In addition, as existing land uses and buildings continue to become obsolete, urban infill will certainly be a crucial part of meeting future demand for not just housing, but also offices, services, entertainment and whatever the future is for ‘brick and mortar’ retail outlets.
To be sure, infill projects enjoy
many advantages, including tapping existing infrastructure and transit options,
closer proximity to retail stores and services, and even potential incentives
provided by local government. Yet there
are also serious challenges for even the most seasoned builder, including
increased and unique project costs, longer time frames to receive entitlements,
and the need to appeal not just to residents or tenants, but also to the
surrounding neighbors.
More recently, according to Tom
Doyle, co-founder and principal of WDLand in Irvine, California, which has been
at the forefront of infill sites since being launched in 1996, another recent
challenge is the disconnect on perceived land values between buyer and
seller.
As Doyle explains, there are three reasons for this over the past two years: Higher direct site improvement costs, steeper development fees and a more restrictive and time-consuming regulatory process, especially for greenfield sites. The result has been lower residual land values than what sellers would have hoped. Moreover, he adds that because those providing equity and debt all prefer core areas, it’s become an extremely competitive market for builders in search of decent volume.
As Doyle explains, there are three reasons for this over the past two years: Higher direct site improvement costs, steeper development fees and a more restrictive and time-consuming regulatory process, especially for greenfield sites. The result has been lower residual land values than what sellers would have hoped. Moreover, he adds that because those providing equity and debt all prefer core areas, it’s become an extremely competitive market for builders in search of decent volume.
Infill development also presents a
different challenge for builders accustomed to creating traditional
subdivisions. Justin Esayian, a broker
with The Hoffman Company of Irvine, cautions that simply selling a project in
an infill location doesn’t guarantee success.
“Builders have had mixed results in infill markets, and that has given
them pause,” he explains. “Their unit count
is generally lower and the projects are more complicated to construct or not
familiar to them, and costs can escalate out of control.”
That’s also why due diligence and
market research is so important for infill sites, especially at the earliest
stages. According to Doyle, it’s crucial for builders to do their community
outreach and with the cities, noting that some are simply not being diligent
enough with the cities and other jurisdictions.
Esayian agrees, adding that when builders try to entitle with only residential
volume in mind, they often get their hand slapped, and that even adding in some
token retail fronting the street can help them obtain approvals.
So what’s popular today for infill
communities? Doyle finds that small-lot,
single-family detached product can often yield the highest residual values,
although a lot depends on the allowable densities per city code. Even denser attached homes above 20 to the
acre are still attractive, although he adds that podium-style product is
difficult unless it’s along the coast or higher-priced areas such as West Los
Angeles.
From his experience, Esayian
suggests that builders take a second look at three-story detached homes
selectively, because they often “live far better than two-story designs; while
you have that extra staircase, you’ve got much more room to move around, and
the livability increases.” Even so, even
the best three-story plans perform well in certain urban submarkets, but less
so in more suburban ones. In addition,
he’s seeing a ‘proliferation of roof decks’ commanding premiums, but don’t put
them everywhere, as they’re often more appropriate for more contemporary
architecture.
As for non-residential infill uses,
Doyle points to The Anaheim Packing House, where developer Lab Holdings
repurposed a former 42,000-square-foot Sunkist facility dating from 1919 into a
wildly popular collection of more than 20 small restaurants under a single
roof.
Started by former fashion industry
executive Shaheen Sadeghi in 1991, Lab Holdings become famous for its
‘Anti-Mall’ redevelopment of an abandoned factory two years later, and has
become a favored partner with Orange County cities in need of creative solutions.
Anaheim Packing House |
Meanwhile, over in nearby Costa
Mesa, Esayian was instrumental in finding a joint venture partner for the
redevelopment of the former L.A. Times printing press site in Costa Mesa. To be
known as The Press, about 300,000 square feet of creative office space will be
repurposed and developed on a roomy 25-acre site along with amenities like
volleyball courts, grills and outdoor seating now popular even with law firms
as well as advertising agencies.
The Press |
No comments:
Post a Comment