Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDraft Fifthe Avenue Planning Study New Rochelle, New York 1/1/2002 DR A, . : FIFTH AVENUE PLANNING STUDY NEW ROCHELLE , NEW YORK •I 44 a ' Submitted to: ,.. � � .. _City of New Rochelle ,, -4'' -; .. ....___ , -. L le 'it...„ ... r .,,... . ,.... „.., �,,s. , ._,,,,,, — . .: , 4f.,_ rte• q"y ,�i .at. �F §�y� � c/7J�I ��yy k i t .. ,-.r -'`" k na« v- / ,i I iii / '''' . / I.i 14 k--- k 4 1 , r 7:,...7. . - -- - f 5, x 4 ,, ...2,...:.„ . . . . ,... - ............._. : Preparedb • Allee King Rosen&Fleming,Inc. a Landsca eArchitects January 2002 ' arli Ulla , , 3f , _ _ RAF JAN i 8 2002 iLj ADMINIsrRalOhOFFIOE TOWN Of MAMARONECK PROPOSAL PROCESS SCHEDULE Event Date Time Issue RFP U x/1/2002 11:00 AM Receipt of Inquiries from Companies E/28/2002 4:00 PM No Later Than... / Pre-proposal Meeting 5$/1/2002 10:00 AM Issue Pre-proposal Meeting Summary S 3/8/2002 11:00 AM Receipt of Sealed Proposals 6 A/1/2002 4:00 PM. Conduct Company Interviews Week of... 4/15/2002 N/A Announcement of Most Responsive Bidder 5/1/2002 11:00 AM Westchester County, i.e., the municipality, assumes no liability for the costs incurred by a company in preparing its proposal for professional services in response to this RFP. The municipality reserves the right to reject any or all proposals. Companies, who have submitted acceptable responses, will be notified of contractor selection by letter after the final determination has been made. The municipality intends that, if a contractor is chosen, an instrument of contract will be signed no later than June 1, 2002. DRAFT TABLE OF CONTENTS GLOSSARY OF TERMS 7 SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION 10 SECTION 2 - PROFILE OF MUNICIPALITY 13 SECTION 3 - GENERAL RESPONSIBILITIES - MUNICIPALITY AND ORPS 17 3.1 Municipality 3.1.1 Project Management 3.1.2 Data Manager 3.1.3 Staff Involvement 3.1.4 Documentation 3.1.5 Space and Equipment 3.1.6 Property Record Cards 3.1.7 Assessor Participation 3.1.8 Clerical Function(s) 3.1.9 Application for Advisory Appraisal(s) 3.1.10 GIS Capacity and Availability 3.1.11 Software 3.1.12 Payments to Contractors 3.2 ORPS 18 3.2.1 Software 3.2.2 Data Collection Material 3.2.3 Processing Fees 3.2.4 Advisory Appraisal(s) 3.2.5 General SECTION 4 -PROJECT REQUIREMENTS/CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBILITIES 21 4.1 Project Management 4.2 Project Timetable 4.3 Public Information 4.4 Local Staff Training 4.4.1 Data Collection Training 4.4.2 Training of Municipality Staff & Local Assessors 4.5 Data Processing 4.5.1 Software 4.5.2 Scheduling 4.6 Tax Map Data 4.7 Taxpayer Inquiry 4.8 Subject Inventory Data Collection 4.8.1 Verification and Collection 4.8.2 Collection Instrument DwT 4.8.3 Parcel Entry 4.8.4 File Creation and Maintenance 4.8.5 Parcel Improvement Sketches 4.8.6 Data Collectors 4.8.7 Data Quality Control 4.8.8 Vacant and Agricultural Land 4.8.9 Public Utility Parcels and Ceiling Railroad Parcels 4.8.10 Data Mailer 4.8.11 Photography/Image 4.9 Sales Inventory Collection and File Creation 4.10 Data Edits 4.11 Unique & Highly Complex Parcels 4.12-17 BLANK 4.18 Project Status Control 4.19 Submissions for State AidNalue Verification 4.20 Mass Mailing and Postage 4.21 Data Entry SECTION 5 - DATA SECURITY 37 SECTION 6 - CONTRACTOR PROJECT STAFFING 38 6.1 Project Management and Technical Staff 6.2 Staffing Changes SECTION 7 - DELIVERABLE PRODUCTS 40 SECTION 8 - PAYMENT SCHEDULE AND PENALTY 42 SECTION 9 - CONTRACTUAL REQUIREMENTS 43 9.1 State Board's Rules 9.2 Employment Requirements 9.3 Changes in Contract 9.4 Statement of Non-collusion 9.5 Insurance Requirements 9.6 Conflict of Interest 9.7 Assignment of Contract 9.8 Compensation 9.9 Ownership of Work Products 9.10 General Legal Responsibility 9.11 Instrument of Contract SECTION 10 - PROJECT COST ITEMIZATION 47 APPENDIX A - Municipality Code of Ethics ow APPENDIX B - Unique or Highly Complex Parcel List APPENDIX C - Affidavit APPENDIX D - Sample Proposal & Company Proposal Response Grid APPENDIX E — City & Town Assessor Sign Off Documents APPENDIX F — Westchester County Assessment Key Dates APPENXIX G — Project Personnel Qualifications iwT GLOSSARY OF TERMS The following terms are used throughout these specifications and shall have that meaning expressly indicated below: ANNUAL INVENTORY MAINTAINENCEPLAN-The municipality's program for inspecting each parcel at least once every six years. The plan must provide information on resources, funding, functions to be performed, and tentative project schedules, including, but not limited to, staffing, data processing support (including hardware and software), and re-inspection schedule. ASSESSOR - The individual or the Board of Assessors serving as the assessor in the municipality. COMPANY - A qualified firm that submits a formal proposal in response to these specifications. COMPUTER-ASSISTED MASS APPRAISAL (CAMA)-A procedure by which values are estimated for parcels by means of computer-based calculations incorporating statistical methods where appropriate. Residential parcels are often valued by the sales approach, utilizing multiple regression analysis (MRA) or the adaptive estimation procedure (AEP), and direct sales comparison to the most comparable properties, as well as through the cost approach, utilizing land schedules, cost tables, and depreciation information. Vacant land parcels are valued through land schedules that are derived by MRA or AEP models of comparable land sales. Commercial, industrial, and utility properties are usually valued through direct sales comparison using cost-based, income-based, and market-based value per-unit data, as available and appropriate. Data adequacy and accuracy are key considerations in developing CAMA estimates. For reliable results, use of data from outside the assessing unit may be necessary in the case of smaller assessing units and/or less-numerous types of property. CONSORTIUM-A group of municipalities entering into a cooperative effort to undertake a municipal-wide reassessment or inventory project using the same contractor. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATOR -The municipal official who represents the municipality in all legal matters with regard to this project. CONTRACTOR - The company that enters into an agreement with the municipality to provide the professional contract services described in these specifications. CREW CHIEF- (field appraisal supervisors) the person(s) responsible for the recollection and/or field verification of data collected by the data collectors. The crew chief monitors and ensures the quality, consistency and accuracy of all of the data. The crew chief must be trained as a data collector and have six month's prior experience as a data collector. 7 T DATA COLLECTOR- An individual responsible for the field collection and recording (on the appropriate ORPS data collection document) of real property valuation data. The data collector must have completed a program of training which includes, at a minimum, "Fundamentals of Data Collection, R/FN." DATA MAILER - A computer-generated report listing, enumerating and describing selected data elements. FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL - A document containing assessment and exemption information on all parcels in a municipality. It differs from the tentative assessment roll with respect to changes ordered by a board of assessment review, assessments and ceilings made by the State Board and ownership and address changes since the tentative roll. Filed on July 1 by most towns in New York State. MUNICIPALITY- Westchester County, New York. ORPS - The New York State Office of Real Property Services. PARCEL - A separate, tax map-designated, assessed lot, parcel, piece or portion of real property. PROJECT- The overall effort, including the activities of all participants. PROJECT ADMINISTRATOR - The municipal official responsible for overall project management and analysis, direct project coordination and represents the municipality in all contract administrative matters. PROJECT DIRECTOR - The contractor staff member who will be responsible for contractor project management, coordination of all contractor activities and who will represent the contractor in all contract administrative matters. RFP- This request for proposal which contains specifications for the contractual services phase of the municipality's reassessment project and serves as the senior document, the basis for resolving disputes. RPS - The New York State Real Property System. RATIO STUDY-A ratio study is an analysis of the relationship between assessments and market value (i.e., assessment ratio)for those parcels where a recent market value indicator - a sale or an independent appraisal - is available. The study utilizes the assessment ratio data and applicable statistical methods to determine the overall or average percentage of current market value that the assessments represent. The ratio study may also measure the extent to which the average assessment ratio is changing over time thus quantifying the assessment adjustment necessary to maintain current market conditions. The statistical methods and indicators used in the study include measures of central tendency (mean, weighted mean, median); measures of variation (coefficient of dispersion, coefficient of variation, price-related 8 T differential); measures of association (multiple regression, correlation); and significance tests (binomial test, Z-test). REAPPRAISAL - The process of physically inspecting and reappraising each parcel. Reappraisal refers to the valuation of a single parcel. 1) Physically inspecting - at a minimum, observing each property from the public right-of-way in order to ascertain that the physical characteristics necessary for reappraising are complete and accurate. 2) Reappraising —developing and reviewing an independent estimate of market value for each parcel by the appropriate use of one or more of the accepted three approaches to value (cost, market, and income). * REASSESSMENT - A systematic analysis of all assessments, either within an assessing unit or within a class of a special assessing unit, to assure that they are at the stated uniform percentage of value as of the valuation date of the assessment roll upon which the assessments appear. It is synonymous with the terms revaluation and update. A reassessment can be completed by a reappraisal of parcels, trending of parcels to current value, or a combination of both. * *NYSORPS "Guidelines for Annual Reassessment", November 1999 STATE BOARD - The New York State Board of Real Property Services. STATE BOARD'S RULES-The New York State Rules and Regulations for Real Property Tax Administration, which establish standards of certification for state financial reimbursement (9 NYCRR). The State Board's Rules that must be adhered to are those in force as of the date of contract execution. SYSTEMATIC ANALYSIS - The four step process of reassessment which includes the gathering and grouping of data and information, application of accepted analytical techniques both diagnostic and prescriptive and the subsequent validation of results before the filing of a tentative roll. TAXABLE STATUS DATE- The ownership and physical condition of real property as of this date are assessed according to a value fixed as of the valuation date in the year that the data collection is to be implemented. A list of taxable status dates for Westchester municipalities can be found in Appendix F. TENTATIVE ASSESSMENT ROLL - A preliminary assessment roll whose assessed values and exempt amounts are subject to grievance by a taxpayer before a board of assessment review. The roll does not become final until all grievances have been acted upon by that board. TRENDING - The process of applying factors based upon criteria such as property type, 9 . . RAF D . _ , location, size, and age, developed from assessment-sales ratio studies or other market analysis, to groups of properties to maintain uniformity of assessments at the stated uniform level of assessment. VALUATION- The process of estimating market values for all parcels in the municipality using mass appraisal procedures which are in compliance with standard 6 of the Uniform Standards of Professional Practice of the Appraisal Foundation. VALUATION DATE - All real property is valued as of this date. A list of valuation dates, i.e., taxable status dates for Westchester municipalities, can be found in Appendix F. VERIFIED PARCEL - A parcel for which the inventory data has been field verified for completeness, corrections entered onto the inventory file, file edited by computer and corrected for any errors. WCTC - The Westchester County Tax Commission (the Real Property Tax Services Agency for Westchester County). WORK/WORK PRODUCTS - The services to be performed/delivered by the contractor. 10 SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION This document is a request for proposal for the collection and database storage of property inventory. It is done in the spirit of Sections 301 and 305 of the New York State Real Property Tax Law (RPTL). It is the intent of Westchester County to insure that each local municipality is in a substantially better position to complete a reassessment in accordance with section 1573 RPTL, rules and procedures in order to qualify for State assistance. This proposal must be based on the usage of the latest version of the ORPS Real Property System to accomplish its goal of collecting and entering all data collected prior to the 2005 Year tentative_assessment roll. The municipality intends that this project conform to the State Board's Rules (9NYCRR). A copy of the most current, applicable State Board Rules can be obtained by contacting the NYS ORPS Regional Service Delivery Office, State Aid Representative, Address John Wolham, ORPS Newburgh Regional Director, Phone (845) 567-2648. This information is also available at the ORPS website address: www.orps.state.ny.us A statement of the company's intention to fully comply with these State Board Rules must be included in each proposal. The municipality intends to solicit proposals from companies capable of undertaking and successfully completing a real property inventory project of approximately 253,000 parcels of real property over a 24-36 month period, and conducting such real property inventory project in conformance with the State Board's Rules that apply to reassessment. The municipality intends to select a company, which has a successful history of undertaking and completing real property reassessment projects. Therefore, the company must have undertaken and completed real property reassessment projects of which any one such project must have totaled over 36,000 parcels, i.e., exceed the number of parcels in the City of Yonkers, Westchester County, New York. In addition the company must have qualified personnel on its permanent payroll staff who have direct experience managing real property reappraisal, revaluation, or reassessment projects and who have the skills and experience to undertake major public information and personnel training programs. 11 111 kAF T Supplemental technical experience information, relating only to real property reassessment projects, is required in the proposal. Such information shall include full identification of the contracting parties, number of parcels, dates and duration of contracts, use of the NYS ORPS and compliance with the State Board's Rules. The company is required to submit in its proposal a complete client list of all real property related projects with which it has been associated over the past ten years. A contact person and telephone number is to be provided for each project listed. Appendix D outlines a format for the proposal and items that it must contain. Proposals that deviate from the format or contents may not be considered. The RFP is the minimum specification for the project. Each proposal must contain a statement that the company fully intends to comply with the specifications as found in this RFP. In no event does this preclude a company from offering goods and/or services above and beyond those specified in the RFP. Finally, this document is in compliance with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (standard 6), developed by the Appraisal Foundation for mass appraisal. 12 ow T SECTION 2 - PROFILE OF MUNICIPALITY The municipality is the County of Westchester New York. A detailed municipal summary is contained on the following pages. There is also an abundance of information available on the ORPS website to assist the contractor in gathering pertinent information. In addition, a municipal profile can be provided by the ORPS' regional office upon request. • additional descriptions; • previous reassessments and/or data collections; • NYSRPS involvement; • current staffing and operations; and • data processing/administration resources ITEM QUANTITY Population 923,000 Number of School Districts 71 Number of Special Districts 390 Square Miles 450 Number of Property Transfers/Year (RP-5217's) 24,000 Annual Number of Building Permits 2126 (RES) 13 R A F' T See the following for the last year of reassessment for each municipality and the last data collection for each municipality. Please note that many of the indicated years are the best estimates. DATA COLLECTIO MUNICIPALITY N REASSESSMENT Bedford 1954 1954 Cortlandt 1952 1953 Eastchester 1940 1941 Greenburgh 1957 1958 Harrison 1937 1938 Lewisboro 1974 1974 Mamaroneck 1968 1968 Mt. Kisco 1979 1980 Mt. Pleasant 1962 1963 Mt. Vernon* 1853 1853 New Castle 1987 1987 New Rochelle* 1956 1956 North Castle 1964 1965 North Salem 1973 1974 Ossining 1971 1972 Peekskill* 1964 1978 Pelham 1997 2001 Pound Ridge 1976 1976 Rye City* 1972 1972 Rye Town 1966 1967 Scarsdale 1969 1970 Somers 1974 1975 White Plains* 1950 1950 Yonkers* 1954 1954 Yorktown 1960 1961 14 . imF,, , T 2001 PROPERTY CLASSIFICATION BREAKDOWN BY NUMBER OF PARCELS 1 (500) (100) (200) (300) (400) RECREATION & MUNICIPALITY AGRICULTURE RESIDENTIAL VACANT LAND COMMERCIAL ENTERTAINMENT Bedford 22 5013 734 279 8 Cortlandt 6 11217 1971 1002 232 Eastchester 1 6536 1022 1432 15 Greenburgh 4 18526 2572 5622 118 Harrison 0 5514 694 404 16 Lewisboro 10 4529 994 64 26 Mamaroneck 2 6484 433 1257 35 Mt. Kisco 0 1814 208 466 11 Mt. Pleasant 0 10298 1846 1223 38 Mt. Vernon* 0 8314 812 1300 43 New Castle 1 5515 631 188 26 New Rochelle* 0 11849 1305 1769 67 North Castle 4 3715 530 198 18 North Salem 24 1780 402 62 27 Ossining 0 6827 714 2212 18 Peekskill* 0 4041 416 1337 10 Pelham 0 3070 112 309 7 Pound Ridge 2 1879 349 37 9 Rye City* 1 3849 229 549 41 Rye Town 0 7598 493 2564 19 Scarsdale 0 5305 307 58 10 Somers 28 7322 1096 87 12 White Plains* 10 8267 852 3523 18 Yonkers* 0 24236 4328 5459 37 Yorktown 11 9609 1399 2284 28 *cities 15 I ,mF.,,, T . . (600) (800) (900) COMMUNITY (700) PUBLIC WILD AND MUNICIPALITY SERVICES INDUSTRIAL SERVICE FORESTED LAND TOTAL Bedford 102 6 63 44 6271 Cortlandt 161 17 191 182 14979 Eastchester 84 8 69 1 9168 Greenburgh 484 35 397 112 27870 Harrison 81 1 55 83 6848 Lewisboro 198 0 17 4 5842 Mamaroneck 87 39 41 63 8441 Mt. Kisco 55 17 23 8 2602 Mt. Pleasant 219 21 176 7 13828 Mt. Vernon* 264 359 21 0 11113 New Castle 63 4 66 119 6613 New Rochelle* 274 42 71 19 15396 North Castle 90 7 93 82 4737 North Salem 60 2 84 48 2489 Ossining 187 37 40 40 10075 Peekskill* 77 24 32 19 5956 Pelham 56 13 28 22 3617 Pound Ridge 30 1 65 62 2434 Rye City* 65 3 102 5 4844 Rye Town 128 4 102 23 10931 Scarsdale 161 0 18 3 5862 Somers 120 0 97 68 8830 White Plains* 173 13 69 70 12995 Yonkers* 1283 275 147 12 35777 Yorktown 1149 2 313 31 14826 16 DwT BREAKDOWN OF CONDOMINIUMS BY MUNICIPALITY 17 Dwry SECTION 3 - GENERAL RESPONSIBILITIES - MUNCIPALITY AND ORPS The successful completion of this project depends on the cooperation of several participants and their ability to successfully complete their assigned tasks as required by this RFP. Following are the major responsibilities that must be performed by each. 3.1 Municipality 3.1.1 Project Management The project administrator will have ultimate project responsibility. The administrator will provide general direction throughout the project and timely resolution of problems when requested by any of the following: • Contract Administrator (County Attorney or Designee); • Contractor; and • ORPS The project administrator, David B. Jackson, AAS, SCCD, IAO, at a minimum of 16 hours per week on this project. 3.1.2 Data Manager The municipality will provide Patrick F. Cahill, IAO, WCTC Director of Program Development, to act as data manager who will work with the contractor, be trained by the contractor and or ORPS if applicable, and who will ultimately be responsible for file control and data management. Mr. Cahill will spend a minimum of 8 hours per week on this project. 3.1.3 Staff Involvement The municipalit will not provide staff, in addition to the Project Administrator or Data Manager, to assist the project contractor. 3.1.4 Documentation The municipality will provide timely access to all current assessment roll, tax map, and jurisdictional information, i.e., but not limited to, RP-5217 forms, wetland maps, zoning maps, zoning ordinances, special district maps, and building permits. 18 vitAt Within ten (10) days of project start up, the contractor and the municipality will meet and determine the time frame and procedures for providing the contractor with: • sales documents (RP-5217); • tax maps; and • other pertinent information. At this meeting the contractor and the municipality will establish written procedures for allowing the contractor to have access to the inventory/assessment system and records. 3.1.5 Space and Equipment The contractor is responsible for providing its; • office space; • storage space; • training areas; • paper goods; • data processing equipment; • site for meetings with taxpayers; • adequate furnishings; • etc... The contractor is responsible for providing its own telephone service including installation. 3.1.6 Property Record Cards The contractor is responsible for all expenses related to purchasing and printing bulk copies of the appropriate data collection forms (property record cards). 3.1.7 Assessor Participation a) Each municipality's assessor will be involved throughout this project. b) Each municipality's assessor will participate in informational meetings and attend a training session. c) Each municipality's assessor will provide the contractor with "local" knowledge; participate in data element selection and editing, field verification, and informal meetings. d) Each municipality's assessor will review file maintenance corrections and the collection and verification of data related to new construction, building permits, and demolition. The WCTC Executive Director or designee will be available during the project 19 0 . . „ I i, ,_ ,,. phases to assist the contractor as follows: 20 Li KAT PHASES NUMBER OF HOURS PER WEEK Project Start Up 32 Hours (3 Days) Data Collection 32 Hours (3 Days) Sales File Verification 32 Hours (3 Days) Informal Meetings 10 Hours 3.1.8 Clerical Function(s) The municipality will not perform any clerical function(s). 3.1.9 Application for Advisory Appraisal A municipality will not request advisory appraisals of taxable utility property and highly complex properties. 3.1.10 GIS Capacity and Availability The latest version of the ORPS Real Property System comes with basic GIS features. Westchester County will provide the contractor with one copy of planimetric and topographical spatial data. The contractor is responsible for insuring that all centroids are updated to North American Data 1983 and working with ORPS so they may fully utilize the GIS component of the latest version of the ORPS Real Property System. 3.1.11 Software Real Property System Version IV. In addition, a proposed Sketch Software Package that will be used by the contractor on behalf of Westchester County, used independently from the Real Property System, and can be acquired at no cost or minimal expense by each individual municipality in Westchester County. Each municipality that uses different software will bear the cost of conversion. 3.1.12 Payments to Contractors Payments shall be made promptly in accordance with Section 8 of this RFP. 3.2 ORPS 3.2.1 Software, if RPS, ORPS will supply assistance with use of the software. 3.2.2 Data Collection Material 21 Lii,RAt., . The ORPS provides: • data collection manuals (for a fee); and • one copy of the data collection training lesson plan A data collection trainers' manual, as well as 35mm slides and overhead transparencies, are made available by ORPS to the contractor for use in conducting data collection training. 3.2.3 Processing Fees Computer processing fees are billed to the contractor and will be based on the Real Property System Fee Schedule for the fiscal year that the processing actually occurs. For projects that extend over multiple fiscal years, the most current fee schedule should be referred to when preparing budgets and expenditure plans. 3.2.4 Advisory Appraisals Advisory Appraisals are not to be requested by the contractor. 3.2.5 General The ORPS will assign a regional consultant who will be responsible for monitoring project progress, consulting with the municipality and others and providing advice and assistance as needed. ORPS will provide upon request: Statewide information through Land Information System (LIS) which would include sales data through Sales Web, municipal profiles through MuniPro, statewide assessment data through Parcel Database and GIS/Census data; 22 SECTION 4 - PROJECT REQUIREMENTS/CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBILITIES 4.1 Project Management The contractor is responsible for providing professional personnel capable of successfully accomplishing their responsibilities as defined in this RFP. Minimum staffing requirements are found in Section 6 of this RFP. The contractor is responsible for performing all project related clerical function(s). 4.2 Project Timetable On the following page is the proposed timetable for this project. If the company deems it necessary to alter this schedule, the company must specify any changes in its proposal. If changes are made, please note in Appendix D sample proposal in response to request for proposal. 23 " . KAI' L) ' RFP PROJECT TIMETABLE START FINISH SECTION DATE DATE 4.2 Project Timetable 07/01/02 01/03/05 4.3 Public Information 07/01/02 01/03/05 4.8.11 Photography/Image 07/01/02 07/01/04 4.4.1 Data Collection Training 08/01/02 09/01/02 Appendix E Assessor Sign Off Document#1* 07/01/02 09/01/02 4.8 Subject Inventory Data Collection 09/01/02 07/01/04 4.8.4 Subject File Creation 09/05/02 07/05/04 4.9 Sales Validation, Verification, and File Creation 10/05/02 01/03/05 Appendix E Assessor Sign Off Document #2* 09/01/02 11/05/02 4.8.10 Data Mailer 10/05/02 08/05/04 4.8.10 Production in Response to Parcel Inventory Mailers 10/05/02 10/05/04 Appendix E Assessor Sign Off Document#3* 10/05/02 12/05/02 7.0 Project Deliverables to Assessor 6 Months 01/03/05 Before Taxable Status Date 4.19 Submit Application for Appropriate State Aid Reimbursement 07/01/02 01/03/05 Appendix E Assessor Sign Off Document#4* 01/03/05 01/03/05 Project Completion 01/03/05 01/03/05 * Each City & Town Assessor 4.3 Public Information The contractor must conduct a comprehensive public information program designed to coordinate all activities necessary to promote public understanding, awareness, and cooperation throughout the project. The contractor must be prepared to conduct a public information campaign, which includes monthly media releases, three direct mailings to all property owners, and oral presentations. Individual presentations will be solicited by contractor and directed to taxpayers, local officials, businesses, and civic groups so that they may better understand the scope and objectives of the project. CONTRACTOR TO DESIGN PUBLIC RELATIONS PROGRAM and include that 24 DRAFT program in response to this RFP. At a minimum, this program should include the time frames and method (meetings, mailers, media, cable, radio, newspaper, Network TV, Internet, etc.) For public information release associated with: • contract signing • public information meeting schedule • general project information • data collection • inventory mailer • project status updates The contractor will conduct the prescribed meetings at various locations throughout the municipality. All public information activities should strive to emphasize the responsibilities of the various participants, the methods to be employed during the project and the overall goals of the project. At a minimum, the following points should be addressed as often as possible: • significance of real property tax; • necessity of project; • purpose and methods of project; • role of each municipality and assessor; • role of project contractor; • role of ORPS; • necessity of data collection; - caliber and training of data collectors; • cooperation of parcel owners is key to success; and • ongoing nature of system The contractor will provide, in the proposal, a detailed plan and schedule, by project phase, of the intended public relations endeavors. 25 DRAFT The contractor should include in their proposal sample press releases and brochures/pamphlets used in previous projects conducted by the firm. If the company is selected, these materials could be expected to be used to enhance the proposed comprehensive public information campaign for this project. 4.4 Local Staff Training The contractor is responsible for training local staff, in such a manner that, at the end of the project, appropriate municipal staff will be knowledgeable in the operation of those phases of data collection assigned as a contractor responsibility. The contractor is also responsible for training personnel under its control in order to maximize their usefulness. The contractor is responsible for conducting a thorough, effective, and documented training program for: • appraisers • data collectors; • municipal staff; and • assessors; The minimum standards for conducting training will include the following: Lesson Plan - Outlines and lesson plans for training for all aspects of the project which shall describe the material to be presented and the techniques to be used. Training Manual - A comprehensive reference tool depicting the substance of the lessons to be given with, at least, definitions, applicable illustrations, explanations of computer assessment administration concepts and necessary flow charts. Schedule of Training Sessions - A detailed outline which specifies dates, sites and content of each class necessary to be conducted within the framework of this project. The contractor must provide proposed target dat s and a training schedule in response to this RFP. The final training plan will be provided to the project administrator for approval prior to any training session taking place. In its proposal, the company will provide a general training schedule, which it intends to follow during the project. However, within fifteen (15) working days of contract execution, the selected contractor will provide a training plan for data collectors. Also, within twenty (20) working days of approval of a contractor work plan, the contractor will provide a detailed training plan and schedule for the remainder of the training responsibilities. Municipality personnel must be permitted to participate fully in all training activities. 26 DR ...AFT 4.4.1 Data Collector Training Training for data collectors must be comprehensive and documented. The data collection training lesson plan and manual, as prepared by ORPS, will be used for this training. Training sessions must be conducted in both a field and classroom environment including successful completion of a written examination. Attendance logs must be maintained for all classroom sessions. 4.4.2 Training of Municipality Staff, including Local Assessors & Local Assessment Personnel The contractor is responsible for training municipal staff and assessors so that they can routinely interface with assessment administration modules as they relate to the company's involvement by the end of the project. Formal training will include, but not be limited to, such topics as: • data collection; RPS file maintenance procedures; and • file control concepts of the system; In addition, the contractor will provide on-the-job training in the practical application of file maintenance for each local municipality's data manager and/or assessor. This will enable them to become aware of the practical application of assessment administration. The contractor may offer additional training or workshops as part of its proposal on a per diem basis. 4.5 Data Processing 4.5.1 Software ORPS' computer programs may not be modified without permission of ORPS. New programs will not be written and existing non-NYSRPS programs will not be used for this project without the permission of the project administrator. Existing contractor software developed for personnel and financial management of the project shall not be subject to this provision. 4.5.2 Scheduling If printing is to occur at the ORPS' regional office, the contractor will be requested to submit to ORPS, for approval, weekly forecasts of anticipated computer usage, one week in advance, to assure printing time. 4.6 Tax Map Data Each City & Town in Westchester County maintains their tax maps and all maps 27 Dm. FT meet NYS ORPS standards. During the data collection effort, the data collectors may discover tax map errors. These errors will be reported to the project administrator as they are discovered. The project administrator will furnish the contractor with tax map inventory changes as determined in Section 3.1 of this RFP. In its proposal, the company must explain how errors in tax maps found in the field will be recorded and reported. 4.7 Taxpayer Inquiry Contractor personnel, familiar with the entire project, must be dedicated to the function of resolving taxpayer inquiry and complaint follow-up. All taxpayer inquiries and complaints must be fully documented and responded to. At a minimum, the following will be forwarded to the applicable municipality: • name of inquirer or complainant; time and date of inquiry/complaint; and • the response to the inquiry or complaint 4.8 Subject Inventory Data Collection 4.8.1 Verification and Collection All data collection is to be conducted in accordance with Volume 6 of the Assessor's Manual published by ORPS. The contractor will conduct an on-site inspection as defined by the State Board's Rules of all parcels as if they were to be to be valued within the scope of this project. The collection of all parcels will oe conducted by a data collection crew to be hired and trained by the contractor. 4.8.2 Collection Instrument The contractor will use the ORPS Property Record Cards (RP-3100 for Residential, Farm, & Vacant and RP3105 for Commercial Industrial, & Public Utility Parcels), a Westchester County ORPS approved Property Record Card/Data Collection Form, or a data collection device approved upon the awarding of this contract. Property description data in the project will be of two types: "front-loaded" data and field collected data. The "front-loaded" data currently exists for each parcel, in machine-readable form, and must be placed on the data collection card prior to data collection. This data will be resident at the parcel level in the RPS format. 28 DRAFT This data includes, at least, the following items: parcel ID (parcel key); owner name; • owner address; • parcel location; • property class code; and • parcel size A notice detailing the purpose of the data collection project is sent to each property owner at least one week prior to the commencement of data collection activities. This notice shall detail the general procedures to be used in the data collection effort. It will also specifically outline the procedures to be followed if no one is at home during the first entry attempt. 4.8.3 Parcel Entry The contractor will attempt to perform a complete interior inspection of all improved properties. The data collectors are required to indicate whether entry was made. Where entry is made, the contractor will attempt to secure the signature of an owner or adult occupant. (If no one is at home the data collector must leave notification of the visit or must notify owner by mail within ten (10) days.) The Data Mailer cannot be used for this notification. Instructions on how the occupant may set up an appointment for an inspection are to be supplied. In the case of total refusals, signatures should be obtained and a list of all such refusals will be given to the project administrator for assistance in gaining entry. Measuring & Inspection Of Real Property 1 . Physical Details The Contractor will make a complete listing of all physical details for all residential, commercial and industrial buildings and all structural improvements attached to each parcel. Listing will include all interior and exterior construction details. 2. Sketches Contractor will sketch all buildings and physical improvements to scale; also on the predetermined form. Sketches will be drawn to the nearest foot and labeled, using the labeling procedures approved by outlined in Volume 6 of the ORPS Data Collection Manual. Sketches must be produced for each condominium unit. When available, master deeds and associated floor plans can be used as the basis for producing sketches. There are no exceptions to the inspection requirements for condominiums. 29 Dwrr The contractor will be responsible for vectoring the field sketches into a digital sketch format. The computerized sketches should conform to the most updated standards and should clearly show dimensions and story heights for primary and secondary structures and should calculate the square footage of each defined area. 3. Inspection The Contractor must complete an on-site interior and exterior inspection of all improved sale parcels using appraisers. Appraisers and/or trained data collectors for all other parcels with an appropriate level of qualifications and experience (See The Project Personnel Qualifications in Appendix G) This project is a complete physical collection and therefore proposals must assume no reliance on the existing Assessor's Office data unless approved by the Assessor. It is extremely important that the Westchester County obtain an accurate inventory of improvements with a minimum of errors or estimates. The Contractor must specifically identify the procedures and staff that they will use to ensure high-quality data collection. The Contractor must review unimproved parcels that have road frontage during the property inspection program in a given area. The Contractor must guarantee to make an interior inspection of at least 95 % of all properties. Excluded will be those properties wherein the owner refuses inspection or fails to respond to Contractor's notification letter. For each property above the allowable 5%, which is not properly inspected, the Project Administrator may deduct $150 from the contract price to be paid to the Contractor; such amount deemed by the parties hereto to be a fair and equitable estimate of damages to the Westchester County. The Contractor must prepare and send a letter mailed via first class mail to every house in each neighborhood not more than three weeks before inspection. All data must be collected consistently with the data specifications set forth by the New York State Office of Real Property Services Data Collection Procedures. Please note that Westchester County has gated properties that require scheduled appointments to gain entry. The Contractor must plan for 30 DRAFT sufficient time for on-site inspection of these properties. Many of these properties will require substantially more time to measure and list all site improvements. Contractors must identify the specific staff that will be responsible for inspecting these properties. All property data collected must be entered into the computer on-site at the Contractor's office and available for internal quality control and review by the Project Director and Field Appraisal Supervisor. The Contractor will be responsible for all data security during the course of the project. a. Verification Contractor's staff will have each interior inspection verified by having an adult owner, sign and date property record card. The lister will also identify their self, date, indicate the time, etc... on each property card to record the measuring and listing of the parcel. Verification must be completed in accordance with New York State ORPS Data Collection Standards. b. Refusals When entrance to a building is refused, Contractor's staff will make note of this and report weekly to the Project Administrator with names, addresses and reason for refusal. The contractor will be responsible for adding finished basement, finished attic, additional kitchen(s), additional bathroom(s), and superior quality for all kitchens, baths, and overall interior. c. Call Backs When necessary the Contractor will make two callbacks to attempt to gain entry for an interior inspection. These callbacks will be on a weekday after 6:00 PM and on a Saturday or Sunday. The Contractor must be sensitive to observance of religious Sabbaths. Dates and times of callbacks will be recorded on the property record card. If no one is home after three entry attempts, a certified return receipt requested letter must be sent to the owner of record outlining a convenient procedure to schedule an appointment to inspect the property. The Contractor must keep copies of return receipts on file. 31 ate,, 4.8.4 File Creation and Maintenance Inventory data records are to be created and or corrected within ten (10) working days after the last required visit to the property or refusal. Documents for parcels that are data collected are to be manually verified for completeness and computerized. • The contractor is responsible for the data collection of all parcel changes which are reported to the contractor prior to the taxable status date. All parcels will be edited and file maintained prior to Data Mailer production. At that time, a complete set of edit reports is to be given to Westchester County and ORPS. Data Mailer discrepancies must be resolved and corrections made to the inventory file as per project schedule. Throughout the project, the contractor will make available, upon request, all edit reports and subsequent output reports to the project administrator and ORPS. 4.8.5 Parcel Improvement Sketches Sketches for all improved parcels will be done on the data collection form in a manner prescribed in the ORPS Assessor's Manual Volume 6 data collection manual and within the approved Sketch Software Package. A plot plan must be submitted for those complex parcels as listed in Appendix B„ scanned, and available for viewing in the Real Property System. 32 DRAFT 4.8.6 Data Collectors The minimum number of data collectors and crew chiefs to be employed for the project shall be sufficient to collect the required data items within the time scheduled. Crew chiefs are primarily responsible for the recollection and/or field verification of data collected by the data collectors. The crew chiefs functions include monitoring and ensuring the quality, consistency and accuracy of all data. A ratio of not less than one crew chief for every five data collectors must be maintained. 4.8.7 Data Quality Control Each crew chief will be required to field verify twenty-five (25) of the first one hundred (100) residential parcels and ten (10) of the first one hundred (100) parcels in the farm, commercial and industrial categories which have been collected by each data collector within 30 days from the start of data collection for each collector. The responsibility of the crew chief will be monitor and verify on a daily basis 20% of all work completed during the prior workday. The documented results of this verification of data must be reported to the project administrator and the ORPS and the reason for any differences must be determined immediately. In all cases where an individual or group of data collectors is collecting data erroneously, due to lack of skills, the collector(s) must be recalled for intensified retraining or termination. The work of those collectors who have been retrained must be field verified at a frequency of one (1) out of every five (5) parcels for the next fifty (50) parcels. Continued failure to collect data properly after retraining will constitute cause for dismissal of the data collector. In all cases where the reason for collection differences is based on the failure of a collector to carry out his/her duties, that collector will be promptly terminated. Upon return from the field, each data collection instrument will be time stamped and visually checked by contractor office staff for completeness and legibility. Insofar as possible, that check and any follow-up clarification will be gained from the data collector on the day following the return of the card from the field. In addition, Data Mailers as described below will be an integral part of the quality control. The quality control must include a procedure for remedying any failures or discrepancies in the accuracy of the data as revealed by the field verification of data, or brought to the attention of the contractor by other knowledgeable persons. The company will include in the proposal, a detailed quality control program. In addition to the previously mentioned criteria, the program must include a comprehensive weekly reporting procedure to the municipality, which details collection staff, each collector's work, municipal level progress summaries and estimates for the upcoming week. Also, the quality control program must include the calculation of square footage from Aerial photography for each 33 Commercial Property and comparing it with that collected by the data collectors and/or appraisers for accuracy. 4.8.8 Vacant and Agricultural Land All vacant and agricultural lands are to be listed on the appropriate property record card with appropriate land breakdown. For parcels in an agricultural district, or for parcels currently receiving an agricultural exemption, land breakdowns are to be noted separately for eligible and ineligible lands as categorized on the exemption application. This may require multiple entries of some land types. 4.8.9 Public Utility Parcels and Ceiling Railroad Parcels The contractor shall collect the land data items using form RP-3105 for parcels in the public utility category. The contractor shall collect the land data items and all structural properties using form RP-3105 for ceiling railroad parcels. Non-structural property, including trackage, shall be collected according to the procedure described for the valuation of unique and highly complex parcels. 4.8.10 Data Mailer Taxpayers will also play an important role in monitoring the quality of data collection. Upon completion of the process (defined as a parcel which has been data collected in the field, manually verified for completeness, entered onto the inventory file, computer file edited and all corresponding errors corrected), data mailers will be sent to owners of each parcel of property in the residential, farm, and vacant categories. The mailers, which will consist of a selected property description as collected by the contractor, must be sent in sufficient time to allow for resolution of inquiries prior to use. A cover letter which explains the purpose and content of the mailer, and the procedure whereby the property owner may schedule an appointment for collection, should be included with the mailer. Production of these notices, as well as folding and envelope stuffing, if required, will be a contractor responsibility. Upon completion of data collection of the parcels in each of the other property classification categories within the municipality, a notification, by mail, will be sent to each of these parcel owners that the data items collected may be reviewed at a stated time and place within the municipality. Commercial data mailers available in the RPS system may be substituted for this notification requirement. Again, the mailers must be sent in sufficient time to allow for resolution of inquiries prior to use. Taxpayers will be asked to review the property inventory data descriptions and 34 1 report any discrepancies. Mailer returns will be sent to the contractor for analysis. The contractor will resolve all data problems as indicated by taxpayers' responses prior to commencement of valuation activities. Telephone inquiries as a result of data mailers are the responsibility of the contractor. The contractor will mail a questionnaire to owners of commercial/industrial property, prior to or concurrent with the inventory mailing, which will request all appropriate income and expense information. 4.8.11 Photography/Image The photography image aspect of the project is seen as an opportunity to enhance the quality of data, supply an additional tool for the review of values and to increase the public's confidence in the project. To help attain these goals, the following guidelines have been prepared. * Municipal images must be made available to data collectors and each Westchester County City and Town prior to inspection. Images should be quality assured and quality controlled to link with each Parcel ID;with address verification. To insure the quality of the images: Each image is to be identified by the appropriate Section, block and lot number. Each image shall be sharp and the dimensional sides of the structure clearly defined. Where possible, the structure captured must fill at least fifty (50%) percent of the horizontal frame. No more than one structure shall be contained in each image except in those cases where an attached or semi-attached garage is present. Wherever possible, the image must depict the front and side view of the structure (the length and width) as well as the height. The structure should not be obstructed. The contractor shall provide to the project administrator, in batches, the images (photos, video) for review. The project administrator must review and accept or reject the images within 45 days of receipt. The project administrator will review the images for quality, sharpness, accuracy, and that the structure is clearly defined. If photos are submitted as part of this project, each photo must ultimately be attached to its appropriate property record card by contractor staff. The Project Administrator or Project Administrator's Designee will be ultimately responsible for quality control and for the determination of reshoots. There must be an accurate link between the image and the parcel. Therefore, the companies, in their proposals, shall include: A description of the equipment to be used and discuss the method of identification used to insure the link of images to corresponding parcels. The initial parcel imaging shall be completed before field review, in order to provide the municipality/contractor the opportunity to review the image and linkage to the parcels. The images shall be used as an additional quality control measure during the field review process. The company shall, in the proposal, outline the procedures to be carried out for the security and backup of all images. The company must provide a detailed list of all equipment and associated cost, i.e., hardware, software, imaging devices, which will be utilized at the municipal level for viewing, printing images, and updating. The company shall provide an outline of the training program for municipal staff in 35 1 the implementation and operation of the image system as well as a description of the procedures and the associated cost with updating the image file. The company must describe its procedures for linking the image file to a assessment file. These procedures should be congruous with IBM compatible micro- computers (both stand alone and network) and mainframes. All copyright and ownership rights to the completed image file must be fully and explicitly disclosed. 4.9 Sales Inventory Collection and File Creation The contractor is required to collect and verify the data for those parcels located throughout the municipality that have sold since June 1, 2000, and for all sales occurring until the implementation taxable status date. For parcels where inventory as of the date of sale differs from subject inventory, a separate inventory card for the sale parcel must be completed. The contractor is required to produce a separate data file in the ORPS Real Property System for valid arms-length sales, describing inventory status as of date of sale. The contractor must subscribe to a local realty data service and use realty data at the time of sale to verify the accuracy of inventory status. 4.10 Data Edits The contractor will submit to the project administrator a list of the proposed edits prior to file editing. ORPS will advise the project administrator as to the applicability of these edits and the final edits will be mutually agreed upon by the contractor, the municipality, and ORPS. These edits will remain frozen until a change becomes necessary and has been agreed upon by the three parties. The contractor will be responsible for resolving all errors that result from the edit runs. It is the contractor's responsibility to provide a complete inventory file for valuation that is as error free as possible. This inventory file must be available to the municipality prior to valuation being done. In the event that the data inventory file shows unacceptable levels of inventory discrepancies, ORPS reserves the right to withdraw support for this project. The contractor will submit to the municipality a copy of the output reports from the valuation edit program. The contractor will resubmit to the municipality a copy of the error reports from the final run of the land, cost and commercial edit programs prior to valuation. 4.11 Unique and Highly Complex Parcels The project administrator and the contractor will attempt to isolate the unique parcels and highly complex properties at the outset of the project. Appendix B contains a list of known unique and highly complex properties. 4.18 Project Status Control 36 DRAFT The successful completion of this project depends upon proper coordination, planning and management throughout its duration. Therefore, the contractor must provide bi-weekly written summaries of project status to the project administrator, each Municipality's Assessor, and ORPS (Contractor to propose example of status report contents in RFP Response). These reports will present accurate up-to-date project status; specifically contractor progress, possible problem areas, remedial measures which are being undertaken, overview of contractor staff participation, and training provided to municipal staff. Provide monthly written reports containing the same type of information as the biweekly reports. This report shall be sent to the project administrator, each municipality's assessor, al!42 Muni �,{d CEO' and to ORPS. Attend meetings, held on a bi-weekly basis, with the project administrator to review project developments, resolve problems, interpret contractual requirements, review billings, and provide project continuity. The project director, each municipality's assessors, appropriate staff, and ORPS will attend these meetings. Attend meetings, held on an as needed/requested basis, with the project administrator. These meetings will be similar in content and conduct to the bi-weekly meetings. The project director, appropriate staff and ORPS will attend these meetings. Provide miscellaneous written reports regarding specific project developments, as they arise, to the project administrator. 4.19 Submissions for State AidNalue Verification The contractor assembles and provides documentation to the municipality for reimbursement for state aid pursuant to the State Board's Rules as W;aitiatiie, 4.20 Mass Mailing and Postage The contractor is responsible for providing paper, envelopes, and postage (first class) relative to mailing of: pre-inspection letters; J # =Hi io unt 'z;pon iv=✓piop i y owner; ,iIIers -'catid ell back; anti • data mailers, including cover letters; 37 4.21 Data Entry The contractor is responsible for providing data collection data entry services as necessary. The final output of the data entry device must be on the Real Property System and the approved Sketch Software package. 38 SECTION 5 - DATA SECURITY The contractor is responsible for establishing and maintaining appropriate methods to store and transport all project data in a manner that will ensure minimal data loss. Each company will submit a plan for data security in its proposal. The contractor will be responsible for copying each master data file, on a monthly basis, and storing it in an off-site location that will ensure safety of the files. The transactions, necessary to update the data files, will be kept on appropriate data storage media until the updated master file is copied. This will be in addition to the normal daily and weekly archiving, the results of which need not be stored off-site. The contractor shall not keep, copy, use or take away from any municipality any document, paper, computer output, or other material to which the contractor obtains access during this project. The contractor shall not at any time reveal to any person outside the scope of this project any proprietary or confidential information of which the contractor gains knowledge during this project. The contractor shall, at the termination of the project, return to the municipality all identification badges, keys, or other access devices issued by the municipality and shall not copy or use any such devices in any manner except as specifically authorized by the municipality. 39 DRAF_ SECTION 6 - CONTRACTOR PROJECT STAFFING The contractor must provide competent professional and technical personnel who are capable of accomplishing the required work. The company will, in the proposal, describe the organization structure that will be used to manage this project and will include a complete organization chart. All management and technical personnel that the contractor will use for the project must be approved by the project administrator prior to assignment and must be named in accordance with the following: 6.1 Project Management and Technical Staff Contractor staffing for this project should include, at a minimum, the following: Management Staff Project Director Data Collection (Field Appraisal Supervisor) Supervisor Data Management Supervisor Office Manager Public Information Officer Technical Staff Data Collectors Crew Chiefs Personnel who will be responsible for inventory Personnel with residential/farm/vacant responsibilities Personnel with commercial responsibilities Personnel with training responsibilities Taxpayer Inquiry Specialists The contractor must make at least one technical person available for inventory processing, as needed, throughout the project. A minimum of the project director, one technical person, and sufficient appraisal staff will be required to provide services as needed. The name of the individuals who will direct, supervise, and furnish technical assistance; their qualifications, the staff days each will spend on the project, the time each will be spending on other concurrent projects, and a list of the most recent projects in which each has been involved, identifying the capacity in which they were employed, must be in the proposal. 40 • impT 6.2 Staffing Changes If the contractor needs to make a change in staffing, the contractor must notify ORPS and obtain approval from the project administrator. The contractor must make every effort to maintain the specified staff or staff with equivalent training and experience. 41 SECTION 7 - DELIVERABLE PRODUCTS The contractor will be responsible for the delivery of the following products according to the project timetable: O Project status reports produced throughout the project; O Training lesson plans, timetables, dates of training, attendance rosters, and assessor sign off on training components; O A data collection form with sketch (and photograph/images, if this option is selected) for each parcel (if photographs are selected, each photo must be attached to the appropriate property record card); D A report of failures and discrepancies in the accuracy of data items collected, as revealed by the recollection of data items by field supervisors/crew chiefs and a report of the remedial action taken; O A report of all tax map discrepancies found; 71 A report on the disposition of all taxpayer complaints and informal reviews; O The following programs will be run in the prescribed sequence in order to assure that the subject and sales inventory data and associated output reports turned over to the municipality are as clean as possible: Inventory Editing - A program which performs standard and/or user defined cross edits (see Section 4.10) on the residential and commercial inventory files. The output report must show that all possible edit errors have been resolved, or else maintain the master files to resolve errors and re-run until all edit errors have been resolved; and Sale/Subject Mismatch - A program which compares the subject inventory to sale inventory and displays mismatches. The output report must show that all erroneous mismatches have been resolved, or else maintain master files to resolve errors and re-run until all possible edit errors have been resolved. Copies of these files must be available to the municipality prior to final valuation production; a One copy of all the documentation and application(s) prepared for the municipality for submission to ORPS for applicable state aid reimbursement; and O Training for municipal assessment staff and board of assessment review as specified in this RFP has been completed as evidenced by attendance logs and sign-in 42 DRATT sheets. 43 DRAFT The contractor's work shall be considered to be complete and meeting final acceptance when all of the items mentioned above in Section 7 are delivered to the project administrator and are certified as complete and accurate by the project administrator. Within 45 days of receipt, the project administrator must notify the contractor in writing that the contract is complete or supply a list of missing deliverables. The number of copies of final computer data files and program workflow (paper copy) will be limited to one machine-readable copy of each. System documentation and completed data collection instruments will be limited to one (1) copy. Copies of written materials, such as work plans and reports to be furnished to the municipality which are considered suitable and necessary in the opinion of the municipality's project administrator will be delivered. The contractor will retain copies for one year of any work products that have been approved by the project administrator. During this time frame, these products will be available at no expense to each local Municipality. 44 DRAFT SECTION 8 - PAYMENT SCHEDULE AND PENALTY With the exception of per diem charges for work related to small claims and certiorari proceedings, this is a fixed price contract. Proposals submitted, other than fixed price proposals, will not be accepted. Each proposal shall include a payment schedule that shows deliverable products at easily identifiable stages of the project. Payment shall be made to the company, according to the agreed upon schedule, for the pro-rata share of the itemized cost of each task and phase of the project based on the percentage of completion of that task or phase. The schedule is to adhere to the following criteria. The contractor will submit an itemized bill to the project administrator. This bill is to be discussed at the next regularly scheduled status meeting. The project administrator shall review submitted vouchers within two weeks of receipt. The project administrator must notify the contractor, in writing within an additional week, of any item or portion of an item that is incomplete, not in conformance with the contract, or erroneous. If the project administrator certifies that the project is progressing satisfactorily in accordance with the project timetable (Section 4.2 of this RFP), payment for the uncontested items will be made to the contractor representing ninety percent (90%) of the amount billed. The remaining ten percent (10%), will be retained by each municipality. The entire amount so retained will be paid to the contractor within forty five (45) days following satisfactory completion of the terms of the contract. If the project administrator determines that, due to the fault of the contractor, the project is not progressing satisfactorily on schedule, an additional forty percent (40%) of the bill will be retained. The project administrator will provide the contractor with written justification for the additional retainage and define an acceptable resolution to the situation. If the problem has been rectified to the satisfaction of the project administrator within thirty (30) days, the forty percent (40%) will be paid at that time. If the problem is not rectified within the thirty (30) day calendar period, the project administrator will immediately determine whether the forty percent (40%) will be retained until thirty (30) days after satisfactory completion of all terms of the contract; or, whether the municipality will exercise the option of having the work satisfactorily completed at its own expense and the cost thereof deducted from the retainage. In addition, failure by the Contractor to complete all work prior to the completion date specified within their proposal, shall be cause for a penalty payment by the Contractor on request of the Project Administrator in the amount of one thousand dollars ($1,000) per day beyond each date specified in the contractor project schedule submitted in response to this RFP. This penalty, if applied, shall be deducted from the contract price. Delays occasioned by war, strike, explosion, acts of God, or an order of court or other public authority are excepted. 45 DRAIT SECTION 9 - CONTRACTUAL REQUIREMENTS The following constitute legal and insurance obligations with which the contractor must comply and which constitute the minimum of said requirements to be incorporated in the revaluation contract. 9.1 State Board's Rules and Procedures The contractor must affirm that it will conduct this project in strict compliance with the State Board's Rules and procedures. 9.2 Employment Requirements The contractor shall comply with all the applicable provisions of Federal and State laws, rules and/or regulations regarding employment, and will further specifically comply with those sections related to discrimination as follows: In hiring of employees, for the performance of work under the revaluation contract, or any subcontract hereunder, no contractor or subcontractor, shall by reason of race, age, sex, color, creed, or national origin, discriminate against any citizen of the State of New York who is qualified and available to perform the work to which the employment relates. No contractor, subcontractor, or any person on his behalf shall, in any manner, discriminate against or intimidate any employee hired for the performance of work under the revaluation contract by reason of race, age, sex, color, creed, or national origin. In the event the contractor breaches any of the terms set forth herein with regard to discrimination, or violates the New York State Labor Law, as last amended, during the pendency of this agreement, there may be deducted by the municipality the legally designated penalty for each pe son for each calendar day during which such person was discriminated against, or ir;timidated, in violation of the provisions of this agreement, from the fixed price heretofore set in to be paid to the contractor. The contract may be canceled or terminated by the municipality and all monies due or to become due may be forfeited for a second or any subsequent violation of terms or conditions of this section of the revaluation contract. All project personnel must be approved by the municipality prior to being employed for the project and will be required to carry an identification card while on project business. This I.D. card will contain the employee's photograph, name, title and physical description. This card will carry the signature of the project administrator and will be issued by the municipality. This card will be surrendered to the project administrator upon termination of the employee or upon completion of the project. 46 9.3 Changes in Contract There shall be no changes, alterations, or additions in the data ttitIttifin contract without prior written consent of the municipality's contract administrator. This specifically includes the fixed price payment and per diem charges as outlined in the contract. In the proposal, the company will state that the fixed price paid by the municipality to the company shall include any and all expenses set forth by example herein, but not limited thereto, including all temporary living and relocation expense allowances, nominal office supplies, direct and indirect costs, administrative and marketing overhead, and travel within municipality. The said fixed price also includes expenses of the company, its agents and/or employees for travel outside the municipality. 9.4 Statement of Non-collusion A statement of non-collusion, duly executed by the company, shall be affixed to the offer to perform services pursuant to this contract, and shall affirm that: The proposed fixed price has been arrived at independently, without collusion, consultation or communication as to any other company or with any competitor. The said fixed price was not disclosed by the company and was not knowingly discussed prior to the submission, directly or indirectly, to any other company or to any competitor. No attempt was made by the company to induce any other person, partnership or corporation to submit or not to submit a proposal for the purpose of restricting competition. Appendix C contains a sample of an affidavit for this purpose. 9.5 Insurance Requirements The municipality and the contractor must mutually understand and agree that their respective liability hereunder for damages, regardless of the form of proceeding or action, shall be such as is defined by applicable statutes and common law of the State of New York. The contractor will serve in the capacity of an independent contractor in this rJata collection project and will maintain insurance at least as hereinafter set forth so as to protect it and the municipality from any and all claims under the Workers' Compensation Law, and such other employee benefits law, and from claims for damage to person or property arising out of and during its operation pursuant to this agreement, for the entire pendency of this revaluation project: 47 DRAF, A comprehensive general liability insurance policy with the following limits of coverage: bodily injury and property damage, $1,000,000 each occurrence, $1,000,000 each individual claim per occurrence, $1 ,000,000 aggregate of all claims per occurrence. A comprehensive automobile insurance policy with the following limits: bodily injury, $1,000,000 each person and $1,000,000 for each occurrence; property damage, $1,000,000 each occurrence, aggregate $1,000,000 for each occurrence. The foregoing comprehensive liability insurance policy and comprehensive automobile liability insurance policy shall include the municipality as an additional named insured, at no extra cost to the municipality, and the certificate of the insurance relating hereto shall be submitted to the municipality upon the signing of the contract. The contractor, in addition to the foregoing, must provide and maintain, during the pendency of the data collection project, such Workers' Compensation and Employer Liability Insurance and New York State Benefits Insurance policies as are required by statute. All insurance must be issued by an insurer licensed and authorized to do business in the State of New York and which maintains an office within the State of New York. 9.6 Conflict of Interest No director, officer, employee, agent, contractor, or subcontractor of the contractor shall deemed to be an agent, servant and/or employee of the municipality. The contractor shall not employ as a director, officer, employee, agent, contractor, or subcontractor, directly or indirectly in any capacity, any elected or appointed official of any city, town, village, hamlet, school district, or other political subdivision of the municipality or any member of the immediate family. The contractor agrees that it will require all its directors, officers, employees, agents, contractors, or subcontractors, to be bound and adhere to the Code of Ethics of the municipality (See Appendix A of this RFP). The contractor further agrees that it will require all of its employees to comply with all applicable laws relating to this agreement and it will provide relevant testimony regarding any phase of this agreement, or the performance thereof, and that the refusal to supply such evidence and/or testimony shall be the cause for immediate termination of this agreement by the municipality. 9.7 Assignment of Contract The contractor shall not assign, convey, transfer, or delegate any of its responsibilities and obligations to this agreement to any person, corporation, partnership, association or entity, without the prior written approval of the contract administrator. 48 DwT 9.8 Compensation The contractor will follow the procedure outlined in Section 8 of this RFP for payment. 9.9 Ownership of Work Products All final written or tangible work products shall belong to Westchester County, New York. In the event of premature discontinuation of work, the contractor shall agree to provide all existing work and data files to the municipality. Delivery of all files after the project is completed will be as outlined in Section 7 of this RFP. 9.10 General Legal Responsibility The contractor must comply with all federal, state, and municipal laws, ordinances, rules and/or regulations, including labor laws, and those against discrimination, existing or adopted in the future, during the term of the project, applicable at any time to the contractor pursuant to its obligations in regard to this project. The contractor and any of its subcontractors, agents, servants, and/or employees shall obtain, at their sole cost and expense, all required permits, franchises, approvals, licenses and/or certificates, necessary for the performance of its obligations pursuant to the agreement. 9.11 Instrument of Contract The contract must specifically set forth in the body thereof or in an appendix thereto the duties and responsibilities of each of the parties. A combination of the request for proposal and the proposal would be sufficient for this purpose. Beware, this practice could give rise to disputes as to exactly what was agreed upon by the parties. The precise terms and conditions must be explicitly set forth. In most cases this could best be accomplished by preparing a contract which prioritized all of the documents and merges them so as to reflect exactly the agreement and understanding of the parties and which details such other areas of agreement as may have been reached during negotiations. The company proposal will become the senior document and this RFP will become the junior document. This instrument of contract will be agreed upon and signed prior to project commencement, no later than 6/1/2002. 49 DRAFT SECTION 10 - PROJECT COST ITEMIZATION The following schedule must be used to itemize project cost. Additional entries may be made where appropriate. Also, the intended use of a subcontractor for any or all work to be performed within the scope of this project must be stated separately. CATEGORY AMOUNT Project Management (including RFP Sections 4.3, 4.4, 4.5, 4.6, 4.7, 4.20, 5, 6, and 7) Data Collection (including RFP Sections 4.8, 4.9, and 4.10) TOTAL Per-diem Charges Additional Classroom Training/Workshops 50 APPENDIX B Unique or Highly Complex Parcel List 52 . impr APPENDIX D Sample Proposal 54 ii T SAMPLE Contractor Proposal in response to the Request For Proposal Real Property Inventory Project Municipality New York Date 55 11 . A statement of non-collusion, duly executed by the company, must be affixed to the offer to perform services pursuant to this contract, and must affirm that: A. The proposed fixed price has been arrived at independently, without collusion, consultation or communication as to any other company or with any competitor. B. The said fixed price was not disclosed by the company and was not knowingly discussed prior to the submission, directly or indirectly, to any other company or to any competitor. C. No attempt was made by the company to induce any other person, partnership or corporation to submit or not to submit a proposal for the purpose of restricting competition. 12. A statement of the company's full compliance with the specifications found in this RFP and a Company Proposal Response Grid (see below). All companies must enter a response in Column B for every section of the RFP listed on the grid. If a conflict arises between the internal wording of the company proposal and the section indicated on the response grid, the response on the grid shall be considered the intent of the company. If the company is offering goods and/or services above and beyond the minimum standard specified in the RFP, enter the appropriate response in Column C and corresponding cost (if any) to the municipality for adopting this option. Column C must also reference a detailed explanation of the variation. Remember, the RFP specifications are considered the minimum standards and the only acceptable deviations from the specifications must call for responses in excess of those specified and must be explained in detail in the proposal. 57 A B C Company agrees Company is with content of offering services the RFP and will above minimum. RFP Section comply with the minimum YES / NO specifications. (List Cost In YES / NO Dollars) 4.10 Data Edits 4.11 Unique or Highly Complex Parcels 4.18 Project Status Control 4.19 Submissions for State Aid/Value Verification 4.20 Mass Mailings and Postage 4.21 Data Entry 5 Data Security 6 Contractor Project Staffing 7 Deliverable Products 8 Payment Schedule and Penalty 9 Contractual Requirements 59 D APPENDIX E MUNICIPALITY SIGN OFF DOCUMENT #2 The project administrator and contractor have discussed the progress of the real property inventory project for Westchester County, New York. The RFP sections have been completed and the necessary deliverables have been provided to the Town relative to: • DATA COLLECTION 1 SUBJECT FILE CREATION D. SALES FILE CREATION SALES VALIDATION AND VERIFICATION • LOCAL CAPACITY BUILDING ASSOCIATED WITH ABOVE PHASES OF PROJECT Project Administrator Date Project Director Date 61 • I RATT APPENDIX E MUNICIPALITY SIGN OFF DOCUMENT #4 The project administrator and contractor have discussed the progress of the reassessment project for the Town of XXXX. The RFP sections have been completed and the necessary deliverables have been provided to the Town relative to: Ei INFORMAL MEETINGS AND FIELD RELATED ACTIVITIES TENTATIVE ASSESSMENT ROLL FILING PROJECT DELIVERABLES TO THE ASSESSOR LOCAL CAPACITY BUILDING ASSOCIATED WITH ABOVE PHASES OF PROJECT Project Administrator Date Project Director Date 63 RAF . _ iii ,_ _ _ WESTCHESTER COUNTY KEY ASSEESSMENT DATES TAXABLE TENTATIVE FINAL FISCAL STATUS COMPLETION GRIEVANCE FILING MUNICIPALITY YEAR DATE OF ROLL DAY OF ROLL CITIES: Mount Vernon Jan 1-Dec 31 May 1 June 1 3rd Tuesday Aug 1 in June New Rochelle Jan 1-Dec 31 May 1 June 1 3rd Tuesday Aug 1 in June Peekskill Jan 1-Dec 31 May 1 June 15 3`d Tuesday Aug 15 in June Rye Jan 1-Dec 31 May 1 June 1 3rd Tuesday Sept 15 in June White Plains July 1-June 30 Dec 1 Jan 1 Jan 21 Mar 1 Yonkers July 1-June 30 Oct 15 Nov 1 Nov 1-15 April 10 Filings Jan 27-Feb 14 Hearings TOWNS: All Towns Jan 1-Dec 31 June 1 June 1 3rd Tuesday in Sept 15 June VILLAGES: All Villages June 1-May 31 Jan 1 Feb 1 3rd Tuesday April 1 in February EXCEPT: Ossining Jan 1-Dec 31 No longer an assessing unit. Now uses Town of Ossining roll & statutory dates. Pelham & June 1-May 31 No longer an assessing unit. Now uses Town of Pelham Pelham Manor roll & statutory dates. Scarsdale June 1-May 31 Uses single TownNillage roll. Village uses Town statutory dates. 65 i . ---,* '''... subject to approval by the Project Administrator. 67 ii). , _ , t \Thivp . . Residential Appraisers: More than 10 years property appraisal/assessment experience, and is licensed as a State-Certified Appraiser, State Certified Assessor by the New York Office of Real Property Services, or State Certified Real Property Appraiser by the New York Office of Real Property Services or equivalent professional recognition. Highly Advantageous More than 5 years property appraisal/assessment experience, and is licensed as a State-Certified Appraiser, State Certified Assessor by the New York Office of Real Property Services, or State Certified Real Property Appraiser by the New York Office of Real Property Services or equivalent professional recognition. Advantageous. More than 2 years property appraisal/assessment experience. Acceptable Less than 1 year property assessment experience. Not Acceptable Residential & Commercial Data Collectors: Graduation from High School and successful completion of an examination that will test math and writing skills. Fluency with a second language is advantageous. Crew Chief: (field supervisors) The person(s) responsible for the recollection and/or field verification of data collected by the data collectors. The crew chief monitors and ensures the quality, consistency and accuracy of all of the data. The crew chief must be trained as a data collector and have six month's prior experience as a data collector. Commercial Appraisers: More than 10 years property appraisal/assessment experience, and is licensed as a State-Certified General Appraiser, State Certified Assessor by the New York Office of Real Property Services, or State Certified Real Property Appraiser by the New York Office of Real Property Services or equivalent professional recognition. Highly Advantageous 69 s:. t DmF RFP#1 REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) SPECIFICATIONS Real Property Inventory Project MUNICIPALITY WESTCHESTER COUNTY, NEW YORK Prepared By: Westchester County Chapter of the New York State Assessor's Association & Westchester County Tax Commission Date: Wednesday, January 02, 2002 DRAFT TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN Enclosed are specifications for the contractual services phase of the Westchester County, New York real property inventory program. The purpose of the real property inventory program is to collect real property inventory for all parcels, land and improvements, in Westchester County. Companies interested in providing these services are invited to attend a pre-proposal conference at 148 Martine Avenue, Conference Room 102, White Plains, New York 10601 @ 10:00 AM on March 15, 2002. The conference is intended to provide clarification of these specifications, where needed, and to respond to all technical inquiries. All questions concerning these specifications shall be presented at the pre- proposal conference or mailed to David B. Jackson, AAS, SCCD, IAO, Executive Director,Westchester County Tax Commission, 110 Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., White Plains, New York, 10601, prior to the pre-proposal conference. Companies who respond in writing, or who attend this conference, will receive a written summary of the results of the pre-proposal conference. All companies who received the RFP should get the summary. No subsequent inquiries will be accepted. Companies desiring to provide services according to these specifications must deliver 10 sealed copies of their proposal to David B. Jackson, AAS, SCCD, IAO, Executive Director,Westchester County Tax Commission, 110 Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., White Plains, New York, 10601 no later than 4:00PM, April 1, 2002 . Proposals received after this specified time will not be considered. All company proposals must be formatted as specified in Appendix D. Full proposals, with a restating of the RFP sections and specifications, are not acceptable. These specifications are considered the minimum standards for this project. The only acceptable deviations from the specifications are responses in excess of those specified and must be explained in detail in the proposal. No substantive changes will be allowed after the submission of the proposals. Interviews will be held for companies that submit proposals at the digestion of the municipality. Proposal clarification and explanation will be the primary purpose of the interview, therefore companies are encouraged to have their prospective project directors actively participate in this process. 3. Inspection (Under 4.8.3 Parcel Entry) The Contractor must complete an on-site interior and exterior inspection of all improved sale parcels using appraisers. Appraisers and/or trained data collectors for all other parcels with --r?, k 1----,. „-----, an appropriate level of qualifications and experience equipped with ttif " a copy of the existing current property record card for each parcel. (See The Project Personnel Qualifications in Appendix G) proposals must assume no reliance on the existing Assessor's •• •.: •- - - • - .. . et • -• • . •- '--a...• . It is extremely important that the Westchester County obtain an accurate inventory of improvements with a minimum of errors or estimates. The Contractor must specifically identify the procedures and staff that they will use to ensure high-quality data collection. The Contractor must review unimproved parcels that have road frontage during the property inspection program in a given area. The Contractor must guarantee to make an interior inspection of at least 95 % of all properties. Excluded will be those properties wherein the owner refuses inspection or fails to respond to Contractor's notification letter. For each property above the allowable 5%, which is not properly inspected, the Project Administrator may deduct $150 from the contract price to be paid to the Contractor; such amount deemed by the parties hereto to be a fair and equitable estimate of damages to the Westchester County. The Contractor must prepare and send a letter mailed via first class mail to every house in each neighborhood not more than three weeks before inspection. All data must be collected consistently with the data specifications set forth by the New York State Office of Real Property Services Data Collection Procedures. Please note that Westchester County has gated properties that require scheduled appointments to gain entry. The Contractor must plan for sufficient time for on-site inspection of these properties. Many of these properties will require substantially more time to measure and list all site improvements. Contractors must identify the specific staff that will be responsible for inspecting these properties. All property data collected must be entered into the computer on- site at the Contractor's office and available for internal quality control and review by the Project Director and Field Appraisal Supervisor. The Contractor will be responsible for all data security during the course of the project. 1111111111111111111.1"111111. — .v com IS - lndrew J.Spano (bunt'Executive David B.Jackson,AAS.SCCD,lAO Lxecunve Director.\vest pester County Wax C otrnnissi0 AGREEMENT INTERMUNICIPAL MADE THIS #_DAY OF M�H BETWEEN: THE CITYITOWN OF AGREEMENTD TO AS THE CITYITOWN AND THE S AT O48 MAROF MUNICIPALITY, NERRE WESTCHE HAVING STER HAVING ITS PRINCIPAL P LAICEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS OF AVENUE, WHITE PLAINS, NEW YORK 10601 , -I COUNTY. THE PARTIES HERIN AGREE AS FOLLOWS: R COUNTY TAX L SERVE HAS PROJECT DIRECTR FFOR THE 1) THE L EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE WESTCEST COMMISSION, OR DESIGNEE, W REAL PROPERTY INVENTORY PROJECT TO TAKE PLACE IN THEIR MUNICIPALITY. Y 2) THE CITOR Y ASSESSOR, THE OR DESIGNEE, WILL READ THE REAL PROP E T INVENTORY REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL AND REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL. THE REAL PROPERTY INVENTORY PROGRAMSIGN OFF ON ALL S" PROVIDED BY THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 3) THO E CITYITOWN ASSESSOR, ORNT DESIGNEE, WILLOU "ASSESSOR SIGN OFFTCOUNTYUM COMMISSION WITHIN DAYS (14) OF RECEIPT. IF THEERSTAX DOCUMENT',ASPECTY RECEIPT. IF ASSESSOR CAN NOT CONCUR WITH ANY MUST SHE ITEMS ADDRESSED IN THE "ASSESSOR �GHE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR PROVDE AN EXPLAINATION IN OF THE WESTCHESTER COUNTY TAX COMMISSION WITHIN THE AFOREMENTIONED TIME PERIOD. DESIGNEE, WILL BE INVOLVEDSTHROUGHOUT MONTH 4) THE CITYfTOWN ASSESSOR, OR TWO DAY , THIS PRS OJECT FOR A MINIMUM OF 16 HOURS, �FTHE WESTCHESTER COUNTY OF COMMISSION. NY THE EXECUTIVE NEW YORK STATE COMMISSION. THE CITYITOWN UNDERSTANDS THAT IT IS THE WESTCHESTER COUNTY CHAPTER OF THE WEEK. THE THAT THE CITYITOWN ASSESSOR, OR DESIGNEE, ASSESSORS ASSOCIATION BE INVOLVED IN THIS PROJECT A MINIUM OF 24 HOURS PER EACH 5) THE YR REAL ROASSES TOR, OR DESIGNEE, WILL PARTICIPATE IN MEETING. BI- WEEKLY REAL PROPERTY INVENTORY PROJECT INFORM Westchester County I ax Commission,Office of the Executive Director 1',4X:(9141915-1333 Telephone: (914)9954325 10 ur.Martin Luther King Jr.,Blvd. �._nlail:Dhjlgii:westchestergov.com SECTION 6 - CONTRACTOR PROJECT STAFFING The contractor must provide competent professional and technical personnel who are capable of accomplishing the required work. The company will, in the proposal, describe the organization structure that will be used to manage this project and will include a complete organization chart. All management and technical personnel that the contractor will use for the project must be approved by the project administrator prior to assignment and must be named in accordance with the following: 6.1 Project Management and Technical Staff Contractor staffing for this project should include, at a minimum, the following: Management Staff Project Director Office Manager Public Information Officer Technical Staff Personnel who will be responsible for assessment, inventory and valuation processing Local Appraisers Personnel with residential/farm/vacant valuation responsibilities Personnel with commercial valuation responsibilities Personnel with training responsibilities Qualified Field Reviewers Taxpayer Inquiry Specialists The contractor must make at least one person, skilled in the operation of the valuation programs, available throughout the project. A minimum of the project director, one technical person, and sufficient appraisal staff will be required to provide services as needed. The name of the individuals who will direct, supervise, and furnish technical assistance; their qualifications, the staff days each will spend on the project, the time each will be spending on other concurrent projects, and a list of the most recent projects in which each has been involved, identifying the capacity in which they were employed, must be in the proposal. 33 SECTION 7 - DELIVERABLE PRODUCTS The contractor will be responsible for the delivery of the following products according to the project timetable: O Project status reports produced throughout the project; O Training lesson plans, timetables, dates of training, attendance rosters, and assessor sign off on training components; O A copy (computerized or paper) of all valid sales used in valuation effort and all documents required in Section 4.9; O A report of failures and discrepancies in the accuracy of data items O A report of all tax map discrepancies found; 0 Valuation processing outputs including all selected options used for regression and comparable sales routines (computer file and paper copies); also including, but not limited to, a copy of control cards for land, cost, market and income; O All manual and computerized reports which support values and valuation formulae; O A computer-produced cost document and comparable sales report for each R/FN parcel valued using the market approach; O A computer-produced cost document and market and income report for each commercial parcel valued in valuation; O A field review one-liner for each parcel appraised (R/FN and commercial); O A copy (computerized and paper) of the valuation factor file )r equivalent used to produce commercial market and income values; E7 Land schedules and sales analysis documentation used in the land valuation effort; O A written overview report of valuation methods used; El A limited summary report for each unique or highly complex property; O A cross reference of values, i.e., a listing of estimates of values for each parcel as of tentative roll; 35 SECTION 8 - PAYMENT SCHEDULE AND PENALTY With the exception of per diem charges for work related to small claims and certiorari proceedings, this is a fixed price contract. Proposals submitted, other than fixed price proposals, will not be accepted. Each proposal shall include a payment schedule that shows deliverable products at easily identifiable stages of the project. Payment shall be made to the company, according to the agreed upon schedule, for the pro-rata share of the itemized cost of each task and phase of the project based on the percentage of completion of that task or phase. The schedule is to adhere to the following criteria. The contractor will submit an itemized bill to the project administrator. This bill is to be discussed at the next regularly scheduled status meeting. The project administrator shall review submitted vouchers within two weeks of receipt. The project administrator must notify the contractor, in writing within an additional week, of any item or portion of an item that is incomplete, not in conformance with the contract, or erroneous. If the project administrator certifies that the project is progressing satisfactorily in accordance with the project timetable (Section 4.2 of this RFP), payment for the uncontested items will be made to the contractor representing ninety percent (90%) of the amount billed. The remaining ten percent (10%), will be retained by each municipality. The entire amount so retained will be paid to the contractor within forty-five (45) days following satisfactory completion of the terms of the contract. If the project administrator determines that, due to the fault of the contractor, the project is not progressing satisfactorily on schedule, an additional forty percent (40%) of the bill will be retained. The project administrator will provide the contractor with written justification for the additional retainage and define an acceptable resolution to the situation. If the problem has been rectified to the satisfaction of the project administrator within thirty (30) days, the forty percent (40%) will be paid at that time. If the problem is not rectified within the thirty (30) day calendar period, the project administrator will immediately determine whether the forty percent (40%) will be retained until forty-five (45) days after satisfactory completion of all terms of the contract; or, whether the municipality will exercise the option of having the work satisfactorily completed at its own expense and the cost thereof deducted from the retainage. In addition, failure by the Contractor to complete all work prior to the completion date specified within their proposal, shall be cause for a penalty payment by the Contractor on request of the Project Administrator in the amount of one thousand dollars ($1,000) per day beyond each date specified in the contractor project schedule submitted in response to this RFP. This penalty, if applied, shall be deducted from the contract price. Delays occasioned by war, strike, explosion, acts of God, or an order of court or other public authority are excepted. 37 9.3 Changes in Contract There shall be no changes, alterations, or additions in the reassessment contract without prior written consent of the municipality's contract administrator. This specifically includes the fixed price payment and per diem charges as outlined in the contract. In the proposal, the company will state that the fixed price paid by the municipality to the company shall include any and all expenses set forth by example herein, but not limited thereto, including all temporary living and relocation expense allowances, nominal office supplies, direct and indirect costs, administrative and marketing overhead, and travel within municipality. The said fixed price also includes expenses of the company, its agents and/or employees for travel outside the municipality. 9.4 Statement of Non-collusion A statement of non-collusion, duly executed by the company, shall be affixed to the offer to perform services pursuant to this contract, and shall affirm that: The proposed fixed price has been arrived at independently, without collusion, consultation or communication as to any other company or with any competitor. The said fixed price was not disclosed by the company and was not knowingly discussed prior to the submission, directly or indirectly, to any other company or to any competitor. No attempt was made by the company to induce any other person, partnership or corporation to submit or not to submit a proposal for the purpose of restricting competition. Appendix C contains a sample of an affidavit for this purpose. 9.5 Insurance Requirements The municipality and the contractor must mutually understand and agree that their respective liability hereunder for damages, regardless of the form of proceeding or action, shall be such as is defined by applicable statutes and common law of the State of New York. The contractor will serve in the capacity of an independent contractor in this reassessment project and will maintain insurance at least as hereinafter set forth so as to protect it and the municipality from any and all claims under the Workers' Compensation Law, and such other employee benefits law, and from claims for damage to person or property arising out of and during its operation pursuant to this agreement, for the entire pendency of this reassessment project: 39 9.8 Compensation The contractor will follow the procedure outlined in Section 8 of this RFP for payment. 9.9 Ownership of Work Products All final written or tangible work products shall belong to each municipality. In the event of premature discontinuation of work, the contractor shall agree to provide all existing work and data files to the municipality. Delivery of all files after the project is completed will be as outlined in Section 7 of this RFP. 9.10 General Legal Responsibility The contractor must comply with all federal, state, and municipal laws, ordinances, rules and/or regulations, including labor laws, and those against discrimination, existing or adopted in the future, during the term of the project, applicable at any time to the contractor pursuant to its obligations in regard to this project. The contractor and any of its subcontractors, agents, servants, and/or employees shall obtain, at their sole cost and expense, all required permits, franchises, approvals, licenses and/or certificates, necessary for the performance of its obligations pursuant to the agreement. 9.11 Instrument of Contract The contract must specifically set forth in the body thereof or in an appendix thereto the duties and responsibilities of each of the parties. A combination of the request for proposal and the proposal would be sufficient for this purpose. Beware, this practice could give rise to disputes as to exactly what was agreed upon by the parties. The precise terms and conditions must be explicitly set forth. In most cases this could best be accomplished by preparing a contract which prioritized all of the documents and merges them so as to reflect exactly the agreement and understanding of the parties and which details such other areas of agreement as may have been reached during negotiations. The company proposal will become the senior document and this RFP will become the junior document. This instrument of contract will be agreed upon and signed prior to project commencement, no later than 11/1/2005. 41 APPENDIX A Each Municipality's Code of Ethics 43 APPENDIX C Affidavit , being duly sworn, deposes and says: (NAME) 1. He was, and continues to be, • (TITLE) (FIRM NAME) 2. He is familiar with the attached proposal for professional service for (NAME OF MUNICIPALITY) 3. The proposed fixed price has been arrived at independently, without collusion, consultation or communication as to any other company or with any competitor. 4. The said fixed price was not disclosed by the company and was not knowingly discussed prior to the submission, directly or indirectly, to any other company or to any competitor. 5. No attempt was made by the company to induce any other person, partnership, or corporation to submit, or not to submit, a proposal for the purpose of restricting competition. (SIGNATURE) Sworn to before me this of (DAY) (MONTH) (YEAR) (NOTARY PUBLIC) 45 SAMPLE Contractor Proposal in response to the Request For Proposal Real Property Reassessment Project Municipality New York Date 47 11. A statement of non-collusion, duly executed by the company, must be affixed to the offer to perform services pursuant to this contract, and must affirm that: A. The proposed fixed price has been arrived at independently, without collusion, consultation or communication as to any other company or with any competitor. B. The said fixed price was not disclosed by the company and was not knowingly discussed prior to the submission, directly or indirectly, to any other company or to any competitor. C. No attempt was made by the company to induce any other person, partnership or corporation to submit or not to submit a proposal for the purpose of restricting competition. 12. A statement of the company's full compliance-with the specifications found in this RFP and a Company Proposal Response Grid (see below). All companies must enter a response in Column B for every section of the RFP listed on the grid. If a conflict arises between the internal wording of the company proposal and the section indicated on the response grid, the response on the grid shall be considered the intent of the company. If the company is offering goods and/or services above and beyond the minimum standard specified in the RFP, enter the appropriate response in Column C and corresponding cost (if any) to the municipality for adopting this option. Column C must also reference a detailed explanation of the variation. Remember, the RFP specifications are considered the minimum standards and the only acceptable deviations from the specifications must call for responses in excess of those specified and must be explained in detail in the proposal. 49 A B C Company agrees Company is with content of offering services the RFP and will above minimum. RFP Section comply with the minimum YES / NO specifications. (List Cost In YES / NO Dollars) 4.12 Assessor Value Review 4.13 Assessment Disclosure Processing 4.14 Informal Review Process 4.15 Value Change Notice 4.16 Formal Defense of Values 4.17 Project Status Control 4.18 Submissions for State AidNalue Verification 4.19 Mass Mailings and Postage 4.20 Data Entry 5 Data Security 6 Contractor Project Staffing 7 Deliverable Products 8 Payment Schedule and Penalty 9 Contractual Requirements 51 APPENDIX E MUNICIPALITY SIGN OFF DOCUMENT #2 The project administrator and contractor have discussed the progress of the reassessment project for the Town of XXXX. The RFP sections have been completed and the necessary deliverables have been provided to the Town relative to: Sales Validation, Verification and Sales File Creation & Accessibility. Project Administrator Date Project Director Date Assessor Date 53 i APPENDIX E MUNICIPALITY SIGN OFF DOCUMENT #4 The project administrator and contractor have discussed the progress of the reassessment project for the Town of XXXX. The RFP sections have been completed and the necessary deliverables have been provided to the Town relative to: ➢ VALUATION PRODUCTION ❑ FIELD REVIEW OF VALUES ASSESSOR VALUE REVIEW WITH CONTRACTOR r LOCAL CAPACITY BUILDING ASSOCIATED WITH ABOVE PHASES OF PROJECT Project Administrator Date Project Director Date Assessor Date 55 A APPENDIX E MUNICIPALITY SIGN OFF DOCUMENT #6 The project administrator and contractor have discussed the progress of the reassessment project for the Town of XXXX. The RFP sections have been completed and the necessary deliverables have been provided to the Town relative to: • ASSESSMENT DISCLOSURE MAILING INFORMAL MEETINGS AND FIELD RELATED ACTIVITIES VALUE CHANGE NOTICES PRODUCTION TENTATIVE ASSESSMENT ROLL FILING • PROJECT DELIVERABLES TO THE ASSESSOR • LOCAL CAPACITY BUILDING ASSOCIATED WITH ABOVE PHASES OF PROJECT Project Administrator Date Project Director Date Assessor Date 57 69 0 XICIN3ddV FROM : BFJ PHONE NO. : 212 353 7494 Feb. 14 2002 04:07PM P2 BFJ Buckhurst Fish &Jacquemart Inc. 115 Fifth Avenue, New York NY 10003 Tel (212)353-7474 Fax (212)353-7494 E-mail: bfji pcapc.com Memorandum To: Mamaroneck Town Board From: Frank Fish fcrcr CONFIDENT/AL Subject: Fifth Avenue Planning Study, City of New Rochelle Date: February 14, 2002 At Steve Altieri's request I have reviewed a draft copy of the Fifth Avenue Planning Study dated January, 2002 which was prepared for the City of New Rochelle. The study presents three alternative plans for the former IKEA site area. These plans have varying levels of city involvement but the study focuses on two key components true of all three plans: 1) To improve the functionality and long term stability of the light industrial district 2) To create a better Fifth Avenue area to serve businesses and residents and to serve as a gateway to the City. The three scenarios remain faithful to the two goals listed above. They do not propose any big box stores or other uses that appeared to be regional traffic generators. The scenarios can be described as following: 1. Light industrial Scheme This scenario relies on minimal city intervention and proposes such items as a zoning overlay district to try to better enhance the light industrial nature of the area, to upgrade parking and circulation and streetscape improvements. 2. Aggressive in-fill Strategy This scheme takes a more proactive view to create a better functioning light industrial and flex space district. By flex space the study means a mixture of light industrial, assemblage, fabrication and office uses. The scheme relies on consolidating some properties and creating much better building conditions through limited acquisition. This scheme includes about 90,000 square feet of new building area that stresses that this square footage is a mixture of commercial, retail/wholesale establishments and light industry. 3. Mixed Use Strategy This scheme introduces a significant component of residential development along the frontage of Fifth Avenue. The residential development is shown on the scheme as townhomcs. Closer to the Thruway the scheme relies upon a mix of light industrial, flex space and warehouse space. FROM : BFJ PHONE NO. : 212 353 7494 Feb. 14 2002 04:08PM P3 Mamaroneck Town Board Memo to the Ma COIRDE# February 14, 2002 111 Page 2 Common elements in all three schemes include the retention of the basic street system of the area, a lack of any big box stores or other regional traffic generators. The largest single amount of retail mentioned is approximately 15,000 square feet. Conclusions Given the above scenarios the recommendations of the Fifth Avenue Planning Study are very reasonable in nature and have little regional transportation impact. If the City of New Rochelle were to adopt them we believe that they would be generally beneficial to the neighborhood area and would not have negative environmental consequences for the Town of Mamaroneck or certainly not consequences on anywhere near the scale of an IKEA. We had feared that one of the scenarios that the Fifth Avenue Planning Study might have included would have been one for a so called "power center". There are several examples of power centers along the 1-95 Corridor in the state of Connecticut. Such centers usually include "category killers" such as Bed Bath and Beyond, T.J. Maxx or a Home Depot. No such scheme is included in the Fifth Avenue Planning Study. Because the Fifth Avenue Planning Study is still in draft form and is considered confidential we do not know whether the City Council of New Rochelle will actually adopt it. However, if the City follows through on its recommendations it would seem appropriate that the Town of Mamaroneck might consider dropping its lawsuit against the City. It would seem at this point that the Town may gain more by having a proactive role in the final planning study recommendations. Table of Contents Foreward F-1 1: Background 1-1 Study Area Definition 1-1 Development History Overview 1-1 Zoning Background 1-1 Planning History 1-3 New Rochelle Planning Studies(1965-1996) 1-3 Industrial Development Study of the Fifth Avenue Area(1989) 1-4 Comprehensive Plan(1996) 1-4 Blight Study and Urban Renewal Plan 1-4 Fifth Avenue Retail Center Project-IKEA(2000) 1-5 IKEA Draft Environmental Impact Statement(2000) 1-6 Subsequent Fifth Avenue Area Studies 1-6 2: Opportunities and Constraints Analysis 2-1 A. Introduction 2-1 B.Planning Analysis 2-1 Fifth Avenue 2-1 Critical Gateways and Intersections 2-2 Study Area Interior 2-2 Valley Place 2-2 Potter Avenue 2-3 C.Market Analysis 2-3 Market Demand 2-4 Light Industrial/Flex Space 2-4 Retail 2-4 Residential 2-4 Summary 2-5 Property Values 2-5 IKEA Effects on Property Values 2-5 Fiscal Considerations 2-6 3: Concept Development and Testing 3-1 A.Introduction 3-1 B. Concept Development Schemes 3-1 Infill Concepts 3-1 Fifth Avenue Frontage/City Yard Concepts 3-2 Large Parcel Flex/light Industrial Concept 3-2 Mixed-use 3-2 C.Concept Testing 3-3 Commercial Realtors(Tri-Com,Rackow,and Cushman Wakefield) 3-3 1 Fifth Avenue Planning Study City Staff and Officials 3-4 Weichert Realty 3-4 Jonathan Rose and Companies 3-5 Robert Martin Company 3-6 Simone Development 3-6 Cappelli Enterprises 3-6 Existing Property and Business Owners 3-7 Susan Stanton,Do Chung Architects 3-8 National Resources 3-8 Northstar Properties -3-8 4: Recommendations 4-1 A.Introduction 4-1 B. Scenario 1: Minimum Intervention 4-1 Overview 4-1 Zoning Overlay District 4-2 Objectives 4-2 Key Elements of the Overlay 4-2 Other Planning Recommendations 4-3 Reintroduce Two-way Traffic on Plain Avenue and Pleasant Street 4-3 Transition out Remaining Non-Conforming Uses from the Study Area 4-4 Plan and Implement City Park Master Plan and Improvements 4-4 Establish Proactive IDA Program to Assist Business Expansion and Retention4-4 Create a Fifth Avenue/City Park Master Plan 4-5 Pursue Joint Planning Initiatives with Town of Mamaroneck 4-5 and New York State Thruway Authority C. Scenario 2: Aggressive Infill Strategy 4-6 Overview 4-6 Infill Plan Development Features 4-6 D. Scenario 3: Mixed-Use Strategy 4-7 Overview 4-7 Mixed Use Plan Features 4-7 Residential Development 4-7 Retail Component 4-8 Light Industrial/Flex Park Component 4-8 E.Next Steps 4-8 Foreword In January, 2001, the City of New Rochelle was confronted with an unusual situation when IKEA withdrew its application for a 308,000 square foot retail center in the Fifth Avenue/City Park area. That proposal would have resulted in a large scale redevelopment based on implementation of a proposed Urban Renewal Plan("the Plan"). The formal adoption of the Plan, with the IKEA project, was the key public action being analyzed in the IKEA Draft Environmental Impact Statement.Thus,in addition to the loss of the proposed IKEA project,the City also was left with an unfinished public planning process. Urban renewal authority is a long-standing mechanism which allows municipalities to participate in redevelopment projects,establish a need for public intervention,and provide the legal mechanisms by which land can be assembled through an urban renewal plan adopted for a specifically designated area. The proposed Fifth Avenue Urban Renewal Area as set forth in the IKEA proposal is the . defined area for the suspended Urban Renewal Plan and is this report's study area.For this area, a blight study was commissioned by the City to determine whether the area was indeed suitable for and in need of redevelopment. The City had also designated IKEA as the redevelopment entity that would take title of the assembled land(acquired privately by the developer and, as needed, publicly through the eminent domain process) and implement the adopted Urban Renewal Plan. With the abrupt IKEA withdrawal, the process is now missing a designated developer and an adopted urban renewal plan.Only the existing blight determination remains intact.As a result, anxious property owners and businesses are unsure of the near and long term changes that might occur within the Fifth Avenue/City Park area. In addition, IKEA has independently acquired many of the parcels in the proposed Urban Renewal Area,thereby adding uncertainty in terms of the value of land in the area (i.e., IKEA paid considerably more than market value in anticipation of the retail facility), or how this IKEA-owned land may be re-sold or integrated into a comprehensive urban renewal plan. Another major issue is the need for planning input for the area. The existing baseline and transitional changes since the blight determination in 1999 show signs of continued deterioration, with increased vacancies, unmaintained buildings and infrastructure, and an inappropriate mixing of land uses. At the same time,businesses in the area remain active and form an important light industrial district within the City. With these challenges,the City asked Allee,King,Rosen,&Fleming,Inc.along with the design firm of IQ Landscape Architects, PC to undertake a planning analysis of options to redirect planning processes for Fifth Avenue and the City Park area.The guiding principles for the study were to: • Pursue good urban planning and design; • Create economic development opportunities; DRAFT F-1 January 18, 2002 Fifth Avenue Planning Study • Address concerns of existing residents and provide a means of accommodating those wishing to remain in the area; • Maximize advantages and opportunities associated with the IKEA assemblage;and • Seek opportunities to retain businesses that want to stay or expand. The study is presented in four sections.Section 1 summarizes the background of how the area was initially developed,its evolution into a light industrial base,prior planning initiatives,and the IKEA-related planning process.Following the background summary,Section 2 presents an assessment of current conditions in order to look at opportunities and constraints in helping form a basis for planning recommendations in this area.Section 3 summarizes initial concept schemes that were created to be used as discussion starters with"focus group"interviews with city staff, businesses, property owners, and developers. The testing of these schemes is also summarized. Section 4 presents the key recommendations of the study, providing a range of opportunities for public and private investment. ❖ I January 18, 2002 F-2 DRAFT Section 1: Background STUDY AREA DEFINITION The Fifth Avenue/City Park area of New Rochelle is a light industrial district interspersed with some individual residential and commercial units that covers 16.4 acres.It is located in the east central area of New Rochelle,adjacent to the City's boundary with the Town of Mamaroneck (see Figure 1-1). The study area is the same as the Fifth Avenue Urban Renewal Area considered as part of the IKEA proposal,and is bounded by Fifth Avenue to the north,Valley Place to the east, the New England Thruway to the south, and Portman Road to the west(see Figure 1-2). This area, and the larger district surrounding it,has been the focus of a series of planning initiatives spanning a period of over 35 years. DEVELOPMENT HISTORY OVERVIEW Development of the area dates back to the early 20th century when private agricultural land was subdivided into rowhouse lots for future residential development.In 1910,a trolley service was extended into the area,linking it to downtown New Rochelle,Mount Vernon,Yonkers,and New York City.Houses continued to be constructed,often with vacant lots between them,through the mid-1950s.From the mid-1950s onward,light industrial uses were encouraged following a zoning change of the area to manufacturing.While industrial uses increased,no new residences were constructed. Today,the area is a mix of older residences that have existed for many years combined with the more recent industrial uses that followed. Although the neighborhood has been designated by the City as blighted, it remains active with light industrial businesses interspersed with a few remaining residential homes. Poor parking and traffic circulation in the area are obstacles to future commercial industrial expansion,since both Pleasant Street and Plain Avenues are one- way streets which become narrow and crowded when on-street parking is at capacity. Fifth Avenue remains the primary two-lane thoroughfare through the area. In addition to providing commercial access to the area, it also fronts both William Flower Park, a public park with athletic fields, and the adjacent New Rochelle Housing Authority apartment complex. Fifth Avenue is currently too narrow for on-street parking,and the through-traffic makes ingress and egress difficult for businesses on the street. ZONING BACKGROUND The zone in which the Fifth Avenue area is situated was changed in November,2001 as part of a revision to the entire City of New Rochelle Zoning Code.Prior to November and since 1995, the area had been zoned M-1 for manufacturing, and new residential development was prohibited in the area.Residential uses that currently exist in the zone were constructed prior to 1995. The new Light Industry(LI)zone supercedes the M-1 zone as part of the recent revision to the Zoning Code and encompasses the entire Fifth Avenue Study Area.The LI zone extends to the DRAFT 1-1 January 18, 2002 1.0 2 - - OF :- --.:.-]-K-..-:-.-.-:-.-.-:-:.-:.-:-:.. C4):::).: NOR,' ♦♦ TOWN :-- '___:� 11/(if... OF :::::-:-:K:EmEE::-:-:-: 4 ,....._ ... _...._ ._... _,__:__::::::::::_:_______,___:::::„. . :,__..::-EE":-Ei---i.-:.iiii:3:"7.--E.:E:E:r.,E_SE_ -:i3.:-...„::, •:_ --___-_-,--:.i•-:---"--_--_.-_:.-_:_.:-_,_:::::-...-_--_ _-__�-- Q TOWN ( / s�Y 07..... 1 „......",.. iiifir z __ • ri , 4,„,„,, iiii.,...,/, . r___/ / d> • -_-_-_-_-_-_-_- ___:::_„,_,_.:E.:10,411,_-- raw 0i*A lipz, :,,,,,„1„i„,,,,,11H, ,tik: ). of _ -'__-___= _ --------------- M'W N G C.4;41 ii::=2D, *4TOWN y / ® rrrt m �/` / • RYE • r . \• ,,i,-,,,-,:,-:1,--,-,,,,,,,,,,,-,-,-:--i--, Does ' . W&i �T E o, , s FERRY �� • L A 5 ' '€ ,'i - ;� TawN e �� , TOW :EE of © r o a -:-:--:--___-_____ �sTiNcs- ;,+ ENBU'• ® t F c _ -:-_-`:-_:-':- DSCSC-d / SCARSDFtLE Iv . lt i II/ , ifi'61... ' : /II\--;,,, ....\ IIRIPP411111104, 7,1•FY doleil'I''''' / A E JR", itN R1 E OF Y 0 j!. . . (..........), / \iiiiii,, '- -<.,,rf ARON'IvAi4/ •'''''°'"''''''t:''':2'--'''--'''''''' ' '.I 6.40s:rd 0 Or,:: NEW \ 401 __= iii-! __ C22 '___;_ ____ Q h } NEL.1..E 1 _____-_Ail: _____ _ _ -__1:1 _ _ ___ ...___:________=_: i ,,,,,, AIMARO NE'.•.:,t-- y Area * - _ a sc_, - _ _ - ,E,,K:s,K:s *144 AO 7i _ 0,•'-4,' =__ ___- _- _______________________-__-_--_-_ ___--_----_ _-___-__ ? LAR,.c .-0-,- :,..-.: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::,:_:_:_„_,,,,,,,,,::::::::„_:„„_,„.„,„ F 1 - 1 1 4": --::::::-.---=-:-::::::::::K:K=K::::::::::::::::::-:::-.:::-::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::_,,,,,::::::::::::::::::::::z:„_„_:::.:::::„,„ -.1 ,1 ,....... , r • E Y RIC Cw 1 4 t1A�` / •/ f..7_,...._____...i.s iii 0 1 MILE f 1 1 1 SCALE FIFTH AVENUE PLANNING STUDY Figure 1 -1 NEW ROCHELLE , NEW YORK Regional Location 1.02 /�,. \ .. �, .4 I: _v.., li . � : AV*ii''''.: Rr , 111 _ 4 i...,, ..„,...,.„ 1 ., -- :?'&:,?.4-..K...,...1.:41F„,....,;,:',.4.r"-",„'-..'.::„!,,,:',:;-.- -• ..----4.,k,;.,,, „. .'.• "\ %,\..?:-.we- ,..;,, ". '. . f - , 1 x ,fix Y � � +x • � e.11:'1�' 61w� � ��i: c � . ...... .,,... .. ,. ..„. ...,..!„..... . - r,' ' ' • .., 0} � � 4..., i � •,,,,..... ....,... r ' , . ...,...,„., ,.yP� ;,;....„, ii. #1.- . . . .... ... , .----.-- \ .:,.0, •,•- •• ••....„-- ... ..k .... 17, • : ,--.. ! -i-Iy. , ,,,...,-.,. . .. is‘... ....,,,,--- '--. ..-:.;-..-.: .,/ f . . \ iiiit,„i,....„ .. : , „. _ : ,. ...,, . t: :4„.: .,;,. .0,. . .. ... ,..,...-. ‘ ,/ .,...\.i.v.mrik-k-- .- ..,..,,...,.•,- J./ , . ..• a P� .res•`. /, • 1 .r•• .,. r \ i `N'(5 tiy. r. —4.-.. i 11 ter ."'. It— '"'I, 4.'" �ilk .. ', ) '' `• ar' a. '44 ipo , l; L,r4),,,, WTw Z 4 : ' f el ik 111 40 tom' r. e� 5 y %A ,c "..r� ,•rte _ . oto, y Ix 4 . -w `a ,,,, ,,, ,„• , . ,, ,, ,:,,,,,,.,.„ ,:.-J-:,,, A •-• ,.•,. ..,, :\• - ..:". 4 ,„,,,, , . . .. iN ., Study Area 0 100 200 FEET I I I I I SCALE FIFTH AVENUE PLANNING STUDY Figure 1-2 NEW ROCHELLE , NEW YORK Study Area Fifth Avenue Planning Study west and southwest of the Fifth Avenue Study Area(see Figure 1-3)and also considers current residential uses within the district to be non-conforming. A summary of the permitted uses by right, accessory uses, and special permit uses are listed in Tables 1-1, and area, bulk, and parking regulations are summarized in Tables 1-2 and 1-3. Table 1-1 Allowed Uses in the LI District Permitted Uses Uses Requiring a Special Permit • Business, professional,or governmental offices • Day care centers • Manufacture,fabrication,finishing or • Motor vehicle dealerships assembling of products, in fully enclosed • Outdoor storage of motor vehicles buildings • Greenhouses, nurseries, and arboretums • Medical laboratories • Cellular antennas and associated facilities • Animal hospitals • Public utility uses • Printing plants • Wholesale businesses, including storage, warehousing and distribution, in fully enclosed buildings • Enclosed storage of passenger vehicles • Health and recreational clubs • Radio stations and transmission towers • Houses of worship • Satellite earth station or dish antennas(as accessory use) • Stores and shops for sales(as accessory use to manufacturing on-site) Source:The 2000 Zoning Ordinance of the City of New Rochelle Table 1-2 Bulk Regulations for the LI District* Dimensional Criteria Maximum Allowance Floor Area Ratio 1.0 Building Stories 2 Building Height 40 feet Building Coverage 60%of lot Impervious Surfaces 90%of lot Note: * There are no yard set-back requirements in the LI district, except where any parcel is contiguous to a Residence District, in which case"the rear yard shall be a minimum of thirty (30)feet and abutting side yards shall be a minimum of twenty(20)feet." Source: The 2000 Zoning Ordinance of the City of New Rochelle January 18, 2002 1-2 DRAFT 1.02 ROS ?..._....1N) ------r--k) , / , '.1, _ JET f .,. 4. ryJr'_- •4'e + Wit,=_ � kt �`.. i ' th 1 .4 •i1. i •, ytt' h �P4 Fid 414 .:,........' ,..,... _?, A . k ������s . �% 1,,,,.. r - ` it , JJ p -.>f-- - 1 1• Sly Q' 4/01011,11111r ''' . 0 /. (11 --\ \ , cY <u 0 f j 1 ,,, . ,,, ,Ii. ----‘. '. ,r„, .,,, ....),„-- -0,,..: \ , , . ,Ifi iiiI.t r ij$ Ito 1 Li.tii .,. ' .' , i ., , f I r" ' II I ., ' I f '` M F `' r�.. / w -p fir+ , . Ad RMF ' --i P-{ . - ° 4 RF - Study Area 1 .5 : ' "` �. i `� + _ Zoning District Boundary ! ;"- - /, a r: 5 R1-7.5 One Family Residential .,...,;......'"-=+�=r, RMF-.5 Multi-Family Residential A~ RMF-.7 Multi-Family Residential 0 100 200 FEET 1 1 1 1 1 ROS Recreation Open Space SCALE LI Light Industrial FIFTH AVENUE PLANNING STUDY Figure 1-3 NEW ROCHELLE , NEW YORK Existing Zoning Section 1:Background Table 1-3 Parking Regulations for the LI District Provision Building Size Minimum Requirement Parking Spaces NA 1 per employee,plus 1 per commercial vehicle kept on the lot, but not less than 1 per 1,000 sq.ft.of Gross Floor Area. Loading Spaces 0 to 25,000 sq.ft. _ 1 25,001 to 40,000 sq.ft 2 40,001 to 60,000 sq.ft. 3 60,001 to 100,000 sq.ft. 4 Each additional 50,000 sq.ft. 5 or major portion thereof Source: The 2000 Zoning Ordinance of the City of New Rochelle PLANNING HISTORY Originally defined by the 1965 and 1977 Master Plans and the 1989 Industrial Development Study, the Fifth Avenue area has been shaped by long-term citywide goals for economic development and the need for more efficient utilization of land within the study area. Despite efforts to encourage infill development and strengthen commercial and industrial uses,the area has remained underutilized and has seen little improvement to the existing character or intensity of uses. New Rochelle Planning Studies(1965-1996) Significant land use and development studies were adopted by the City of New Rochelle in 1965, 1966, and 1977. Several parcels of industrial land were identified in the 1965 plan, totaling approximately 130 acres,that were to become a focus for increasing employment and strengthening the local tax base by encouraging light industrial development. The plan recognized development potential in some of these areas and the need to convert small plots of non-industrial land into active industrial uses. In this phase of planning, however, the City recognized the need to address slum and blight conditions throughout the City, including industrial areas,and began preparing a follow-up study to focus on those issues. A study was completed in 1966,which provided general guidelines for evaluating neighborhood conditions. The study looked at existing and perceived problem conditions in several New Rochelle neighborhoods,including the Fifth Avenue industrial area.The conclusion was that the new industrial area was too small,street patterns for larger-scale industrial use were inadequate, and the physical degradation of existing properties and structures was becoming prevalent.The study recommended the need to address blight conditions by encouraging development in accordance with established goals. The 1977 Master Plan identified economic viability and longevity as primary goals. Several urban areas,including the Fifth Avenue area,were identified as underutilized with an abundance of vacant parcels, the capacity to fulfill goals for economic expansion, diverse uses, and the potential for a strengthened tax base. DRAFT 1-3 January 18, 2002 Fifth Avenue Planning Study Industrial Development Study of the Fifth Avenue Area(1989) In an effort to identify potential sites to expand industrial development, the City of New Rochelle Department of Development conducted a field survey of the Fifth Avenue area to evaluate the character of the area and determine whether the physical deficiencies of the existing structures could be classified as slight, intermediate, or critical. Individual parcels within the study area were reviewed and assigned to these categories. The study concluded that approximately 50 percent of the parcels were noted to have critical deficiencies,while an additional 14 percent had intermediate deficiencies.Approximately 35 percent of the existing structures were considered to be substantial and economically viable. Because the properties with critical and intermediate deficiencies were not all contiguous,it was determined that a relocation of the viable businesses and residences would need to be undertaken to assemble a site for improved industrial development. The study therefore determined the need to establish property acquisition costs,prepare findings to declare the area an Urban Renewal Area,and prepare an environmental assessment to amend the zoning and adopt an Urban Renewal Plan to encourage the redevelopment of the area. Comprehensive Plan(1996) Adopted by City Council in 1996, the current Comprehensive Plan renewed the City's commitment to industrial development. Following nine months of community involvement through a visioning process,the Plan offers physical land use plans for six specific areas within the City. Among these is the Fifth Avenue area, which has seen little improvement from its current condition over the past 35 years. The Plan identifies the properties within the Fifth Avenue area that have redevelopment potential due to blighting factors.It recommends that underutilized individual parcels might best be improved by combining parcels into larger redevelopment sites, but also suggests that existing uses be retained and capitalized upon if expansion occurs. The Plan discusses the Fifth Avenue area's development potential and challenges,and cites the narrow streets, limited on-site parking, and truck congestion as conditions that inhibit redevelopment in the area.The Plan recognizes the value of the area,however,and suggests that its economic development potential might be optimized by responding to several recommendations of the plan. The Plan recommends that unbuilt streets be combined with underutilized plots to create larger development sites where possible.In addition,to become a viable economic resource,the area should be used for light industry,commercial uses,or public service uses.In order to promote these uses,development parcels and assembled sites should have adequate access and on-site parking.Although the Plan does not make a zoning recommendation,it is clear in the Plan that the City believes that the area can be restored to health with an appropriate mix of uses and public and private investment. This Plan remains the guiding document which has overseen several other neighborhood-specific studies for the Fifth Avenue area in recent years. Blight Study and Urban Renewal Plan Two studies, commissioned by the City of New Rochelle, were conducted following the adoption of the 1996 Comprehensive Plan,addressing the Fifth Avenue area.The first,the Fifth Avenue Urban Renewal Blight Study,was adopted by the City in July 1999.It concluded that the January 18, 2002 1-4 DRAFT Section 1:Background dilapidation,incompatible mix of nonconforming residential,automotive,and storage uses with vacant lots,and general functional obsolescence of the Fifth Avenue Area created a negative and blighting effect on the neighborhood.The Blight Study went on to conclude that the 16.4-acre area is appropriate for urban renewal and would qualify as an Urban Renewal Area as defined in Section 502(9)of the New York General Municipal Law.This statute authorizes the City of New Rochelle to undertake urban renewal projects and providing the City with the powers necessary to carry out or effectuate these projects.The Law,referred to as the Urban Renewal Law,calls for municipalities to establish,conduct,and plan programs for the redevelopment of areas that are"substandard or insanitary,"meaning an area that is a slum,blighted,deteriorated, or an area that has a blighting influence on a surrounding area. The adoption of the Study formed the basis and rationale for the City to proceed with the development of an Urban Renewal Area and Plan. The second study,the Fifth Avenue Urban Renewal Plan,was completed in draft form in April 2000. The study proposed the development of a large-scale retail zone that would combine disparate lots and establish a unified and functional commercial area in place of the existing mixed,non-conforming,conflicting and underutilized uses in the area.Zoning controls for the area were proposed as a zoning text amendment to the City's Zoning Ordinance to achieve several redevelopment objectives.Unsightly,unsafe,and substandard vacated and boarded-up buildings would be eliminated from the area.Incompatible land uses, obsolete structures,and environmental deficiencies would be removed as well.In addition,properties would be acquired and reconfigured,and physical improvements to public utilities,streets,parking and other public facilities would take place to facilitate new retail development in the area.In sum,a unified and functional business district would be created that would be conducive to job creation,provide a permanent retail base,and expand of the City's tax base.The proposed zoning controls have not yet been adopted by the City. Fifth Avenue Retail Center Project-IKEA(2000) In February of 1999,during the preparation of the Urban Renewal Plan,the IKEA Corporation, one of the world's largest furniture retailers, began the process of proposing to redevelop the area.Following the designation of the area as"blighted"pursuant to the 1999 Blight Study,the site became eligible for designation as an urban renewal area,allowing the City to move ahead to assemble parcels of land into a development site and proceeding with the creation of a new retail center. IKEA proposed a plan to create a two-story 308,000 square foot store with approximately 1,572 off-street parking spaces on 14.9 acres of land in the Fifth Avenue area. Construction of the facility would have required the removal of all existing structures—approximately 33 commercial or mixed use structures, two churches, and 31 residential buildings—and the acquisition of all parcels in the area. Although the City intended to treat the site as an urban renewal area and,if necessary,use eminent domain to acquire the land to facilitate the project, IKEA began acquiring individual properties at its own expense and risk in April 2000 without having secured any City approvals. IKEA intended to relocate existing residents and business owners to another home or business space in or near the New Rochelle area.The project,when completed,would have added considerably to the tax-base of the City both through increases in property tax assessment and the significant increase in sales tax revenue. DRAFT 1-5 January 18, 2002 Fifth Avenue Planning Study IKEA Draft Environmental Impact Statement(2000) As required by the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA), a Draft Environmental Impact Statement(DEIS)was prepared in September 2000 to assess the potential impacts of the pending Urban Renewal designation and of the proposed IKEA store. The project was met with strong opposition from the surrounding communities.The key issues raised included the potential traffic generated by the retail project as well as its effect on the overall community character.From a land use planning perspective,the inconsistency of a large- scale retail building in an area of smaller scale commercial and residential character was also a key issue. IKEA withdrew its application for the development on January 31,2001,responding to public criticism and stating that it was not feasible to proceed with the project.Adequately addressing concerns for traffic generation while maintaining the profitability of the proposed store was the primary reason cited by the developer for terminating the project.However,by this point,IKEA had already acquired many of the properties in the area. Subsequent Fifth Avenue Area Studies The public nature of the IKEA process led to other studies about the area, including those prepared in response to the DEIS and,most notably,the May 2001 Plan for Revitalizing the City Park Neighborhood prepared by the Columbia Graduate School of Architecture,Planning,and Preservation.That study concluded that from both a long-and short-term strategy,retaining the light industrial base in the Fifth Avenue area would produce better employment, wage, and property tax benefits than a large-scale retail establishment. Further, added industrial development would increase the workforce and contribute to increases in local spending in the City of New Rochelle. The study recommended improvements to local infrastructure,citing the safety of pedestrians and automobile traffic as a concern to be addressed. The study also recommended that the aesthetic appeal of the area should be increased to improve the image of the City of New Rochelle at this busy northern gateway. Circulation patterns and road conditions have been identified as inadequate if future new industrial development is to be encouraged. Fifth Avenue Area Rezoning As summarized above, the most recent action affecting the development of the Fifth Avenue area was the November, 2001 revision to the City of New Rochelle's Zoning Code. The new Light Industry(LI)zone removes the front setback requirements for lots greater than 100 feet in depth,but ensures rear and side yard setbacks for LI properties abutting residential zones(see Table 1-2).The new district also adds greater flexibility to the parking regulations by requiring one space per employee plus one stall per commercial vehicle(not to total less than one space per 1,000 square feet of the gross floor area of the building's lot coverage; see Table 103).The M-1 zone was previously one stall per 600 square feet of gross floor area.Additionally,the new zone refines the list of permitted uses to exclude schools, as well as more intensive industrial uses such as open or unenclosed manufacturing uses. In sum, the new zone, though city-wide, is designed to be responsive to the needs of existing business owners and continues to improve the compatibility of land uses in the Fifth Avenue area. January 18, 2002 1-6 DRAFT Section 2: Opportunities and Constraints Analysis A. INTRODUCTION Decades of change and transition have yielded a Fifth Avenue area where the urban form is a disjointed combination of active but often incompatible uses occupying underutilized or vacant buildings and parcels.This study examines conditions that have been observed in the area since the 1965 planning study described in Section 1. The deteriorated urban fabric is not based on any inherent weakness of the study area's location. In fact,the location is ripe with opportunities.The study area encompasses key gateways to and from the City, an outstanding open space resource, strong residential neighborhoods,and it is close to active commercial and retail centers on Palmer Avenue, in New Rochelle, and into Larchmont. These existing development challenges along with the location-based opportunities described above sets the development tone for the study's concepts and recommendations. This section summarizes the opportunities and constraints analysis. B. PLANNING ANALYSIS The key planning observations are summarized on Figure 2-1 and described below.As noted in Figure 2-1,the planning context for the specific study area extends beyond the edges of the area as defined for this study(based on the boundaries of the proposed Fifth Avenue Urban Renewal District). From a planning analysis perspective, the broader boundaries are roughly Fifth Avenue to the north, the City boundary to the east, Potter Avenue to the west, and the New England Thruway to the south. FIFTH AVENUE In the study area,the most notable features of Fifth Avenue are the use contradictions along its frontage to the north. City Park is a great urban open space with attractive buildings, recreational facilities,and open woodlands.In contrast,Fifth Avenue's southern side provides a poorly defined edge for the park with many aesthetic and design shortcomings including: • non existent or unmaintained sidewalks; • older street trees in need of maintenance or replacement on the park edge and no street trees on the study area frontage; • inappropriate parking lanes, little or no curbing, and cluttered street signage; • numerous and ill-defined curb-cuts and driveways; • vacant buildings and lots; and • many active industrial/storage uses in unattractive buildings,behind fencing,and on open lots. DRAFT 2-1 January 18, 2002 1.02 / 8 \ FX. S I PE an L ` - sI/ . -___7, 134,0°'"I‘W \ • ISN U . 00 r o>a* s -r -- -- � f3VIc- NCS - / W.NI ' 1� SID✓t4?I� . b, 70-iadii 0'0 OPP S 1,64-e.., pliVi 1 ;.0el..{ � . ....A4.s. 71-. • F,�HAYENUE t,----'7--L. Fj 1 ., :,•.'. .' ..• ... .. '. s ••t_i2.1... . -1..::.1.:,: :::--::-. i . :j24-L.: ill',,'14,''',.:.i.,i' ..-0.0 yet"$' 0,04 TISr L ‘. '''t I,1 rm. , L'Ilzir.111111111111, „ ---71., , f // .� --°':1 mil j �! F . //f fl � ,��, /'1` .' , ` 1 1' .'Virin ibis- --r-! it 46(")11111.0..400 X 1, " a ma e iivloyAVOLVATOI -7" , :.., , li \ \ t-i-- _-ii t ,A 4 -----? ini Ari - ih 71"�' NE C ir '1- 1 -) is ow. ,.- • --, - - -., . -- :-., - lii-,. .---- Ills -- I NH ORCT • S'TEFb+ �--_- PIERCE STREET ` 41-• 1 r —. -- V .4 1/I N 66E3E -' i ITT c4M4 = SVS STM PA •► .. (TA4Mo - '' PAtaGELS Illw 8 ! i M -Rqag i 1/1rfM` v _ ii it .,� • G I L ,�GG�S �I S7UDr' ` ROAD s;. r� S 4 AA MI6 / T . 1NTTt"in . ,.....PLACE Awn d<S iic t/ (r-I 1 r Ar,/ F.4.W OM Et214 IP NEWNEW„4,3,),„„.„NIP►lAY l_9S FIFTH AVENUE PLANNING STUDY Figure 2-1Existin Conditions Anal sis NEW ROCHELLE , NEW YORK g Y Fifth Avenue Planning Study CRITICAL GATEWAYS AND INTERSECTIONS The deteriorated character of Fifth Avenue's frontage along the park extends to the roadway which is bracketed by two important gateways.To the east,the intersection of Fifth Avenue and Valley Place is a critical gateway entrance into the City from Larchmont, to the Town of Mamaroneck, and from I-95 eastbound.The corner lot of Fifth Avenue and Valley Place is a critical visual focal point for this gateway. It currently has no buildings with a rough edge of vegetation and fencing. While the initial view entering the City is the relatively"green" City Park(and the entrance to the New Rochelle Housing Authority),the general deterioration of the Fifth Avenue frontage (including the road and sidewalk itself) become the dominant visual theme of the street. The western gateway is located at the intersection of Potter and Fifth Avenues.This important intersection links the study area to the rest of New Rochelle,including Palmer Avenue and the downtown via Potter Avenue,Larchmont to the north via Fifth Avenue,Rochelle Park and the City Hall area to the south,and residential neighborhoods to the west.The intersection is well- traveled by both regional and local traffic.Here,the turn east along Fifth Avenue is greeted by billboards and underutilized retail frontages,rather than the impression of the impressive Flower Park. STUDY AREA INTERIOR There are many planning challenges presented in walking the interior streets of the Fifth Avenue Study Area.Most notably,the gradual transition from platted small lot residential rowhouses to light industrial uses has created many inconsistent land uses and difficult operational difficulties for businesses in the area.The streets and lots are narrow truck maneuvering is difficult,there is little off-street parking, and on-street parking creates additional hazards and obstacles for commercial activities. The parallel one-way road system (where Plain Avenue and Pleasant Street are both one-way in the same direction)also causes internal circulation conflicts. The remaining residences in the study area pose a problem for future planning.While mixed-use approaches to urban redevelopment are important concepts, inappropriate locations can be detrimental to planning and development efforts. In the study area, there are houses next to active open yards with industrial and construction activities,and many of the remaining houses back-up against the New England Thruway on truncated lots with very little distance or buffering. The remaining houses are randomly dispersed and do not form a coherent urban context. Within this context, flexibility in roadway design could be used to create more efficient development opportunities.With a redevelopment scenario that starts with the assumption that large scale retail will not be part of the future of the study area,the City does not stand to accrue significant fiscal benefits from sales tax revenues.As a result, its ability to invest and recoup considerable public capital into the area is limited. Alternatively,the City should consider the roadways themselves as key potential public contributions to the redevelopment plan. With industrial land values ranging from$500,000 to$800,000 an acre,the approximately two acres of study area right-of-way represents approximately$1 million in City land assets. VALLEY PLACE Valley Place serves as the municipal boundary between New Rochelle and the Town of Mamaroneck. The Mamaroneck frontage of Valley Road is in a deteriorated condition with January 18, 2002 2-2 DRAFT Section 2: Opportunities and Constraints Analysis vacant or underutilized buildings and many lots used for open vehicle storage. It would be difficult to create a dramatically different development template for the New Rochelle side of the road while the Mamaroneck side remains in its current state. Furthermore, IKEA has acquired nearly all the land along the Mamaroneck frontage. As a result,integrating the planning opportunities along both frontages is a good opportunity for Mamaroneck and New Rochelle to work together to leverage the most land area available for development. Of particular interest is the large area of land held by the New York State Thruway Authority(NYSTA)behind the Valley Place lots.In general,the entire Mamaroneck area adjacent to the study area is very underutilized,including the Valley Place lots,the recently closed Librett Hardware, and the NYSTA land. Since New Rochelle and Mamaroneck have each been trying to plan for relocation and enhancement of their DPW facilities,one immediate thought is to have the three public entities create a common shared Public Works facility. POTTER AVENUE Based on the planning constraints identified in the study area and along Fifth Avenue, it is important to consider the larger LI district that extends through the study area. The Potter Avenue frontage has a similar mix of small- to mid-size light industrial and commercial businesses. Road frontages, access points, and parking issues present similar planning challenges,and the topographic changes along Potter make circulation even more difficult. The circulation constraints observed in the study area are also present throughout the LI district. Portman Road is a mapped street providing access from Potter Avenue just over the Thruway bridge and extends (at least on paper)to the interior of the study area, eventually connecting with Plain Avenue and back to Fifth Avenue. However,the City-owned right-of-way is not an open roadway, and off Potter Avenue the road is occupied by a contractor's yard and by a commercial nursery.The future use of Potter Avenue should be integrated into an overall master plan to improve the access to Fifth Avenue and the through circulation. As a result of Portman Road not being fully built, Shorot Street becomes the key gateway into the light industrial area, linking up with Portman Road in the area of the City-owned ASPCA building and Absolute Coatings,one of the largest buildings in the study area. Shorot Street is very difficult for truck maneuvering,hampered by tight turning radii,heavy auto movements, and on-street parking. As noted on Figure 2-1, opportunities to create a more efficient and landmark-status gateway to the industrial area should be considered. Ultimately,the ability to create linkages from Potter Avenue through to Valley Place should be focused upon. This could create new development opportunities and make the most of City- owned real estate in the area. C. MARKET ANALYSIS Evaluating market-based opportunities and constraints is highly dependent on how development can be attracted or sustained given prevailing land values and the"cost of entry"to prospective developers and businesses. City fiscal considerations are also sensitive to changes in land and improved property values, although for New Rochelle a key fiscal element is the ability to generate sales tax revenues.For the Fifth Avenue study area,the analysis of market demand and land values is further complicated by the land assemblage undertaken by IKEA prior to the withdrawal of their application,where the retailer paid considerably more for property than the prevailing market could normally support. DRAFT 2-3 January 18,2002 Fifth Avenue Planning Study Information and data were obtained and analyzed from a variety sources,including acquisition information provided by IKEA, development analyses prepared by IKEA's consultant PEG/Park,property tax assessment records provided by the City,and market value information provided by three commercial brokers active in the region(TriCom Commercial Real Estate, Rackow Commercial Realty,and Cushman Wakefield). MARKET DEMAND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL/FLEX SPACE As noted above,despite some of the constraints found in the Fifth Avenue City Park area,there are many businesses that have figured out how to take advantage of the location and adapt to local conditions. The commercial brokers all concurred that the success of these businesses is largely based on the very tight market for light industrial or"flex space"properties. Flex space refers to light industrial buildings that can serve multiple or mixed purposes such as office space,research and development, as well as more traditional light industrial and manufacturing space.There is a high demand for this type of space in the southern Westchester and Fairfield County region,but little available land,particularly in close proximity to the critical I-95 corridor.While the Fifth Avenue area is constrained by difficult lot configurations, deteriorated infrastructure, and transportation and circulation constraints, it has been noted that it has favorable zoning with flexible standards for use,building, and lot configurations. RETAIL IKEA's interest in the site,and the general desire of retailers to locate in the dense and highly traveled corridors of southern Westchester, all suggest that retail demand remains strong and that the site has very good retail potential. However, from the perspective of seeking large-scale regional retail development,the area is severely constrained by the high costs of entry:primarily the ability to control and assemble the land area necessary, the political difficulty in obtaining the requisite approvals, and the high burden of transportation improvements that would be necessary to successfully obtain project approvals. While the area currently has only a minor amount of small community-based retail,there would appear to be opportunities to enhance small retail along Fifth Avenue.The Potter Avenue and Fifth Avenue corridors carry a relatively concentrated flow of local traffic to and from the highways,downtown,and residential neighborhoods in New Rochelle and Larchmont.The park also generates local origin and destination traffic.However,local officials have noted that the current configuration of local retail has never performed particularly well. RESIDENTIAL The Fifth Avenue study area is surrounded by well-established residential neighborhoods in New Rochelle and Larchmont.The study area itself is more constrained as a residential market given that the existing residences are interspersed among industrial properties and new residences are not allow under the current zoning. Residential demand may be somewhat diminished by the presence of the New Rochelle Housing Authority apartments located across Fifth Avenue at the northern end of the study area(across from Valley Place).However,given the study area's prominent frontage across from the Park and the adjacency to Larchmont and January 18, 2002 2-4 DRAFT Section 2:Opportunities and Constraints Analysis other strong residential neighborhoods, it is assumed that under the right circumstances, a residential market could be established in the area. SUMMARY Based on current conditions and trends,the Fifth Avenue/City Park area remains an appropriate light industrial area and it is unrealistic to anticipate a transition of the area to higher values that may be associated with retail or upscale residential developments.Preserving the light industrial base is an important component of maintaining a diverse local and regional economy by retaining important workforce and small business opportunities. As noted in subsequent sections of this study, there are opportunities to seek a mix of uses within the study area,including limited amounts of residential and retail development that focus on the Fifth Avenue frontage. PROPERTY VALUES While there is high demand for industrial and flex space properties, that does not necessarily translate into increasing value for the underlying real estate.Rent rates tend to be more static even as demand increases and there is a relatively low upper limit to what light industrial users can and will pay.This results in a relatively low threshold at which land and building values can be supported by real estate development. Unimproved land was noted by the commercial brokers to have a value starting at about $500,000 per acre, possibly rising closer to $1 million per acre for higher value flex space parcels(i.e.,suitable for combinations of light industrial,some office,and possibly research and development space).These represent land values of about$11 to $20 per square foot. Information from the commercial brokers showed that once built,light industrial and flex space properties have rents in the region ranging from$10 to $20 per square foot.Using a triple net estimate of$8 per square foot(the actual income to the owner less taxes, utilities, etc.), land values can be estimated capitalizing what a property owner would be willing to pay based on the triple net rental income.Using a 10 percent capitalization rate,this amounts to about$40 per square foot or$1.7 million per acre for improved properties. These estimates would vary based on the condition of the real estate. TriCom notes that the deficient parcelization of land in the Fifth Avenue study area suppresses a land value from the typical value noted above.They estimate the industrial land value in the City Park area at about $25 per square feet. On the other hand, based on the corridor location of the area, they are confident that less constrained parcels (i.e., if lots were larger with sufficient parking and loading spaces)that the total values could rise even higher than the$40 per square feet noted above. Thus, a successful repositioning of the study area as an improved light industrial district(i.e., better parcel size or improved circulation and parking)may inherently increase the value of the land in the marketplace. IKEA EFFECTS ON PROPERTY VALUES This general basis of values associated with a light-industrial district has been disrupted by the IKEA purchases. The retailer paid far higher prices for land than would normally be paid for light-industrial properties. Based on the assessment information summarized in Figure 2-2, DRAFT 2-5 January 18, 2002 1.02 Y're4- \ \\/,%'7 7 Block 898 IKEA Property �, Area 305576sq. ft. 191250 Acres 7.02 4.39 Land Value A.V. $374,050 $266,900 Block 890 IKEA Property Total Value A.V. $741,600 $551,450 Block 903 IKEA Property Area 153048sq. ft. 5385 Market Land Value $6,255,017 $4,463,210 //' Area 179954sq. ft. 82161 Acres 3.51 0.12 Market Total Value $12,401,338 $9,221,572 �� Acres 7.02 1.89 Land Value A.V. $172,650 $6,100 ,� / Land Value A.V. $241,200 $115,250 Total Value A.V. $404,500 $14,000 e '_ • Market Land Value $2,887,124 $102,007 , %, Total Value A.V. $609,150 $306,400 p� Market Land Value $4.033,444 $1,927,258 \ Market Total Value $6,764,214 $234114 Y FBF "�' Market Total Value $10,186,454 $5,123,746 1111 ♦♦IOW% s ‘/' 4/t/ l'' %. // ' 0 .-7/j / Vi / \„ - . tf�, . .1t6 A \ Oji \-' \ ' • v A iii / _ 0 • 10 - { �% s Block 892 ilk ;;� .� % // Area 132469sq. ft. / ��� •�' i %� Acres 3.04 i %II �i '/��/ Land Value A.V. $142,000 / %/ // %/ Block 905 IKEA Property / i � � � Area 48659sq. ft. 31731 �, Total Value A.V. $323,500 '" Acres 1.12 0.73 \r Market Land Value $2,374,582 Land Value A.V. $53,100 $44,200 Market Total Value $5,409,699 ' j Q ." Total Value A.V. $170,800 $136,000 7 ' - f Market Land Value $887,960 $739130 Lu Market Total Value $2,856,187 $2274247 \ \ j , / ' , ... ... . 1I _ 00 \ Block 894 IKEA Property City Propery #1191\ 4# Area 237897s . ft. 5507060959 qMI Q ► Acres 5.46 1.26 1.40 Land Value A.V. $186,600 $46,750 $33,250 Total Value A.V. $378,500 $92,850 $54,650 � Block 874 g'C• Block 875 Market Land Value $3,120,401 $781,773 $556,020 , Area 42104sq. ft. ikG� Area 8854s . ft. Market Total Value $6,329,431 $1,552,675 $913,880 Acres 0.96 AilRO q/-`�. 44 Acres 0.20 -, 111111M1111111111111111111111111111111.11, _Land Value A.V. $35,650 -- O�lM Land Value A.V. $9,500I. Total Value A.V. $53,850 P ,--N-11111111 Market Land Value $596,154 . Total Value A.V. $13,400 Market Total Value $900,502 -. Market Land Value $158,863 �� Market Total Value $224,080 `,, � \ • � ,:. �QO _ City Land D % �� ^ M IKEA Owned Property c. !n N �P� �- n FIFTH AVENUE PLANNING STUDY Figure 2-2 NEW ROCHELLE , NEW YORK IKEA Land Holdings Fifth Avenue Planning Study IKEA paid about$55 per square foot for the properties (which, although many of the parcels had improvements, is roughly equal to the calculated land value since the existing buildings would have been removed for the proposed IKEA development). This is some 3.5 times the reasonable land value of$20 per square feet for light industrial properties. The implications of how this might affect land values and study area planning are twofold.The first potential implication is that these higher prices will create a new threshold for property acquisition of other parcels in the study area or surrounding areas. This is unlikely since the intent of the IKEA purchase was very focused and only supported based on the eventual development of their retail store. The second and more important consideration is how the IKEA owned parcels will be brought back into the market place,assuming that the land is primarily geared towards a light industrial base.While the assemblage of a considerable amount of land is an opportunity worth pursuing, it clearly can not be resold at the prices paid by IKEA. This would prohibit any reasonable mixed-use redevelopment scenario.The mechanism by which the land is returned to the market place at realistic value is an important planning constraint for reinvestment in the area.It will be an important role for the City,or its Industrial Development Authority,to work with IKEA to write-down the value of that real estate. FISCAL CONSIDERATIONS While the City's participation and investment may be necessary to realign the cost of IKEA- owned parcels, there is clearly a limited opportunity for fiscal return to the City.This is a key constraint for the City in terms of participating in a reinvestment strategy for the Fifth Avenue/City Park area. Unlike a major new regional retail development, the City would not expect any significant new tax revenues from the orderly redevelopment of the Fifth Avenue study area as a light industrial district. This results from the fact that there would be little in terms of new sales tax revenues since the redevelopment would not be retail oriented.Sales taxes have become a critical source of revenue for the City since it has limitations and caps on property tax revenue. Furthermore,in analyzing the assessment information summarized in Figure 2-2,it is also clear that there is not much room for change in property assessments based on a light-industrial reinvestment strategy. The current property assessment for most of the land in the district is consistent with the market values described above,ranging from$13 to$22 per square feet for land value and a total market value of$26 to$56 per square feet,similar to the typical scenario of$40 per square feet. Thus, the land is essentially valued at its current and future market potential,with little room to reassess future investment into higher property tax assessments.By incorporating a mix of retail and residential uses into the overall redevelopment strategy, assessable property values and some new sales tax revenues could increase over base conditions. • January 18, 2002 2-6 DRAFT Section 3: Concept Development and Testing A. INTRODUCTION This section of the report summarizes the investigation of development concepts and describes how these ideas were discussed with public officials,City staff,residents,potential developers, and existing business owners. The following concepts were discussed,and then further refined into development schemes: • a minimum action or infill concept, creating the largest development lots possible to enhance the flexibility of light industrial redevelopment opportunities; • a mixed-use concept that introduces new residential development; • a flexible park-based approach to new commercial development along Fifth Avenue;and • the possibility of relocating the City Department of Public Works yard from its current location on Route 1 to the Fifth Avenue area. No large-scale retail concepts were considered,given that the IKEA proposal already provided an extensive basis for understanding the implications of such a plan. B. CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT SCHEMES The planning elements presented above were developed in a series of four schemes. These schemes do not represent a fixed plan and elements could conceivably be mixed or realigned in many ways. As noted below, the various concepts were reviewed with stakeholders and interested development professionals, and their reaction and input influenced how these concepts were summarized into the final recommendations set forth in Section 4. INFILL CONCEPTS Figure 3-1 presents a development concept that attempts to incorporate existing elements of the study area through a plan that creates a more intense light industrial use area by recommending infill development.A cursory evaluation of the existing structures formed the basis for deciding which structures might remain as part of the scheme,and which might be removed.(Buildings which could be retained are illustrated with cross-hatch) The existing structures could be expanded to create larger commercial or light industrial parcels (i.e., lot consolidation). The scheme proposes a transition away from continued residential uses in the study area. The scheme assumes that over time,the area would function better with fewer but larger parcels for light industrial users.Figure 3-1 also proposes the relocation of Pleasant Street to the outer edge of the study area bordering the Thruway.In this way,additional lot areas can be added to existing or new buildings along Pleasant Street. This would provide the ability to add more parking, loading,and internal circulation space for future users. DRAFT 3-1 January 18,2002 1.02 fr .• w. AL:- ,,.,. ,, • „Ar ,; ,,,,,i .,;1 -.4, #;,- •...:of , .i ; — • i - tk *- 1---tI I , ; I L,. , J I" . ..1/4.• t- ii;:. . .. ' ar.ap ,,,- I_____34.4ffitt_ ......, r ., :. - . ' r 1P :i' �' , �,�•` . •'r r. .10' a r . 1 ilpsci 4. 09' . . ______ _,. . / ii .3 / i 4 1, • 1 a I, i y i /Wo e ,: FIFTH AVENUE PLANNING STUDY Figure 3-1 NEW ROCHELLE , NEW YORK Infill Scheme Fifth Avenue Planning Study FIFTH AVENUE FRONTAGE/CITY YARD CONCEPTS Figure 3-2 depicts a scheme that incorporates two redevelopment concepts for the study area. The first is the promotion of commercial redevelopment along Fifth Avenue that would de- intensify the current industrial uses along the side of the street opposite the City Park public recreation space.The second is the beautification and improvement of the aesthetic along Fifth Avenue to create a more prominent gateway into the City.The image and character are already seen on Fifth Avenue just to the south of Potter Avenue where two light industrial commercial buildings provide a "parkway-like" character along the Fifth Avenue frontage. Key design elements would be small two-story buildings with front door entrances on Fifth Avenue without curb cuts,driveways, or parking lots. These uses would be located behind the buildings, with access from Plain Avenue. Between Plain Avenue and the Thruway the scheme provides a 6-acre City Department of Public Works(DPW)yard that could be situated within the study area,occupying approximately half the available land. The location has been discussed in prior planning studies, and as demonstrated by the scheme, the study area could clearly accommodate the DPW facility. However, with land costs already high and with the need to relocate many businesses for the DPW facility,the financial implications make the concept impracticable. LARGE PARCEL FLEX/LIGHT INDUSTRIAL CONCEPT As shown in Figure 3-3,the study area could potentially be redeveloped into a series of three 5- to 6-acre development parcels for light industrial or flex space uses.This concept was initially considered to address a potential market-driven response of driving the highest demand and highest value-added redevelopment toward parcels that were as large as possible with a minimum of 5 acres.The concept was similar to the light industrial alternative presented in the IKEA Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), but with an emphasis on preserving a greenway aspect to the Fifth Avenue frontage.,Only one curb cut along Fifth Avenue into one of the development parcels would be provided for access to a common parking lot that would be shared between businesses. The challenge of the concept is that the large lots would encourage monolithic development with a handful of large buildings and large parking areas.The visual result would be similar in character to the previous IKEA proposals,but without the retail sales tax and new job benefits associated with that proposal.Local realtors suggest that for such a dramatic change(i.e.,total land assemblage,clearing,and a consolidation of development parcels),a proportional increase in land value or economic return to the future property owner would not be possible. For the previously mentioned reasons, this scheme would be problematic to implement and would not likely achieve overriding planning goals for the City or community. MIXED-USE The most ambitious scheme,in terms of redevelopment potential and changing the character of the mostly light-industrial study area,is the mixed-use scheme presented in Figure 3-4.The key suggestions of the plan are to line the Fifth Avenue frontage with attached town-homes built on "new urbanist"concepts including roadway frontages with no driveways,traditional front doors, and with an alley system providing auto access and accessory garage buildings.This traditional city housing form already exists elsewhere in New Rochelle, including a notable block along Stephenson Avenue south of the Fifth Avenue study area closer to Route 1. January 18, 2002 3-2 DRAFT 1.02 —) ---4---e- - V. - it V ,7,,, - rrtt Sy s %I4 ''. ' " .1 ' 44-40—# # --0 4//i4-44/P--- '41 ---0 , •;114 'so�-4::''')-:7/'.?Ak17-'''Ir' -.:"1 ' te'*7--''' ' it 4I • Illji Grp i .1 9 s -� y '.k. al 1 1 I s&v.i,c-izte... ' '' 1 is-fror*atle- .•- ki kci. ler 440 ' tails4f41114-'1V°' IrftThi ,.. "/ .dr t: A L ../,____., L, Thtlitt. af. "---/ j(-7// L__ ..______.. Figure 3-2 FIFTH AVENUE PLANNING STUDY Fifth Avenue Commercial Frontage/ City Yard Scheme NEW ROCHELLE , NEW YORK v I - 1.02 —J .1. '•;41e:„...•'A..."',,,e.,1 - - ,r4,iiiilk . r ` $eee ,, I • i " ' 1S•o t . i 14 I • :4„1'-711111 . 'ilidli f , 1,'11/ ://.- i iftgO 0 a., .e.s. / ' • – J / .-, 44 / , !" ., d .1 , : ' y i $ t - •• • 1 I � ice • le e_iirif04:•;,41" f. �� 4,-, .. /' rtIocate FIFTH AVENUE PLANNING STUDY Figure 3-1 NEW ROCHELLE , NEW YORK Infill Scheme 1.02 eine-if04,-- 40 r if.4aworkskoti, , .. 7/ infflitate, kitAgt Alite.,1:, , r ..00 • ø,p, • , ,. ..k. : ii a.s . , 0.. ,... . ": ',,, -^ ...-1, -•;1_ .. :::, , ,:-. • I.. v,:- .4,..., - ....pi. oe.,.. . ....., / 4 ;.". • ,...„...7r, •,17, -7,7. : ir, .7 r '',• , 7-.• 7 ,71.1".1 •""i-.7 '7; :: ''''. ;re r ' -::. :,' i ; :./ " ' ' 1. ...) . 4 4 Z „14. d /' 1 lr,/4/ / . / ig''..% it./ ,/ Z A' , „ , 4 4- ,-: •_ ;f7: / r-, , 711 1 I I 14/.11 r • '1,1ft 4 X r i it_ prirry ,TriF.:11p, ,/,/ • :i ....; , _ ____ _ .;.... ••••' ••• • -•• 0' ... . or. • - , . ,••••• :6111111111 —1:1_:••.t.•"..1 4,..'—.....„- •••••••• _9111.0_ ., .10: _ .. .., .....--,Ap,----- ,-----. • ..m.sa 44,,=tir 4,Fri ainla 4.7 .0/1.., ...,, ,.... '''erje:14:;r4'i4 - ,_,,... , 11 .--iit :110 ,.#k.le,'../.',:e.tio: i --Th 40., r ,•I Y i: ,, 7,,:;44,1! ;7--_ , --_„4 ,N. : / . •, ., r.--------------...._____ . ...: • •-• • 'Aim, - — •;-•...ir --, Ink. • / ffr 77ft ''ilremt' / i' -gm,. - - -. -- •• * • - - . • .;••• • - .- . i11 _...;* 2 i ,., - 1 .4-•' ,.,II 111..,;al ...i ,App - • - 4_ ....e xhiltrio ..,,, . 1M /6, .-. < / ,,,,,,07 • „Mr 4. •• 40, ..-k y"dad; . t;, . , . • ,,,,,,/,,,,d, /7,-/- -- , ,,,-• lat., ' •, . .. , II" I,/a---- .-.-_-14 1• Mi .. __, .._._._.Q.__,4 .i,t_ • •• •. 4 / .. __ _____ . , k _ — , . 0. 4 .''„0.o• at'1 _ (.--) Figure 3-4 FIFTH AVENUE PLANNING STUDY Mixed-Use Scheme NEW ROCHELLE , NEW YORK Section 3: Concept Development and Testing In addition,the scheme presents a community retail location at the south end of the study area closest to(and presumably extending to)Potter Avenue.Towards the interior of the study area, there would be a transition from residential uses back to the existing light industrial base. Immediately to the rear of the residential alley, a block frontage of smaller, half-acre, light industrial uses could be introduced with larger parcels of approximately 1 to 1.5 acres located between Plain Avenue and the Thruway.The smaller parcels could be used as an opportunity to promote a work/live community with direct and easy access. To create enough block depth,it was assumed that Plain Avenue would be shifted to the east to accommodate the residential development and the first tier of light industrial parcels.Several of the focus group participants thought that the cost burden of projects such as utility relocation was too large to sustain,and that several buildings were worth retaining.Other noted concerns included the financial viability and methods by which density could be increased. C. CONCEPT TESTING As the study progressed from the assessment of opportunities and constraints to the establishment of a range of development opportunities, initial concepts were reviewed in a "focus group"format.A variety of real estate development parties,New Rochelle officials and staff,the adjacent municipality of Mamaroneck,and existing businesses in the City Park area participated.This section summarizes the input and observations in these meetings. The consultant team spoke with an array of groups with different opinions on redevelopment and reinvestment opportunities. All those interviewed recognized that the area was in need of new planning,new ideas,and new investment. In general, the group meetings were held in two formats. For developers and real estate professionals, the attendees included the Fifth Avenue Study consultant team, the designated brokers for the IKEA Holdings (TriCom Realty), and representatives of a development organization. The organizations were chosen based on establishing a range of developers that included commercial, industrial, residential, and other special interests in urban projects or properties with development constraints.Discussions focused on the group's observations and ideas regarding opportunities and constraints in planning for the area.Those interviewed were not considered by the City as part of any formal "short list"of potential investors,nor would they be excluded from pursuing private market initiatives (i.e., bidding on IKEA owned property)or from responding to any City-sponsored Request for Proposal,should one be issued in the future. For public officials and existing businesses, the interview groups consisted of the consultant team, senior city planning and economic development staff, and a representative of a neighboring municipality,or businesses in the City Park area..The open discussion of issues and ideas was similar to that described below for the specific real estate development interviews. COMMERCIAL REALTORS(TRI-COM,RACKOW,AND CUSHMAN WAKEFIELD) As noted above,commercial realtors were contacted to assist in developing an understanding of the current market place for the study area and for light industrial properties throughout the region.Each broker provided the consulting team with useful information regarding land value, rents, and tenant demand. In addition, the brokers discussed future conditions and what they considered key issues for this planning study. DRAFT 3-3 January 18, 2002 Fifth Avenue Planning Study Uniformly,there is an ever tightening supply of light industrial space in southern Westchester, particularly in areas with flexible zoning that permits open storage. Demand is currently high and would be expected to remain high into the foreseeable future.However,the demand has a somewhat inflexible pricing structure, in that light industrial land value and rent rates reflect businesses with relatively low rent requirements.Based on current land values,prices paid by IKEA, and currently assessed value by the City, the amount of cost flexibility to generate significant economic benefits to the City was the biggest concern in creating viable development scenarios. CITY STAFF AND OFFICIALS Over several weeks,the consultant team met with City staff and City officials, including the City Manager, the Mayor, and interested council members to discuss ideas for the area and reflect on the input from the development community. As a result of these meetings, it was agreed that the findings of this study would be a starting point for working with the community and reaching consensus on moving forward with determining a long-term development strategy. There was also consensus that given the difficult issues that the City had encountered during the proposed IKEA development review, it would be difficult to conceive of a large retail project resurfacing as a viable development alternative in the area. Among other interests and concerns discussed was the viability ofresidential development along Fifth Avenue.Given the industrial history of the area,the adjacent public housing facilities,and the overall demand and cost structure of new housing as well as the density required to make such a project viable,a residential program mixed with a small amount of retail would not likely create a significant economic benefit to the City to be considered viable. Several of the public staff/officials agreed with the importance of City Park and the Fifth Avenue frontage as key gateways to the community. Other options independent of this study, including the persuit of grants or other opportunities to upgrade City Park and the Fifth Avenue streetscape, were noted as important City goals. Other members agreed that the historical precedent for using a mixed-use approach and a physical model of"new urbanist"style housing already exists in New Rochelle along Stephenson Boulevard within a few miles south of the site, close to Post Road. The limited economic return from anything less than a full retail proposal was discussed as a limiting factor to the City's ability to pursue other new planning opportunities requiring significant public investment. Most important,New Rochelle is unlikely to be in a position to offer large public incentives for reinvestment in the area,thereby creating a need for a market- _ based guiding approach versus a high level of public policy intervention and investment. WEICI ERT REALTY Don Rasmussen of Weichert Realty works primarily in the area of large-scale residential projects in urban areas. For his clients,Mr. Rasmussen identifies potential sites and assesses development opportunities and constraints. His experience on residential development opportunities led to a focused discussion on such opportunities in the study area,using the initial strategy described in Figure 3-4,above. Key observations that came out of the conversation include: • The presence of public housing on the north side of Fifth Avenue is a constraint,but not enough to deter the right developer or development project. January 18, 2002 3-4 DRAFT Section 3: Concept Development and Testing • The location near the Larchmont Station is a distinct advantage. • A Fifth Avenue with residential frontage is key. Mr. Rasmussen understood and saw the planning rationale behind the "new urbanist" street frontage approach in the initial residential concept presented above. However, he expressed concerned that the density would not be sufficient to interest a residential development,or to allow for a sustainable return on investment. • There was discussion on enhancing the residential frontage by increasing the density at the Larchmont Gateway,double loading the residential development,or increasing the density of development along Fifth Avenue by making it a larger multi-family structure.A setback would be used to put lower scale buildings along the Fifth Avenue frontage.Parking access would continue to be from the interior with no driveway curb cuts on Fifth Avenue. • A mix of uses throughout the City Park area,including a transitional light industrial area to the interior,and a possible retail node closer to the Potter Avenue gateway was viable to Mr. Rasmussen. The logical approach would be a development group that had specific developers based on their specific expertise in the consortium. • For residential uses, creating a template that would allow for a reasonable residential development scenario requires a substantial investment by the City.Zoning would have to be amended or created to allow for certain residential and mixed-use developments along Fifth Avenue presented in the scenario. The City would also have to complete an Urban Renewal process that evaluates land assemblage and the designation of a development group.The relocation of existing businesses would be required. • Mr.Rasmussen strongly advised the City to consider large scale redevelopment of the area to address the currently strong market demand for senior living facilities. These are increasingly seen as important commercial projects with few environmental and fiscal impacts,but with a strong commercial tax base. JONATHAN ROSE AND COMPANIES Jonathan Rose and Companies,LLC is a development and planning organization that specializes in"repairing the fabric of American Cities."Through innovative development strategies, the organization has participated as developers, advisors, and consultants on a wide variety of projects applicable to the Fifth Avenue study area, including the rehabilitation of historic buildings into new mixed-use facilities, the creation of affordable housing opportunities and artisan work-live spaces,and a variety of other projects.Mr.Rose has been an active leader in the Congress on New Urbanism and many other organizations seeking to rebuild urban communities. Mr.Rose was briefed on the issues and concepts developed for the Fifth Avenue Planning Study and considered the opportunities for creative development scenarios are very positive.Mr.Rose suggested a mixed-use concept incorporating a unique niche of artisan workshops;building on the existing presence of many small but vibrant trades in the area including Marble America, cabinet makers, and other existing businesses, and creating a "destination" for visitors and patrons to congregate,with a sense of place and identity.The most critical constraint would be the inflated land values that would have to be written down in order to sustain a viable and affordable mixed-use development. DRAFT 3-5 January 18,2002 Fifth Avenue Planning Study ROBERT MARTIN COMPANY Robert Weinberg, founding partner of the Robert Martin Company, is a leading developer of light industrial space in Westchester County and the metropolitan region. The Robert Martin Company,and its current partner Mack-Cali Realty,have developed office and industrial parks in a mix of urban and suburban settings. Mr.Weinberg agreed that despite the need for additional planning and investment in the Fifth Avenue area(particularly on Fifth Avenue itself),the light industrial uses are viable and there clearly is a demand for such space in the study area and throughout the southern Westchester region.He expressed interest in the location and the use of the area and commented on the real estate development potential it contained. With each development concept presented by the consultant team,his overriding concerns were the land values and high tax burdens associated with acquiring and developing the parcels. Another concern would whether or not a positive relationship between rental income (which is relatively limited based on the light industrial uses)and the expense of land purchase and property taxes would exist. This led to a discussion about the level of public intervention and incentives that would be necessary to make a private sector reinvestment reasonable.Mr.Weinberg suggested that there would have to be a relatively high level of City investment that would involve property tax abatements or other fmancial incentives.This would clearly be a challenging situation given the City's financial position and the minimal potential return on the City's investment(i.e.,few new fiscal benefits in terms of tax revenues or employment growth). Given the high land values associated with the IKEA purchases, Mr. Weinberg was also concerned that the public sector may be needed to write down the costs associated with the assemblage of IKEA parcels. He was concerned that prior to making any individual property investments in the area, both the City and IKEA would need to provide the development community with more information and"pro-forma"level analyses on each building. SIMONE DEVELOPMENT Simone Development is a locally based organization that specializes in acquiring, managing, and redeveloping smaller real estate parcels including light industrial and flex-space as well as office buildings and other types of property. Thus, their business plan is similar to the infill strategies explored in Figure 3-1,above. While concerned about land price and tax burden issues, there was generally more positive feedback from Simone Development that the development community can find opportunities in pursuing a parcel by parcel investment and redevelopment strategy in the study area. Simone Development was interested in further exploring how the IKEA-owned parcels(which are still largely incomplete)could be integrated into a development scenario within a reasonable land-price structure. CAPPELLI ENTERPRISES Cappelli Enterprises is a development organization with experience in real estate projects throughout the region.Most notably in New Rochelle,they were the developers of New Center in downtown New Rochelle.The development company has experience in developing a wide variety of projects,including commercial,retail,residential,and other mixed-use projects. January 18, 2002 3-6 DRAFT Section 3:Concept Development and Testing Based on the high demand for development sites in southern Westchester,there was an interest in exploring the development opportunities in the Fifth Avenue area.However,in looking at the real estate land costs,the high cost of land assemblage,and the limited commercial development potential, there was some skepticism about the ability to create a financially viable project (particularly without a strong retail orientation). Similarly, there was some skepticism on the viability of residential development potential in the Fifth Avenue corridor due to limitations on density and the specific location. To this development focus group, the highest and most interesting value of the Fifth Avenue area was building a scenario by which the Fifth Avenue study area became part of a larger deal or land swap that freed up valuable waterfront lands currently occupied by the City's Department of Public Works.While,as noted above,it would be difficult to conceive of a"City Yard"scenario that was justified on the economics of the Fifth Avenue site alone,it would be possible that the investment necessary to make the move could be balanced and justified with the far greater potential return in developing the waterfront parcel. EXISTING PROPERTY AND BUSINESS OWNERS The consultant team also met with a mix of existing property and business owners in the Fifth Avenue area. The assessment of existing opportunities and constraints, and the range of planning concepts and schemes set forth above,were reviewed with the group and their interests and feedback were discussed. Most of the property and business owners expressed an interest in staying in the area. Determined that they could not stay in the area without newer or larger spaces, several businesses had sold their properties to IKEA, and had begun to make preparations to move. Subsequent to the withdrawal by IKEA,some owners are now interested in repurchasing their original properties or other properties,or are seeking other ways to remain in the area.Unless better parcels of land are made available,some businesses are convinced that they will have to move to find adequate spaces. Those who did not sell were specifically interested in maintaining and preserving their businesses in the district.They generally supported the City's initiative to complete a planning process and make the area better for all. Among the scenarios presented,there were concerns and interests across a wide range of areas. There was a minimal interest in wholesale redevelopment strategies that used urban renewal to assemble large new development parcels(such as presented in the large parcel scheme above) because this is clearly not a business retention strategy.However,there was agreement that Fifth Avenue was a poor gateway for the City and the neighborhood,and that planning support and public investment could be effective in improving conditions on Fifth Avenue and at City Park. While the mixed-use scenario was of interest and thought to be a viable approach,the relocation of Plain Avenue in order to provide more lot depth was considered difficult and inappropriate. This would be exceedingly expensive in terms of utility relocation and the disruption to businesses and property owners.Most notably,one of the larger and more stable business and property owners (Vernon Devices) would have to be relocated as proposed in Scheme 3-4, above.Among other suggestions considered,Fifth Avenue could be widened to meet the stated goals of better sidewalk and parking space and the block width from Fifth to Plain Avenues could be narrowed providing either a single depth lot area or different depth lots off each frontage. DRAFT 3-7 January 18, 2002 Fifth Avenue Planning Study Other key issues discussed at the meeting were: • the lack of off-street parking; • the difficulty of operating light industrial businesses in the area, where small and constrained lot configurations still contain a mix of residences,churches,small businesses, and vacant parcels interspersed throughout the area in no cohesive arrangement; • the importance of maintaining the area's good regional access and identity(truck access was not seen as a major hindrance,although the unusual double one-way circulation pattern was discussed); and • the importance of being careful not to presume the easy displacement of the remaining residential neighbors, and where possible, to address their concerns in any proposed planning scheme. Subsequent to the July meeting,the consultant team met with individual businesses and property owners. SUSAN STANTON,DO CHUNG ARCHITECTS This development group seeks commercial development opportunities and expressed an interest in the Fifth Avenue study area as a good location to explore mixed-use commercial development options.They were not interested in the viability of the light industrial base or pursuing an infill strategy but would rather add value by creating a new sense of place focused on commercial, retail,and residential uses.They suggested that the planning study consider a hotel as part of a redevelopment plan for the study area. NATIONAL RESOURCES National Resources,a leading redeveloper of impaired and constrained real estate,has extensive experience in finding solutions to brownfields redevelopment issues and repositioning former industrial or commercial buildings to regain market value. Their perception was that the area had potential but was clearly limited by several obstacles:the incomplete IKEA acquisition,the wide range of land values and monies paid by IKEA,and the low expectations on investment return for light industrial flex space. Real estate opportunity exists assuming creative public policy initiatives could establish joint development synergies with the private development communities. This could be established through creative tax policies for new and innovative applications of state and federal funding sources (i.e., empowerment zone reallocation and other sources of public investment). NORTHSTAR PROPERTIES Northstar Properties is a regionally based real estate development company with experience in retail projects in the northeast.In New Rochelle,Northstar has been active as the developer and owner of the Stop and Shop shopping center on Palmer Avenue just to the south and east of the study area at the intersection of Palmer and Potter Avenues. Northstar's suggests that the area is ripe for mixed-use development because of its prominent location, gateway presence at the municipal border, and the strong residential neighborhoods surrounding the area. The key to project viability is to focus on Potter Avenue as a critical gateway to the study area and to consider that roadway as a high density spine into the City Park January 18, 2002 3-8 DRAFT Section 3: Concept Development and Testing and Fifth Avenue area. Higher densities of commercial activity(primarily retail)along Potter Avenue would feed into interior courtyards and internal streets serving a mix of housing types along Fifth Avenue and towards Mamaroneck and Larchmont.Their scenario envisions a retail base that is somewhat smaller than the proposed IKEA(and comprised of multiple stores,not just one super big-box store),but considerably larger than that contemplated in the mixed use scheme. ❖ DRAFT 3-9 January 18,2002 I Section 4: Recommendations A. INTRODUCTION Building on the analyses summarized above,the Fifth Avenue Planning Study recommends a range of potential actions that the City should consider. These include specific policy recommendations for the Fifth Avenue study area as well as more general planning recommendations.As set forth below in three overall scenarios,the study has focused on infill development strategies and a mixed-use approach as the best opportunities to provide for economic development, viable developer interest, and public consensus and support for City actions. While the City cannot expect an economic or fiscal return on investment akin to a large retail project like IKEA,the overriding recommendation is that the area clearly needs some level of planning intervention.The recommendations presented below vary considerably in the level of public policy intervention and capital,but they are all focused on two key components: • To improve the functionality and long-term stability of the light industry district; and • To create a better Fifth Avenue area to serve businesses and residents and to serve as a gateway to the City. B. SCENARIO 1: MINIMUM INTERVENTION OVERVIEW As suggested by the real estate community,the high demand for light industrial lands,and the advantageous location of the Fifth Avenue study area, an underlying assumption is that the marketplace can and will create new redevelopment opportunities on its own,with only minimal guidance and intervention by the City.Nonetheless,there are important steps the City can take to encourage an orderly and market-based redevelopment in the area. Most importantly, the City needs to create a better template for the redevelopment along the Fifth Avenue frontage. The new LI zoning does not provide specific regulations to guide development throughout the Fifth Avenue corridor. A new zoning overlay district is therefore recommended for this important gateway with frontage along one of the City's most important open space resources.Once this and other prescriptive policy recommendations are established, the City should then consider lifting the blight designation and formally withdrawing the pending urban renewal plan.This would free up private investor decision-making while new regulations guide any new development that might occur. DRAFT 4-1 January 18, 2002 Fifth Avenue Planning Study ZONING OVERLAY DISTRICT The mechanism for addressing special considerations within the Fifth Avenue study area is a zoning overlay district. Overlay districts are tools for dealing with special situations or conditions.As the name implies,zoning overlay districts are mapped districts that are placed on top, or over, existing base zoning districts established by the City of New Rochelle. In this manner,the base zoning that defines where the retail and manufacturing uses are allowed remain the same as with current zoning. However, the overlay regulations provide an opportunity to augment or supercede the underlying zoning regulations. The Fifth Avenue Overlay District("The District")would be a zoning district enumerated in §331,Section 5.23 of the City of New Rochelle Zoning Code(Overlay Zones).It would overlay the LI district defined as the Fifth Avenue Study Area. (see Figure 4-1). OBJECTIVES The District would serve to improve the function of,the aesthetics of,and the accessibility along Fifth Avenue. It would encourage the safe and orderly movement of vehicles and pedestrians and promote the development of a unified streetscape with continuity in facade elements and setbacks. It would integrate the existing light industrial buildings in good condition into any proposed development program,and ensure that new uses would be reviewed for compatibility with existing uses.It would foster an improved corridor with vegetation,lighting,and outdoor seating along the street to compliment the adjacent greenspace to the north and create an enhanced gateway entrance to the City of New Rochelle. Figure 4-2 provides a rendered cross section of what the zoning overlay would seek to achieve through zoning requirements. KEYELEMENTS OF THE OVERLAY Permitted Uses Permitted uses by right would include all of the uses permitted by right within the present Light Industry(LI)District(see Table 1-2). Building Setbacks and Heights Frontage requirements would remain the same as the Light Industry(LI)District, and require that all new structures, regardless of use, be constructed adjacent to Fifth Avenue. All businesses would be required to have an entrance facing Fifth Avenue, allow access to public sidewalks, transit, and parallel parking along Fifth Avenue. As illustrated in Figure 4-2,new buildings would abut sidewalks approximately eight feet in width along the entire length of Fifth Avenue.Building heights for commercial/retail and light industrial structures would remain the greater of two stories or 40 feet. Parking and Circulation Proposed parking would be moved to the rear or side lots, with the provision that main storefront entrances would be restricted to the Fifth Avenue facades of the buildings. Parking would not be permitted in front of any structure (Fifth Avenue side) other than on the street itself.It is assumed that over time,improvements to both the western,or City Park,side of Fifth Avenue and new development along the eastern side of the street would enable roadway improvements allowing for parallel parking on both sides of Fifth Avenue. All other parking would be located along new off-street lots to the rear and sides of the structures. January 18, 2002 4-2 DRAFT 1.02 ROS .._- ..-- ._ _ „. . _.. _....., iN ....... 40 ; . pf _.... ; .-. qz ir . I ....` yi dit•.4 • */* • . / 1 4011 '' • I.1111 fill .,.._,1111 ..'oc 0/11, .11 A09.1,1 4411 li ,....,711 ., _ Ai 1,,, - „:, 0 i. 1-• aic ., - LI_. ._ , . .. 0, I ,, , ., --1. -- ., _. , i , ,. _ 7:............,... / g f*. 4'' 9 `Z' 9 ,, .........,, \ -I — / I e•Ci • 7 I AO 9 3:4 1. , r. . . . a OA r . , --- --k -a :•_1-7---: n• R ,, .... „ . ., , / , . - l 'ME • \-- ' ' --... .... , A / \ . ...... . . , .. - .. . - - A RMF , ....t _ .. . RME — : ....,. / Study Area 5 . , 4 ---:-.„ , __4y • ' -.1‘ / / 6 ... 1, 0 .5 — Zoning District Boundary Nvi __—•=iiir- •,.L- 1177D Proposed Overlay District 0 100 200 FEET R1-7.5 One Family Residential 1 1 1 1 1 RMF-.5 Multi-Family Residential SCALE RMF-.7 Multi-Family Residential ROS Recreation Open Space LI Light Industrial FIFTH AVENUE PLANNING STUDY Figure 4-1 NEW ROCHELLE , NEW YORK Overlay District Section 4: Recommendations Driveway and curb-cuts along Fifth Avenue would be limited.Development should be designed to create common and shared access points and parking areas. To the extent practical,parking access should be introduced along Plain Avenue and not Fifth Avenue. In addition, property between structures not exclusively developed with parking would be landscaped and illuminated to allow safe and uninhibited connectivity between Fifth Avenue and rear or side parking areas for pedestrians. Streetscape Improvements Design criteria would be incorporated into the overlay zoning text to ensure visual continuity along the streetscape using similar building materials, signage, light fixtures, cornices, and fenestration.The zoning could specify design guidelines exclusively for the block between Fifth Avenue and Plain Avenue,or alternatively for the entire overlay district.With either method,an industrial-style aesthetic for all building uses along Fifth Avenue would be the end result. Guidelines would include multi-pane windows, wooden, metallic, or stucco sheathing, industrial-style external light fixtures,and fixed cantilever suspension awnings(see Figure 4-2). The treatment of Fifth Avenue would include a refurbishing of both sides of the street with street trees within a minimum 6-foot public right-of-way adjacent to the curb.Adjacent to the street and alternating between trees would be street lights with decorative fixtures, approximately 12 to 15 feet in height. Steel-bar fencing punctuated by brick piers running the entire length of the avenue would be on opposite side of Fifth Avenue,defining the edge of the park.Overhead utility lines would be removed and buried,and sidewalks and curbing would be constructed where absent or in disrepair. Non-Conforming Uses Existing structures would be permitted to retain uses until a change of use is proposed,or a new structure developed.At such a time,the property would be brought into conformance with the regulations of the Fifth Avenue Zoning Overlay District.Regulations governing nonconforming buildings and uses would be in accordance with the regulations described in the City Zoning Code. OTHER PLANNING RECOMMENDATIONS With more effective zoning in place along Fifth Avenue,the gradual private market investment and redevelopment in the area can begin to address key urban planning issues in the area, namely the deteriorated conditions along the roadway and the removal of open storage uses that are inconsistent with the street's gateway role across from City Park. There are other more general recommendations, discussed below, that use existing resources and minimal public intervention that should be considered for implementation. REINTRODUCE TWO-WAY TRAFFIC ON PLAIN AVENUE AND PLEASANT STREET Over time, as additional off-street parking facilities are integrated into any infill development program,the City should work with existing businesses to create an orderly transition back to two-way traffic flow in the interior streets. Presently, the streets are crowded with on-street parking and truck maneuvering, which presumably was the original impetus for creating the existing one-way traffic flow. However, it does not seem to maximize circulation to and from the interior of the site, particularly with the parallel one-way flows on Plain Avenue and Pleasant Street. This maximization could be accomplished with minimal street changes,but it DRAFT 4-3 January 18, 2002 1.02 wvrkS i / j Gom "Pabst -- sine". des. . 7,1"" leconaree. 1#10 timevrts . , A r -4,(-- cm f?") ,_ , . _,.. 41 lr 7ne,44r-r•slitteiciff _ . .4 ` r . .:� c51.. ..41 , .14 ....... A'Mt ir SEs - 'Ilitilliki lti I tom ai _ W ; (. +i a— r _ . t!s te Vied/A lak/ cr�I M144/di ; -f�a�l a l‘/ srdGlAtik: /744*--- . ��lestrr . p Or') A w6(') Pa416 , gorfrA '16C 1CJ G, i< t! .1 )14 Ci * * *- >* Gross sce,hart a,-. ThW 401/kw& ( ii4f/ Stheøie ,\ FIFTH AVENUE PLANNING STUDY Figure 4-2 NEW R O C H E L L E , NEW YORK 5th Avenue Commercial Cross Section Fifth Avenue Planning Study would require the elimination of on-street parking from at least one side of each of the roadways. TRANSITION OUT REMAINING NON-CONFORMING USES FROM THE STUDY AREA The remaining 10 residences in the study area are all non-conforming under the existing LI zoning. While a mixed-use approach is a good general strategy,current conditions in the Fifth Avenue area are not conducive to an orderly reinvestment strategy. The patchwork remainder of small lot houses does not create a neighborhood,and they are either located adjacent to open storage and vehicle storage and maintenance areas, or they are adjacent to the New England Thruway. Throughout the zoning overlay district,a series of development incentives could therefore be created to encourage existing owners and potential developers to exercise purchase options and invest in further redevelopment in the area. For developers pursuing parcel purchases with the intent of developing a conforming use on combined adjacent parcels, and for those willing to comply with design guidelines and participate in the area's parking plan,the following incentives would apply: • a floor area ratio(FAR)bonus,allowing more developable floor area than the standard lot and bulk requirements of the current LI district; • a height bonus,permitting additional floor area without increasing the building footprint, thus freeing more site area for parking and landscaping; and • a reduction in paved surface requirement for parking, and further parking requirement reductions if developing shared parking with an adjacent business. PLAN AND IMPLEMENT CITY PARK MASTER PLAN AND IMPROVEMENTS The zoning overlay district can guide private development initiatives along the study area frontages on Fifth Avenue. However, street improvements such as the construction and maintenance of curbs and sidewalks,the burying of utilities, the erection of fences along the park periphery, and the lighting of the public right-of-ways along Fifth Avenue, would be a public initiative. By leveraging new sources of funding, including transportation funds (i.e., TEA-21)and other state and federal sources,the City should pursue a joint Fifth Avenue and City Park improvement effort. This effort could address the inability of Fifth Avenue to accommodate parallel parking on both sides of the street,and provide for fencing,lighting,and street tree conditions improvements. ESTABLISH PROACTIVE IDA PROGRAM TO ASSIST BUSINESS EXPANSION AND RETENTION The City's Industrial Development Authority (IDA) plays an important role in economic development opportunities throughout the City.Here,there is an opportunity for the program to assist the small businesses currently in the study area,or businesses that may be attracted to the area as demand for light industrial space increases in the region. January 18, 2002 4-4 DRAFT Section 4: Recommendations A localized program of IDA outreach would have the following key goals: • To help property owners acquire new parcels to allow for expansion or improvement. In particular,to assist with purchasing(and in some cases buying back)parcels acquired by IKEA; • To serve as coordinator for a formal/informal organization of business and property owners in the Fifth Avenue/City Park area to assist in joint efforts to acquire transitional residential real estate and create common off-street parking and staging areas; • To remain responsive to ideas and development proposals from larger developers interested in building and/or relocating to the area; and • To create job preservation and retention programs. In coordination with this localized IDA program, the City and local businesses should also consider creating a Local Improvement District (LID)comprised of an overseeing body with existing property and business owners, and potentially partnering with a light industrial developer that can lend development expertise to the LID.This would strengthen the ability to seek common solutions of such issues as off-street parking and loading areas, streetscape improvements, infrastructure improvements, and the orderly acquisition of property and redevelopment opportunities.In addition,the LID could work in conjunction with the Town of Mamaroneck to ensure that coordinated development takes place throughout the entire area. CREATE A FIFTH AVENUE/CITY PARK MASTER PLAN While this study is focused on the proposed Fifth Avenue Urban Renewal Area,the overall LI district extends beyond Potter Avenue. The City should create a unified master plan for the entire district.As noted in Section 2,the continuity and relationship of the two areas is critical to understanding the planning context of opportunities and constraints related to land assemblage, existing business retention,and improved circulation. As noted in Section 3, it is the entire district that provides unique opportunities for new development and comprehensive redevelopment opportunities. PURSUE JOINT PLANNING INITIATIVES WITH TOWN OF MAMARONECK AND NEW YORK STATE THR UWAYAUTHORITY As noted in Section 2,the Valley Place municipal boundary between the City and the Town of Mamaroneck is ripe with opportunity for the two municipalities to jointly create an orderly redevelopment plan. The Mamaroneck lots all have frontages along and are accessed from Valley Place,but they also back up against the New York State Thruway. Joint public uses of these lands (i.e., share DPW facilities) would offer significant opportunities to improve and strengthen the gateway entrances on both corners of Valley Place, enhancing the overall character of Fifth Avenue.Commercial truck traffic could be facilitated in and out of the district by extending Plain Avenue or Pleasant Street to the small roadway adjacent to the former Librett Hardware, or further into the Thruway Authority land. DRAFT 4-5 January 18, 2002 Fifth Avenue Planning Study C. SCENARIO 2: AGGRESSIVE INFILL STRATEGY OVERVIEW This strategy includes additional actions that the City can undertake to expedite a transition in the study area and create a better functioning light industrial/flex space district.In essence,it is a master plan prototype for promoting infill objectives. It carries forward all the recommendations noted in Scenario 1. The most important feature is a coordinated effort to improve circulation and to add off-street parking and loading facilities.These are the biggest constraints noticed in field observation and as discussed with the business community. Such an effort requires an organized approach that involves existing businesses interested in securing property and expansion opportunities,and/or a designated developer that can weave the new and old properties together. The components of the infill strategy would extend beyond the treatment of the Fifth Avenue corridor to specifically address the streetscaping,parking,and future land development patterns throughout the entire study area. The intent is to capitalize on the theme of the existing light industrial uses in the area by preserving the structures currently in use, and facilitating the expansion of new light industrial and commercial/retail uses along Plain and Pleasant Streets. This alternative would build on the zoning-based improvements offered by an overlay district and would require more investment in public works improvements and long-term neighborhood modification. The result, however, would be a development program that comes closest to achieving the goals of a long line of proceeding plans and study recommendations laid out over the course of the area's development history. INFILL PLAN DEVELOPMENT FEATURES The first step in examining the infill master plan was using field reconnaissance to determine which buildings are the most suitable for retention and integration into the plan.These buildings are identified in Figure 4-3. As shown in Figure 4-4,the build-out of the infill strategy provides for the orderly transition of the area into a well-coordinated flex/light industrial district.All remnants of the small lot house configuration of the original development are removed and what remains are one-and two-story commercial buildings ranging in size and height.Fifth Avenue would still be closely regulated by the zoning overlay district to ensure a uniformity of design and to minimize driveways and curb cuts.There would be no open storage yards or off-street parking facilities.A neighborhood retail corner would be retained on the corner of Portman Road and Fifth Avenue across from the Park's parking lot driveway.Towards the interior of the district on Pleasant Street,the small lots with frontages along the Thruway that are insufficiently sized for commercial or light industrial redevelopment would be consolidated as residential uses in the area diminish and additional off- street parking facilities are built.This would enable the creation of a visual buffer and landscape feature that would present a"greener"edge to the district,enhancing the City's visual image for travelers viewing from the Thruway. As rendered,the infill strategy includes approximately 90,000 square feet of new building area and about 380 new off-street parking facilities.A better mix of uses,with offices on the second floor, artisan workshops on the ground floor, or commercial retail/wholesale establishments • would be allowed. Within the parameters of the new LI zoning, this would not constitute a January 18, 2002 4-6 DRAFT 12.01 , 0 t 40 `a:: - {BLOCK 9191 a • J {BLOCK 920{ �� eia r� - -� �, • :� k1E.O '(1U� r j -- BLOCK 9191 p o I {BLOCK 9101 LOT 5.1 O� �i- w - FIFTH-AVENUE • �. axl. , !BLOCK �iYr OS J •..ru i =��� T.�^'-�-\ • -'� --.� a •'++�•I t' -t] u:_ — - tali A- • s , -.� _ �_,... ' ; _ ..��� _i 1 fir„ - __ e_. �. �/� .. �+. � Asn _�+T.•:{.. - I� s. _at r goingr -•^--•_� L'�ISJ\��s�. •et.al feli 7?` �•.__1 Erl�li _�-Mc ►T ems. y. c5r."."'"'"4. Arm ' -------4P - ' czami---------7---ro ___._ , i.„7,,,--:77---,,,- sr •i "'""rte �i / �r Fur /t ' T - � ` it*-- ' 1 if N. 7 �j _,�� / ► 0. IIP r • ,. M•. •/ . , �BLocK lso{ 'I �— `l�� ,,Za w°"".a�.` � �, /��'��� y -t1. 411, is--._b ��..,:W� , _��_ �_.—.,fr I- `rID / 'J �__Fre //0- o {BLOCK 1311 Iwo, _ : it? if r �� ,j81414- hid Egiter0/,4A�/S� _eb' I - 1� li �� �I4=-----.. .._-_ -_-.,-74 <�. ;---, !�`�f�'�'�� ��[t -� �ei �I�s--��• r.7t � I r •e ago 111, ' --- �� NM—ir lilts 10! _r . P ogAtNi /•Y• �► :®r _ --.�.n-..= .�� .� a� /"/I a e: .,.. ; _ rir MIMI .. cearyr lik=rial in,-73i i:71 ; lc, • ��� �rr.` , • . ONir �l�I :eta L� _ ! I'I"M ►�d azs r �.l� �+a<+S. �e�i.'�-.r -rce:� ,r��.r—..�P_ . .i.�'eliili�-�!e!`�i'`r .ate .�+ _". ,,.+':•_.. • • 141 Ate _ I"-` �� Ii o ,—,--, _I �I� �c �c.w, � "�I �/ II / � ��r/Priv!! / ili i •�g� �, a +rel, ,,,,,,,,►'_N , 1 ill 7 I v0044,40 ie. • Ve 4. ____ iL I v.04,r,00.404, 144 ..,d_ AA! ry/ f. hr t I 4 -14,,i ill r qo lebse-,srion,sw_ 119 +� i . , . , : • i . 4 _ill- 47. Arair,,tr. .., ,, Pimirilir7; Til . . 4* _40,... ..,,,,, .i- � 4,, [ /I ilk -. . _ r;---mr: "ay+/ If__ A!'l\ !� t' .. y rr, 1.0.2 "_ —1421% // IL � n 011 e<r •o.,0?../44„lmew� /, /0' )1 1 /eidell rfrOgarrafienbli11414111 - 1 ��ss if/• n r o ,' - �� / r � - EW YOR 1 cam= —•—=!...":"'4,1%,,j, 49:n,e. O c —'� ., NEW YORK THR.' - �' - % .. I,E"-' • GRAPHIC SCALE 40 0 40 120 III as p Figure 4-3 FIFTH AVENUE PLANNING STUDY NEW R O C H E L L E , NEW YORK Infill Existing Conditions 12.01 �� ASIA "w�rw '�I �1 .,/ c"iff.i,!.,....„,,. .�..� ' ,,,,,Lom„, si.1," Isetam r w. �• ,, ;� ri„ ---. 4 - -", A ,r.,/// -7 ty a L.,,,,:,. ,.:<,,,;,„ a ,7//:(7 1-1--- 411- ' f`/? sitifi, ' reltii,;:41,1,00.6.401.r.; 1-0...A..... ...zro,„,41) ,....-,,,. 4..i •,,,,,,, .. _. , „,.,,-',, 7 .. ..._I i , lop f,. A % . LT is 0 4 41,01.6 afp) " • 4) i . 4•'- -- 1, I I 11- - • gi ji; Y ‘il- ii..............*_. / 0 E:i g 6 -----.--e ti.' 6 Illt 66" 41 1.1 1"AIL "sr0( ,, r 444116444 III:, =-Iiimma, . diiiiWim_. _ _ _ Q It's ''::::*6 ga ,,...2,/, ‘„, 4 I�w �1r ( Plate 7 _ up Plate' it iFI!Lw 0 ft - • -A C 41 A 6:0 ' 'ci Q l italette. I.' ©.r4 =: ; __, iii a P'1.4.4.1 ii --. , .1.vadmiii*.1 I:u•b a r.......u, *,::::::::!!!!''''' Q 4 I J ^ VIS "4446 II I �o0 t /� 1 ._ ‘-:#1 t,,-,__iLt: - 771-.. ._ . t ifirw eatr741.11-dr III: .4 al ri---4( 1-----:1-1 iii A imiriphH it ' Mt I . • --....- I 10 f—) 74.00011 isi... zir.;.ii._.-311Ret_ pi_ _ _ 41_ a-Jr_ da._writ,_ rdsla r, __ iiii4la is IP-, Gos rz,acr f D48 14 1.;' .--1 hv IV fil ma $1,Z__‘;)_____ lip i11%G4' 1 Figure 4-4 FIFTH AVENUE PLANNING STUDY Infill Build-Out NEW ROCHELLE , NEW YORK Section 4: Recommendations significant increase in overall development potential. There would be no incremental adverse traffic impacts or other environmental issues with the infill strategy. While not as critical as the design guidelines associated with the Fifth Avenue overlay,in order to create a well-run light industrial or flex park district development in the infill strategy needs to address landscaping requirements,street lighting,parking lot design,and maintenance issues. Therefore, the on-going participation of the IDA, the creation of an LID, and an area-wide master planning initiative are all still critically important.This scenario could be built out by a new redeveloper designated by the City as part of an urban renewal process, or incrementally developed by existing owners and individual developers as anticipated in Scenario 1,above. D. SCENARIO 3: MIXED-USE STRATEGY OVERVIEW This planning study will serve as an opportunity for the City to begin a public planning process that involves the local and regional community,the business community that currently exists or may be attracted to the area,and the real estate development community that can bring private capital and initiative to help strengthen and grow the Fifth Avenue/City Park area. Here, a mixed-use development program is carried forward as an alternative vision of what is possible with the right combination ofpublic policy,community support,and development initiative.The mixed-use plan is presented in Figure 4-5. The mixed-use alternative recognizes the historic uses in the area along with the development opportunities of the surrounding areas.It provides an alternative to developing the entire study area with light industrial uses. Like the other scenarios examined, it should incorporate the additional planning recommendations noted in Scenario 1,above. A mixed-use development program would require substantially more public investment than the infill strategies discussed above.It would require the implementation of an urban renewal plan, the designation of a master redeveloper, and public participation in the assemblage of land. While the mixed-use plan would not provide the same level of economic stimulus as a single retail use development, it would provide economic development opportunities that would enhance and strengthen the property tax base for the City.It also provides for the development of about 100 residential units and about 95,000 square feet of light industrial/flex space. MIXED USE PLAN FEATURES RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT The key feature of the mixed-use strategy is a residential frontage along Fifth Avenue. This would instill a gateway character to the area and would reinforce a traditional urban form along the roadway.A residential frontage would also greatly enhance the relationship between Fifth Avenue and the adjacent park. The residential development would have two elements. First, a traditional row-house development would be introduced along the frontage.These one-or two-family buildings would follow traditional urban development guidelines for street frontage with no driveways or curb cuts.All auto access would be from a rear alley allowing garage access and garbage pick-up.As with the recommended Fifth Avenue overlay zone,development guidelines would be created to ensure that new development follows specific criteria.A rendered cross-section of how the row DRAFT 4-7 January 18,2002 12.01 r ,,,- .-.., a . e _ il _ 4111,..• .wall - elir., 0 n rirws a ci 0 vi, w 0 • . ,d, s' :11,PIPLeclIMIPMNFPF Prir P" r PPPPV749,Pre# 411 /r/ '''' '/''' . ' ' if" � 4 N (4, L) w gg g , a1 / „ f , :fix . . /. 4 . (6 , .0 .., bes,„,e4 ry rn �� w r r *1 r, r r� •1 - - - , tct)70- 74ewhamilf,:,,77401 VI/ 41 .+ r� !. �. r �/� Imo. %ai.. .r w �� �r ' �1'� _. rnykini 1�rwimmap,rb. 4 E l4►�' •�� Ifes •._ 0.114411414. so i or4 /'''''' ' P4Nklit; . , ,,,, . 2' 1 'cm 2> l 75' lalliri dip Ilk, ,Ankh '' fall riarliy rd. •►mit ,, 4:6 4- a r J Uaf •!4i avenc<ed Ayr 1111,4111111,411111P. (1111S7 , i relliii,j1ILIH411614.1161 iiillib,,, , r_____„, 04 ...,„,„ : yer o 6, , 6 , /7/11,4* 4 /./////////////i IA-- C) 41 I 4�' _ r 0' r w r 4-1' r ab r C (.. di 4 I l 11. i... 101 Viy___ Li414- .e, 4c_____,AD c64r i b� bt �="..:« . *w� E 8 E iii) e0,4,444,4 2.60 �l Q G fir.2.•ate'••• ,.r t ,� �117_ +ems" /e c(4 sed-. 0..s..•".tee' //6&s I - FIFTH AVENUE PLANNING STUDY Figure 4-5 NEW ROCHELLE , NEW YORK Mixed Use Plan Fifth Avenue Planning Study housing would be developed in relation to Fifth Avenue and the rear alley is presented in Figure 4-6.A rendering of what a typical contextual setting of these row houses could be is presented in Figure 4-7. In an attempt to add sufficient density to make the residential development more viable,the plan also includes an apartment component at the corner of Fifth Avenue and Valley Place. This provides the opportunity to introduce at least another 70 units adjacent to the row housing,and provide a strong visual focal point at the gateway to the City.Such a development could be built to accommodate a senior living facility which was suggested in the focus group interviews as a particularly viable development alternative. RETAIL COMPONENT The mixed-use strategy also retains and expands the retail component at the corner of Portman Road and Fifth Avenue.The 15,000 square feet of retail on this corner could also be matched by new retail development on the opposite corner between Portman Road and Potter Avenue.It is recommended that the new retail be architecturally appropriate for the area and be similar in character to typical retail frontages found elsewhere in New Rochelle. A typical rendering is presented in Figure 4-8. LIGHT INDUSTRIAL/FLEX PARK COMPONENT From the residential alley through to Pleasant Street, the mixed-use plan aggressively reorganizes the interior portions of the study area. First, four smaller commercial buildings would serve as a transition between the residential use and the industrial district.Approximately 30,000 square feet of space could be shared with the adjacent retail and residential uses and would include about 60 off-street spaces that. The primary business district would be aligned along Pleasant Street, with larger foot print buildings assembled from existing structures at the south and north ends of the block,with three larger footprint buildings in between(totaling about 70,000 square feet). With a well-defined row of fairly large buildings, the remainder of the land to the Thruway would be cleared to provide efficient loading and off-street parking(approximately 260 spaces) to serve these light industrial buildings.Pleasant Street would be re-routed to circulate around these new facilities and would provide a landscaped buffer between the district and the Thruway. Cross sections of these interior spaces are presented in Figure 4-9 and 4-10. E. NEXT STEPS This study has outlined a set of recommendations based on a range of public policy and capital investment initiatives. As such, it provides the City with the flexibility to begin a more comprehensive and formal public outreach effort to solicit public comment,generate additional ideas, and complete a plan of action for implementing zoning changes and other actions as recommended in this report. ❖ January 18, 2002 4-8 DRAFT 1.02 �S -1-*e‘ i.i --1- 14, gs 14/04,51,44.4..r�o��ss.ry sit 11�11111�f1LLII/111f msrr�aii4 �r s �'G ( — .,1Ak . CSYiIr./ - ff �. .� c \ --4,,; H ::.; •; -- "__ rte{" y'a•• "�'• �° ' 01' S 7k 4. 'r Y.; /ttftti 7 �, xs �. 21.C.-/-7,1171. 77/— i i .0.1" u i,: I 4 file__ ..,,4.1 fa - •aim : :- .f ...iii, -, � +. _ _ �, � _ ,_. ,�u:,.__,./ , sir _- <... Qarkr d!a' 6' *overt 4tlw 'rte.> pvete.. ,_ tw Skop M 4t-uvrhfral coley/4X Falih I 44144444,. whim/111k- i**--. of i I. { Lw (2'-16 16 — k Cr,s5 f ear* u Powlwases CM rxed as& scheme). FIFTH AVENUE PLANNING STUDY Figure 4-6 NEW ROCHELLE , NEW YORK 5th Avenue Residential Cross Section 1.02 f • .1 �r` v-',. ,t t t J _ t t 1 / w ''' • g air ,,;- '1 --, ._7,;,„,-..-I.i 0 t-:.- ,--,--. - 40.- '# .. ' C T 4y'� aa'R` . bi • • y .` / _ ; f _ s - -II x -r a .t-i..47,-; ` a , ,t t 1 -' ilL:-7-... ' -444 f ,` t i... '-:. S ' f iS FIFTH AVENUE PLANNING STUDY Figure 4-7 NEW R O C H E L L E , NEW YORK Residential Rendering 1.02 zy ; '- ; " `,F'E.lw 'e.t.• �4,,,,,_,;1014. , ,�1�1 �/� .2 ,li , _ 1'A.'4:1,,si.A ."‘,. ••, :v. :ir-74.*'. - . 5 /,'.er_ • "-- , • - frf.--v;I - • +2.... .#.4.-...• _ ' ' • ,, _ elf f a.. if � � '� •a-es J,I'"..�i ,,t. 411cr # , -.t - ' :•-,E2:.;,.• ` _i-...., ,,,,. ‘ ,f. � ! ..ate .--iforAffl-, . . - t - , 0,4"...." . /-1: f.1 ' '...'' . ' -4,4 • _'',/it i'mor.7-... .1'.AlLiiii=4,41.",,,,r 41 ....1. • n ,stern., ..40,0:074, _ _. .„ , , .., , . , lir .6•. of ir ..„--,"./ 7,,,-. ', s',. a a ', ~mss � _ v. s'; :r,•. '" .....4 -b. * l ' fes' >yY iA FIFTH AVENUE PLANNING STUDY Figure 4-8 NEW ROCHELLE , NEW YORK Retail Rendering 1.02 6. .,,, , 1 q', ,,,,,,,,, --im, ,,„.,44„,..,,, ,,,_____. _ . , _,.. _.. ,,, Netiv tf.9 r O/ bark. sua°nr 1i� -- _ • Y '(' .4.''' "t:474P7'.7. ...___ l 'A -.4.0iii ikr 4; 4.4..„4 / ____- . - ,,,,s' '`,, ;71, r,.. ,t, 1-'. ,e ,...\,. ..P .,. Ti,,,- 147„.,1,7) 16 ('VJ(Y`Y\ .L.� It! r� • �, r--- � /l�i�/GiWjf r1O� ,�s+�� � � j '2 j•- , y ���ffe....i.;...J..:iv J .11 _ -- _-_ _— fi*— '"' — j T rifler • %/f6Y, Lli yi b1444' scr+senrK ssrrrGe nuclowl s�,lew�t/� paeing7 G+�- r y mor to — o A„r- pctrj/k/roritinb Gross $eteo at P itsarae. -/N 1S 7lir ed i( fixse sc eke . Figure 4-9 FIFTH AVENUE PLANNING STUDY NEW ROCHELLE , NEW YORK Pleasant Street Cross Section 1.02 ------ . 4 LI A . i%Thre , q. , ., -bres mi iwiciat 4,4 • ---------• ___ syrt4e._ _ 1„ .tii#i _ _ -b -12- - - ._____.. _ ...__. ,• 'V- . ____,„t1L—", 45%a c f'c , 1 ` ` § inkiiro I pok.m64-! . 0 - 0 ,..,___. ..: , ipstobesc. ., , . 0 ..)::x .,-41-,.. _::- _ , ,,,:„,,,, . 4' *sa ,.,,:3 , ir - 4 ' il'..,:‘-k-,-,06Cst?- A - - i' '( ?Pao. 04,kittwt 4, ,'.- 1,?,-,,. 1,t t. i _ :5440424r� , j orf /✓�r"�_ �i• • 9.f! � •- // K \ s �Crcv k, �. � 540a r/AVM �,�c, lawb �r t�4,r tu�en k� Ce,�-� /We 64,/n0166 PP,WK/iel 4rat1 s�dcar ireNGS l l p delle• t isoY S mwtigio ' 14140.> :. fewie aiaric ®ff/Xedi<G 5Cheirte Grote 460/7011 Pk?/2 4 ( 14Pr bo i sc;,fetiu 0 FIFTH AVENUE PLANNING STUDY Figure 4-10 NEW ROCHELLE , NEW YORK Plain Avenue Cross Section i ,i f I £ f t4 Concrete Sidewalk , 1 III } i '�"""" , Ii 48r , ii ��_�l � Ree Pit ► t � ;�� �� �. � ��� pedestrian ecce • _. �. �m- .''.. Ramp Tia of li �; � I 11 , .. �' Parallel Parking Shade Tree fi el Myrtle Boulevard II L t U 451 4111111166-- Med ian , 4 CA ., Lawn with Shade Trees• . � ; . . . i- 11J 'w"'"1 it 4 0 s Fit R IParallel Parking Shade Tree y, 1 + Tr�'�: Pit a �� COiicrete Sider calk 4 R GRoesch Architecture & Landscape Architecture, P.C. Madison Avenue—Myrtle Boulevard Median Concept ALTERNATIVE 1 — Plan 475 Tenth Ave., New York, New York 10018 (212) 244-2121 Not to Scale Date: 11/28/01 t. A crk...r.r„; '..1-7&. ,14414 -\'le& ,„,-r" \r"-t ........ ,,,-.a,, art ; N., ¢ 1 '411id".elL(''''''.. ,_,_,,_,,lr , Art--- --,,,,/,-,1"\-1,-,... 1 i fr• 6 Shade '[ree �- , 44. ''t-r-7-----4- ''',c, -,-'-' ° r v ..,,,,,,,,,4 ,„,,,,,, , ..„,,, ,:.jr.,,i,„<kir. ...,.._.) ,,,,,-, -,-. --, „.g. � *.-„,1---" *-1\\71-^-* -'.---\,,,1 - if -,„,-„, TN., `' .„., .,,, ,i _ - 4. N06. 4.-? r , .,..r...„ ,,,,, __, , ,..,, 1 , ,,,,,,,, s" „.., , 4,7-- 4- , - . --,-,..„,4"\„,----% \-,,, ni.,TS,,,,,,.,.:!,,,,,,,..4; .c '''r'*''') \Allmillthr,, .:".• ir ‘,...../IN, 7,7f P*.''''''''11''''''''1'1, s FyCfl' � � rNirIgloo ?~+ --'‘f,..,../4, .--,,, 5--:''''ir~- .,_.._;a c.,,,,, °fir w _�, ? r3i-LL,' C—Iflit 5 s'c,,-......a'j ''-Th'i 1...........,A it , , it'lli .,,,,,.,..\>. ---.....„.., . 3.,,,,,,,.., -.....r,... "-- 71-1:tr"ft 7 ‘,rr „ _- --Ai rrificr _# ,. I cil k Mt MI ij"41111= re.smetaa.....* Lawn D 0 i I/1 -- t= fear411111111.* t f I or r Sidewalk Parking Travel Lane Median Travel Lane Parking Sidewalk 2' 24' 9' 24' 12' — R G Roesch Architecture & Landscape Architecture, P.C. Madison Avenue—Myrtle Boulevard Median Concept ALTERNATIVE 1 — Section 475 Tenth Ave., New York, New York 10078 (212) 244-2121 Not to Scale Date: 11/28/01 1 T. 1 Concrete Sidewalk ( ., , , , , , r-' ""ii Ni M _ Granite Block or Lawn Strip i p I �: �.� . , �_ rl l It l 1 jj {y_ { � 1l ► �'}. ' „"` IIPedestrian §14 tl / .3 11 � , + c ll � ' , U I/ >:i� ii I Ili 1. 4. €Sa ; t FF,` SR t >, i ti€.aiti :q " � s 1iIII £ }r > i € . : ,illi/ e,s. 1 i e! �� • , .,,,, fi � ' . . 101 d ;F1 k E �s %',ji ; tl, ;L. ' ; is i, Ramp E il ,.} Parallel Parking Shade Tree . ii * . V. a i Myrtle Boulevard I1 c.:; I A' 1 i f fI , AfiAltrati. Iviedlan . b p ,,,>, .rY 1 tl 7� 1 L11 a" x n, ., . .,........ -^,. � r >� - � .o.u.�.. .-+.s�. +«w..�.. yF"' .�wY 4...1' vim? A111,,, �.,: s ��f e .... -«.xwu*-.-.."« ' ..�..>::...-..a.,«.. MIM «,�e»>w�.�,....- .�...,-..,..e,�»,.. -,-«H....-.. .. .....«w,q., �-:.. .:..aao�«..>.,.....,-...aa. ..e�tll �.,..,.,.w ... ‘44111 ii Small Flowering Trees and Groundcovcr , ,- 0 with 18" Granite Block Edge 5 Z P Ls., ; N p i 11.193 • Parallel Parking l Shade Tree it l :714 ...,......y...-_- _ �a'�1 ,�"'b"" '"'i II ggg€gI I ? It � 11 <q � 1l � 3 it 'jf ,� ,llflI' 1IIIIU ��'�11i 'l 1,� �"` 11i.�t },` _ � jf .��� � Mi �� �:l i :t # 0 i t, E . lq �Y •3 € „, i. . ,E } > I.! i,3 7 17 I.s $E } {EF JR ': 71 1. i� : i i a €, 1 � �.� < .wA .4 i t i e F . #y O fl $:. '4 iF �W • e E N Granite Block or Lan Strip �' �' ? ' Concrete Sidewalk „ l .ww,., .....:.m.wa,...,..w.w..-..... w,,...t.,. F j' , �. I w. . i 4., ,:.1..1 ! _,7:: 1 i R GRoesch Architecture & Landscape Architecture, P.C. Madison Avenue—Myrtle Boulevard Median Concept ALTERNATIVE 2 — Plan 475 Tenth Ave., New York, New York 10018 (272) 244-2121 Not to Scale Date: 11/28/01 \ ( . , < . 1.110. f; ., Shade Trcc 4"" ,,-,trt./A r Flowering Tree I, ` '' flil t (Cherry). 4 I , -a--,- 4' LI .Ar r---1-1 ' Vr it ' ilkilitifet — r__ ________, 11 ,....J.-\„....„,, , r f1 ���i',.aM� —18" Granite Block Edgezc:3 c==:, I:3 fil Grounds oti c:riiiiiiratilin * 1( % 6r► . ,,t11121M„,al. k1111 filimmi __. 114 li. Sidewalk Parking Travel Lane Median Travel Lane Parking Sidewalk 17' 24' 9' 24' 12' R GRoesch Architecture & Landscape Architecture, P.C. ALTERNATIVE 2 — Section 475 Tenth Ave., New York, New York 10018 (212) 244-2121 Madison Avenue—Myrtle Boulevard Median Concept Not to Scale Date: 11/28/01 I ,r MUM MOM 1 4111114.11 IVG117 F, ill kill ConerE to Sid walk IL 1 Ail Gram B nStrp NE mimomilitel Pedestrian Ramp 1 A a i Parallel Parking w Shade Tree CA s Myrtle Boulevard u u 1111111& Lik d10,14 J - diatikk 4 ,..= . . __s______7_, _ ,,,, Median --7,--- 4 s s a y. •.wr.--r---7,...T � � - T_. . .e- y- � s..�1-Nirio-opit. , . . . . N r : � .+d .l yt~ S1Y. d y' i Ste. • • ...,_ ___iikilir as 111111PPF 1.- U Informal Groupings of Small Trees, Shrubs and Perennials 50 u U NI Ilk Parallel Parking Shade Tree At f 111 kjiIftUIflDhIILDL1Th III , 11111160111111111110i101111JI1llhIlJh� A7.,„ elk H1IIViTUThiIi I f l' 4 l Grani 'c Bloc! or Lain Stri oncretf Side .'alk to ;, 11111 IIIo alt =0/11111.11111` R GRoesch Architecture & Landscape Architecture, P.C. Madison Avenue—Myrtle Boulevard Median Concept ALTERNATIVE 3 — Plan 475 Tenth Ave., New York, New York 70018 (212) 244-2121 Not to Scale Date: 11/28/01 114 '."- .., ,, -",,...,„,,,,, . _ --7\--/-1\ -\:. ........... w Shade Tree ,--.7-6.)"'1/415 ' IK: ----\---„, A iii,„ , „.„-- -,41. ,..,-.1,---, --..„,._,,,, , , ,..„ , 0 ..........1 ii, c....,_ . -al, st„..„ k ‹' > I 4,1 Multi-stern Tree ' (Birch) '1.11f � I f tir AKt I 0 0 \ I' t 1 ?'' , - Low Shrubs, /Mak . c-14 \--, ‘ Perennials s �. and Gr nrAW ... k / —_ • .,„ , . • 3im / 1 .1 'Ica,..0#..., A Sidewalk Parking Travel Lane Median Travel Lane Parking Sidewalk 12' 24' 4' 24' 12' R GRoesch Architecture & Landscape Architecture, P.C. Madison Avenue—Myrtle Boulevard Median Concept ALTERNATIVE 3 - Section 475 Tenth Ave., New York, New York 10018 (212) 244-2121 Not to Scale Date: 11/28/01 4 A., A u„.,,. ti$ „,----?, , , , Shade Tree Beyond- _ .. i '3 t x d Y ; )` Multi-Mein Tree /, - . ,� ..---"”- ,.,<xL �;� .,h.^ _-_.`^mss~ �£R x *001 , i'''.'":1/1::::. ,.••••1''' —11,, st L. r' ` •—N,. w p t di '1/414 / .o.'141.7''—',..)-- 4.1" lel 1 r-1‘,..-A-\> ---, , . . ," • gf ' Informal Groupings of a M k 4 .., (Shrubs and Perennials �, \ •k t.i, ill .1 . .., , . A -... ..,,,- , , vo.:."- r •—• .gym r-- ±s t A.... , ,. . ?„... a e' fir- ••kw��"y - 3 _ , . ' i - f44: ..- tf. : Wit: y-w�.,4 `. ^r qt �,, r • „......,. ..„,,,,, , , � INV . �M -, . . . y ► • � f :..! ".: .xs :1' p. ii p '" y� a 1 "' � ( 7 .3i`. n ". r� r .«1 ..,-..4....,'. a lit.... .'' r 4 ,y: ri: e,.Aa ° ...a.4ll. w . .... Med tan R GRoesch Architecture & Landscape Architecture, P.C. Madison Avenue—Myrtle Boulevard Median Concept ALTERNATIVE 3 - Elevation of Median 475 Tenth Ave., New York, New York 10018 (212) 244-2121 Not to Scale Date: 11/28/01