The Downtown Buffalo Study Area—
As derived by the target market methodology, up to 3,910 of the 10,150 households that represent
the market for new and existing housing units in the City of Buffalo are a market for new or
existing housing units within the Downtown Buffalo Study Area, or approximately 38 percent of
the total potential market. (See Appendix One, Table 11.) Younger singles and couples are
likely to account for 58 percent of these households (in seven market groups); 36 percent are likely
to be empty nesters and retirees (in eight groups); and six percent are likely to be traditional and
non-traditional families (in four groups).
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 68
December, 2004
The distribution of the draw areas as a percentage of the market for the Downtown Buffalo Study
Area is:
48.6 percent
33.5 percent
2.8 percent
5.4 percent
9.7 percent
Total:
100.0 percent
The 3,910 draw area households that have the potential to move within or to the Study Area this
year have been categorized by tenure propensities to determine renter/owner ratios. More than 36
percent of these households (or 1,430 households) comprise the potential market for rental units, of
which 1,070 households comprise the potential market for new and existing market-rate rentals.
The remaining 64 percent (or 2,480 households) comprise the market for market-rate for-sale
(ownership) housing units. (See Appendix One, Table 12.)
Of these 2,480 households, 29 percent (or 720 households) comprise the market for multi-family
for-sale units (condominium apartments and lofts); and another 20.2 percent (500 households)
comprise the market for attached single-family (townhouse or duplex) units. Nearly 51 percent
(or 1,260 households) comprise the market for all ranges of single-family detached houses. (See
Appendix One, Table 13.)
—Target Market Data—
Target market data are based on the Claritas PRIZM geo-demographic system, modified and
augmented by Zimmerman/Volk Associates as the basis for its proprietary target market
methodology. Target market data provides number of households by cluster aggregated into the
three main demographic categories—empty nesters and retirees; traditional and non-traditional
families; and younger singles and couples.
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 69
December, 2004
Zimmerman/Volk Associates’ target market classifications are updated periodically to reflect
the slow, but relentless change in the composition of American households. Because of the nature
of geo-demographic segmentation, a change in household classification is directly correlated with
a change in geography, i.e.—a move from one neighborhood condition to another. However, these
changes of classification can also reflect an alteration in one of three additional basic
characteristics:
•
Age;
•
Household composition; or
•
Economic status.
Age, of course, is the most predictable, and easily-defined of these changes.
Household
composition has also been relatively easy to define; recently, with the growth of non-traditional
households, however, definitions of a family have had to be expanded and parsed into more
highly-refined segments. Economic status remains clearly defined through measures of annual
income and household wealth.
A change in classification is rarely induced by a change in just one of the four basic characteristics.
This is one reason that the target household categories are so highly refined: they take in multiple
characteristics. Even so, there are some rough equivalents in household types as they move from
one neighborhood condition to another. There is, for example, a strong correlation between the
Suburban Achievers and the Urban Achievers; a move by the Suburban Achievers to the urban core
can make them Urban Achievers, if the move is accompanied by an upward move in socioeconomic status. In contrast, Suburban Achievers who move up socio-economically, but remain
within the metropolitan suburbs may become Fast-Track Professionals or The VIPs.
Household Classification Methodology:
Household classifications are based on the Claritas PRIZM geo-demographic segmentation
system, which was established in 1974 and is the most widely-used neighborhood target
marketing system in the United States. Claritas uses 15 unique clustering algorithms to define
various domains of affluence and settlement density. These algorithms isolate the key factors in
M ARKET ANALYSIS
Page 70
December, 2004
each density-affluence domain that accounted for the most statistical difference among
neighborhoods within that group.
Over the past 15 years, Zimmerman/Volk Associates has augmented the PRIZM cluster system for
use within the company’s proprietary target market methodology specific to housing and
neighborhood preferences, with additional algorithms, correlation with geo-coded consumer data,
aggregation of clusters by broad household definition, and unique cluster names. For purposes of
this study, only those household groups with median incomes that enable most of the households
within each group to qualify for market-rate housing are included in the tables.
o
6 East Main Street
908-735-6336 • 908-735-4751 facsimile
info@ZVA.cc • www.ZVA.cc
ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITATIONS—
Every effort has been made to insure the accuracy of the data contained within this
analysis. Demographic and economic estimates and projections have been obtained from
government agencies at the national, state, and county levels. Market information has
been obtained from sources presumed to be reliable, including developers, owners, and/or
sales agents. However, this information cannot be warranted by Zimmerman/Volk
Associates, Inc. While the methodology employed in this analysis allows for a margin of
error in base data, it is assumed that the market data and government estimates and
projections are substantially accurate.
Absorption scenarios are based upon the assumption that a normal economic environment
will prevail in a relatively steady state during development of the subject property.
Absorption paces are likely to be slower during recessionary periods and faster during
periods of recovery and high growth. Absorption scenarios are also predicated on the
assumption that the product recommendations will be implemented generally as outlined
in this report and that the developer will apply high-caliber design, construction,
marketing, and management techniques to the development of the property.
Recommendations are subject to compliance with all applicable regulations. Relevant
accounting, tax, and legal matters should be substantiated by appropriate counsel.
6 East Main Street
908 735-6336 • 908 735-4751 facsimile
R IGHTS AND STUDY O WNERSHIP —
Zimmerman/Volk Associates, Inc. retains all rights, title and interest in the methodology and
target market descriptions contained within this study. The specific findings of the analysis are
the property of the client and can be distributed at the client’s discretion.
o
ZIMMERMAN/VOLK ASSOCIATES, INC., 2005

MARKET ANALYSIS Residential Market Potential

Transcription

Similar documents

Prometheus Books invites you to join us for

wblk buffalo

a searchable PDF of this publication.

Saturday, October 18th Practice Juniors 3:30

Instead the New Buffalo City Council contracted with Fleis and

testing services update

Start your trip here - Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor

Thank You - Claddagh Commission, Inc

Simon Pure News October

DIY Installation Guide