<%BANNER%>

Evolution and Anaysis of Building and Design Methods for Multi-Family Affordable Housing in Miami, Florida

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0024482/00001

Material Information

Title: Evolution and Anaysis of Building and Design Methods for Multi-Family Affordable Housing in Miami, Florida
Physical Description: 1 online resource (51 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Bolz, Benjamin
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2009

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: affordable, building, construction, density, miami
Building Construction -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Building Construction thesis, M.S.B.C.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: Housing affordability has been a significant problem for the State of Florida over the past sixty years. The literature addressing this problem as well as its ongoing evolution and changes has been incomplete, as no studies have focused on the particular development of construction techniques of affordable housing within the State of Florida. To determine the evolution and the change that was occurring in the construction techniques of affordable housing, this thesis was designed around a case study of affordable housing in the Miami, Florida area. The case that was used considered five older generation affordable housing complexes and five newer affordable housing; it further examined the construction methods used, the amenities included in each of the complexes, and the interaction between the complexes and the built environment where it was located. A detailed photographic record was recorded from these site visits. One significant implication of this case study was that it drew attention to a definitive shift in how the newer generations of affordable housing have become more functional (largely due to the higher quality construction methods used) and how affordable housing has taken the pre-existing environment into which it is built into greater account. In particular, this case study has uncovered one notable pattern with respect to the evolution of affordable housing multifamily housing namely, that newer and more modern methods of construction have resulted in a higher quality product being delivered.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Benjamin Bolz.
Thesis: Thesis (M.S.B.C.)--University of Florida, 2009.
Local: Adviser: Williamson, Anne.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2009
System ID: UFE0024482:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0024482/00001

Material Information

Title: Evolution and Anaysis of Building and Design Methods for Multi-Family Affordable Housing in Miami, Florida
Physical Description: 1 online resource (51 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Bolz, Benjamin
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2009

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: affordable, building, construction, density, miami
Building Construction -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Building Construction thesis, M.S.B.C.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: Housing affordability has been a significant problem for the State of Florida over the past sixty years. The literature addressing this problem as well as its ongoing evolution and changes has been incomplete, as no studies have focused on the particular development of construction techniques of affordable housing within the State of Florida. To determine the evolution and the change that was occurring in the construction techniques of affordable housing, this thesis was designed around a case study of affordable housing in the Miami, Florida area. The case that was used considered five older generation affordable housing complexes and five newer affordable housing; it further examined the construction methods used, the amenities included in each of the complexes, and the interaction between the complexes and the built environment where it was located. A detailed photographic record was recorded from these site visits. One significant implication of this case study was that it drew attention to a definitive shift in how the newer generations of affordable housing have become more functional (largely due to the higher quality construction methods used) and how affordable housing has taken the pre-existing environment into which it is built into greater account. In particular, this case study has uncovered one notable pattern with respect to the evolution of affordable housing multifamily housing namely, that newer and more modern methods of construction have resulted in a higher quality product being delivered.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Benjamin Bolz.
Thesis: Thesis (M.S.B.C.)--University of Florida, 2009.
Local: Adviser: Williamson, Anne.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2009
System ID: UFE0024482:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

1 EVOLUTION AND ANAYSIS OF BUIL DING AND DESIGN METHODS FOR MULTIFAMILY AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN MIAMI, FLORIDA By BENJAMIN WARD BOLZ A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLOR IDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE IN BUILDING CONSTRUCTION UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2009

PAGE 2

2 2009 Benjamin W. Bolz

PAGE 3

3 To my mother

PAGE 4

4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS To my entire family, who have been supportiv e of me throughout this endeavor and to all my professors who have made this thesis possi ble. I would like to especially thank Dr. Williamson for her continued support throughout this process.

PAGE 5

5 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................................... 4LIST OF FIGURES .........................................................................................................................7LIST OF TABLES ...........................................................................................................................9ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................................... .............10CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 12Background .................................................................................................................... .........12Statement of Problem .......................................................................................................... ...13Purpose of the Study .......................................................................................................... .....13Organization of the Study .......................................................................................................13Significance of the Study ........................................................................................................142 LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................................................15Introduction .................................................................................................................. ...........15Affordable Housing Defined .................................................................................................. 15Evolution of Affordable Housing within Florida ................................................................... 173 METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................. 21Introduction .................................................................................................................. ...........21Designing a Case Study ........................................................................................................ ..21Case Study ..............................................................................................................................21Conclusion .................................................................................................................... ..........224 RESULTS ....................................................................................................................... ........23List of Case Study Sites with Addresses ................................................................................ 23Map of Locations ....................................................................................................................24Photographs and Descrip tion of Each Site .............................................................................25Amber Garden ................................................................................................................. 25Santa Clara .......................................................................................................................27Santa Clara II ................................................................................................................ ...29West Brickell ...................................................................................................................31Congress Building ...........................................................................................................33Hadley Gardens ...............................................................................................................35Town Park Village I ........................................................................................................ 37Casa Isabel .......................................................................................................................39

PAGE 6

6 Holy Comforter Senior Housing ..................................................................................... 41Town Park Plaza South ...................................................................................................435 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................... 46Conclusions .............................................................................................................................46Further Studies ........................................................................................................................48LIST OF REFERENCES ...............................................................................................................50BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH .........................................................................................................51

PAGE 7

7 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 1-1 Population in the State of Florida (Census) ....................................................................... 124-1 Map of Locations ...............................................................................................................244-2 Looking at entrance from NW 24th St ...............................................................................254-3 Looking at back of building from NW 23rd St .................................................................. 264-4 Looking at SW corner of building ..................................................................................... 264-5 Looking East from 13th Ave .............................................................................................. 274-6 Entrance showing keycard security system ....................................................................... 284-7 Solid Waste Department Transfer Station directly across Street ....................................... 284-8 Looking SE from NW 13 Ave ........................................................................................... 294-9 Metrorail station that is locat ed directly next to complex .................................................. 304-10 Playground that was built in conjunction with project ......................................................304-11 Looking SE from SW 2nd Ave .......................................................................................... 314-12 Looking at the south side of building ................................................................................324-13 Back of building ................................................................................................................324-14 Looking NE from NE 2nd Ave .......................................................................................... 334-15 Entrance way located on NE 2nd Ave ...............................................................................344-16 Lobby of Congress Building .............................................................................................. 344-17 Sign and entrance to lobby ............................................................................................... ..354-18 Rearview of building facing west ......................................................................................364-19 Unused security feature ......................................................................................................364-20 Looking at south at part of complex from NW 17th St .....................................................374-21 Typical exterior of units .....................................................................................................384-22 Units being rehabbed ..................................................................................................... ....38

PAGE 8

8 4-23 Casa Isabel from E on South River Drive .......................................................................... 394-24 Rear view of building from SW ......................................................................................... 404-25 Rear stairwell .....................................................................................................................404-26 Side view of building looking SW ..................................................................................... 414-27 Rearview of complex from sidewalk on SW 2nd Ave ...................................................... 424-28 Looking West on SW 13th Ave into parking lot ............................................................... 424-29 Looking W into the south end of the complex ................................................................... 434-30 Looking N into middle of complex from south parking lot ............................................... 444-31 Typical front of buildings ..................................................................................................44

PAGE 9

9 LIST OF TABLES Table page 4-1 Matrix of findings ..............................................................................................................45

PAGE 10

10 Abstract of Thesis Presen ted to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Building Construction EVOLUTION AND ANAYSIS OF BUIL DING AND DESIGN METHODS FOR MULTIFAMILY AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN MIAMI, FLORIDA By Benjamin Ward Bolz May 2009 Chair: Anne Williamson Major: Building Construction Housing affordability has been a significant problem for the State of Florida over the past sixty years. The literature a ddressing this problem as well as the ongoing evolution and changes has been incomplete, as no studies have focuse d on the particular deve lopment of construction techniques of affordable housing wi thin the State of Florida. To determine the evolution and the change that was occurring in the construction techniques of affordable housing, this thesis was designed around a case study of affordable housin g in the Miami, Florida area. The case study method that was used considered five older generation affordable housing complexes and five newer affordable housing; it further examined the construction methods used, the amenities included in each of the complexes, and the in teraction between the complexes and the built environment where it was located. A detailed p hotographic record was recorded from these site visits. One significant implication of this case study wa s that it drew attention to a definitive shift in how the newer generations of affordable housi ng have become more func tional (largely due to the higher quality construction methods used) and how affordable hous ing has taken the preexisting environment into which it is built into gr eater account than. One of the main findings of this thesis is the higher density of the newe r units being built and th e construction methods

PAGE 11

11 needed to achieve this. In particular, this ca se study has uncovered one notable pattern with respect to the evolution of affordable housing multifamily housing namely, that newer and more modern methods of construction have resu lted in a higher quality product being delivered.

PAGE 12

12 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Background An explosion in population in the State of Flor ida over the last sixty years has led to an ever increasing dem and for affordable housing for its citizens. Figure-1 shows the consistent growth in the population within Florida over the past century. However, the solutions in Figure 1-1. Population in the State of Florida (Census) affordable housing solutions have come in many sh apes and sizes throughout the years. As our society continues to expand, the problem of provi ding enough affordable housing in the state will only become more pressing. An analysis of the advantages and the drawbacks of projects from earlier decades (and from more recent years) will help us to determine the best means of confronting the ever-growing pr oblem of housing our states most economically challenged citizens. Looking at various affordable housing complexes built over several generations enables us to understand not only the evolution but also the future of affordable housing in Florida. 0 2,000,000 4,000,000 6,000,000 8,000,000 10,000,000 12,000,000 14,000,000 16,000,000 18,000,000 Year Population

PAGE 13

13 Statement of Problem To com prehend the future of affordable housing in Miami, Florida, we must first answer the following questions: first, how has affordable housing changed over the past six decades, and second, what factors and/or tr ends have driven those changes. The best way to obtain an understanding of how affordable housing has evolved in Miami, Florida is to identify affordable housing projects from different points in time and then compare and contrast them. The answers derived from this will quantify how affordable housing has changed over the years, but we will need to consider the history and policies behi nd these changes in orde r to uncover the reasons behind them. Purpose of the Study The goal of this case study is to gain insight into curren t developments in the affordable housing market and to understand how historic factors and evolving construction techniques have contributed to these developments. Organization of the Study The second chapter of this st udy will review the policies of the Federal Governm ent over the last sixty years and explore th e origins of these policies. The third chapter is a description of the methodology used in the case stu dy that is the backbone of this thesis. The fourth chapter presents the results of the case study of the ten affordable housing projects over several generations in the greater Miami area. Five of the complexes that were completed under affordable housing programs that are now no longe r funding new complexes; the remaining five were constructed as part of the recent a nd still ongoing Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) Program. Finally, this paper will conc lude by addressing the re sults of the case study and providing answers to the questions posed earlier in this chapter.

PAGE 14

14 Significance of the Study As previously m entioned, no large study on the evolution of affordable housing construction techniques in Miami, Florida has be en undertaken to date. The primary benefit of this study is that it is the first to consider the development of construction techniques of affordable housing within Miami, Florida; as suc h, it will be helpful both to those in academia and those currently working in the construction industry. Additionally, understanding the evolution of construction techniqu es of affordable housing allows us to make informed decisions about the future of affordable housing in Miami, Florida.

PAGE 15

15 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW Introduction This liter ature review presents a framework in which the policies and action of affordable housing construction in the State of Florida are brought into context. There is no definitive affordable housing history treatise with respect to the State of Florida and, as a result, this review is forced to focus on the broader spectrum of na tional policies in some aspects. This does not degrade the literature review, howev er, as affordable housing policies within the State of Florida have generally been born out of policies that were created at the federal level. Because this paper is looking at the evolu tion of multifamily residential c onstruction, this review does not focus on affordable housing policies that have affected the single family homeowner. This chapter is divided into two sections. Th e first section will look at the definitions of affordable housing and the determining levels on what makes housing affordable or not. The second section of this literature review is a hi storical review of affo rdable housing within the State of Florida; it examines the policies and prog rams that have shaped affordable housing since its inception in 1930s to the present day. Affordable Housing Defined Som ewhat contrary to popular belief, the mean ing of affordable housing is not limited to a description of housing that has been put in place through the government s actions; instead, it is a concept that is much broade r in scope. In general terms, hous ing is described as affordable for a household when the family that occupies the residence is spending no more than 30% of its income on housing (HUD). It is important he re to note the differen ce between renters and owners, as tenants generally only pay rent a nd utilities whereas homeowners are responsible for paying mortgages, taxes, and insurance (Florida Housing Finance Corporation). In theory, the

PAGE 16

16 definition of affordability has no limits. As an example, if a family whose household income was $100,000/year was paying in excess of $30,000/year for all of their hous ing related costs, such familys housing would be deemed unaffo rdable, even though its household income is significantly above the poverty line. Practi cally speaking, however, housing affordability is something that almost exclusively affects families with lower incomes and thus the government bases its affordable housing programs on median in come levels. As might be expected, the government is not overly concerned about the mill ionaire who is spending more than 30% of his household income to make the mortgage payments on his waterfront luxury estate. As stated in the previous paragraph, median household income provides the basis for administering both federal and state affordable housing programs within the State of Florida. The guidelines that determine these income levels for the state are established annually by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). In the State of Florida, the 2007 median income for a household of four was $53,300; this amount is adjusted accordingly depending on the household size. In 2005, 14.6% of homeowners in the State of Florida spent betw een 30-50% of their income on housing, while 9.8% of homeowners e xpended 50% or more of their annual income on housing. Renters fared worse: 20.3 % sp ent between 30-50% of their income on housing and 18.9% devoted over 50% of their income to housing (Shimberg). When a household pays over 30% of their income on housing, it is desc ribed as cost-burdened; when over 50% of a households income is spent on housing, that household is termed severely cost-burdened. The foregoing statistics clearly demonstrate the need for affordable housing programs in the State of Florida

PAGE 17

17 Evolution of Affordable Housing within Florida Affordable housing program s in America (and, more specifically, in Florida) were a product of the twentieth century, and they gained particular traction during the 1930s Prior to that time, Federal and State Governments had ge nerally stayed out of the realm of providing housing solutions for its citizens, except for such small and short programs such as housing for war workers during World War I (Wright). The first affordable housing programs in Florida were a product of federal programs created in Washington. Over the years these programs varied greatly, and they reflected the Federal Go vernments ever-changing ideas on how best to approach the problem with affordable housing at the federal level. The earliest affordable housing programs in the State of Florida were created by the Federal Government in response to the troubled economic times and were an attempt to prevent housing construction from falling into further rui n. The first two pieces of housing legislation initiated by the Federal Government were th e Federal Home Loan Bank Act of 1932 and the Home Owners Loan Act of 1933. Together, th ese programs brought the government into the affordable housing discussion for the first time. In addition, the National Housing Act of 1934 led to the creation of the Federal Housing Admi nistration, which still exists today under the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The main piece of legislation to emerge from the 1930s was the landmark Housing Act of 1937 in which the Federal Government provided money to localities to be used for the construction of new public housing facilities. This program was a direct response by the government to fund short-term rental programs fo r the poorest citizens. As demonstrated by Table 1, Floridas population at that time was small in comparison to the country as a whole, and the population centers of the states were much smaller; as a result, the funding from this program that was actually funneled to Florida was much smaller than what the st ate received in later

PAGE 18

18 years. Although thousands of units were cons tructed in Florida through the Housing Act of 1937, they were considered to be only a short term solution. Surprisingly, there are over 38,000 units surviving from this Depression era program throughout the st ate (Florida Housing Finance Corporation). While World War II would eventua lly shift the countrys priorities away from affordable housing, wartime programs such as the Belmont Heights Estates in Tampa began during the war and continued for some time afterwards (Tampa Housing Authority). As America emerged from the wartime econo my brought on by World War II, it was a country full of prosperity and one that had big dream s for the future of all its citizens. This new hope for the future was evidenced by Congress pronouncement in 1949 that the goal of the country was a decent home and a suitable livi ng environment for every American family (Bratt, Stone, & Hartman). The articulation of this new goal was a watershed moment for the country and was reflected in the Housing Ac t of 1949, which was a marked shift for the government in that in no longer wanted to prov ide simple shelter for its citizens but instead proper housing (Orelbeke). Despite Congress lofty ambitions, the Housing Act of 1949 may have ultimately been a bit too ambitious, as ten years after the 6-year, 810,000-unit total had been set, less than a quarter of the units were in place (Orelbeke). Much like the rest of the country, the dreams of affordable housing on a large scale were never realized in Florida. After years in which grandiose plans collided with the reality of minimal affordable housing construction within the state of Florida and the country as a whole, Congress took more proactive steps and created a se ries of housing programs administered by U.S. HUD and the U.S. Department of Agricultures Office of Rural Development. (Florida Housing Finance Corporation). Programs such as these marked the start of a new era of affordable housing, which began in the end of the 1950s and con tinued into the 1960s, during which public and

PAGE 19

19 private forces worked together to build affo rdable housing units, of which approximately 72,000 still exist in Florida today (Florida Housing Finance Corporation). In 1974, the Federal Government changed its ap proach to affordable housing programs. Until that time, the programs had been largely driven by the governments plan for the construction of new affordable housing units. After 1974, the government a dopted a rental based approach which utilized both new and existing units (GAO). This new approach was known as Section 8, a reference to the section that was an addendum to the Housing Act of 1937, which was still in place in 1974 (and remains in place today). In essence, the government turned its attention from the constructi on industry and began a rental voucher program in which the government approved and gave citizens vouchers to pick and choose where they wanted to live so long as the housing unit met the standards of the governments program. This was a marked shift in policy for the government. In Flor ida, the Federal Govern ment still provides approximately 75,000 Section 8 or Housing Choice vouchers in Florida each year (Florida Housing Finance Corporation). Today, however, these programs are not administered by the Federal Government today but rath er by local or other agencies. One other program also created in 1974 was the Community Development Block Grant, in which grants were made to local agencies for the purpose of preventing slum and blight. While these were not strictly affordable hous ing programs, these programs did impact the affordable housing stocks in Florida by providing money to communities to improve their poorest areas. The final chapter to affordable housing pr ograms to date occurred in 1986 when the LIHTC was put into practice for the first time; although the program was originally intended to be temporary, it was made permanent in 1993. Through the LIHTC program, companies or

PAGE 20

20 individuals that invest in afford able housing can use a dollar-for-dolla r tax credit that is identical to the amount of the investment. Certain conditi ons must be satisfied before an investor can utilize the LIHTC. For example, renters of the qualified investment properties must be comprised of at least 20% of people who earn less than 50% of the median area income; alternatively, 40% of the renters must earn 60 % or less than the area median income. In addition, the renters cannot be charged more th an 30% of their household income, and all of these guidelines must be met for 15 years (Orelb eke). Money is administered to states on a per capita basis; it began at $1.25 but was subsequently raised to $1.75 in 2002 and has been pegged to inflation since 2003. This program has been the foundation for nearly all new affordable housing construction in the United States and it appears that it will stay this way for the foreseeable future.

PAGE 21

21 CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY Introduction The purpose of this paper is to set forth and dis cuss a precise pictur e of the evolution of multi-family affordable housing. Upon reflection, it was determined that the best methodology through which to achieve this purpose is the case study. The case study methodology is a means of conducting social science res earch when the researcher woul d like to find out the how and why behind a pattern in which behavioral events cannot be c ontrolled and a focus on contemporary events is necessary (Yin). Empl oyment of the case study enables us to review developments and trends in affordable housing an d to explore how and why it arrived at its current status and is thus the most desirable methodology for the purposes of this thesis. Designing a Case Study The case study m ethod is separated into three dis tinct areas: (i) defi ne and design the case study; (ii) prepare, collect and analyze the data; and (iii) analyze and draw conclusions from the data. The first step of the case study is to de fine and design theory on what one is studying. Next, the researcher must select cases and al so design the data collection protocol. The researcher is then ready to conduct the numerous case studies that they ha ve selected to do. Finally, these data can be used to draw cross-case conclusions, and modify the theory. The case study data will be used to develop new theories and be able to show any cross case correlations and show them. Case Study This case study began by carefully selecting several properties within the city of Miam i. The next steps in the process involved the creat ion of a matrix to quant ifiably grade and gauge the selected properties. Some of the data that were obtained for the matrix was public record,

PAGE 22

22 while most of the data were a result of field studies in Miami, Florida. Although not all data were available, sufficient information was gathered such that the credibility of the matrix became very clear. After these properties were selected, several days of site visits were made in an attempt to gather the appropriate informati on and also to take photographs that could qualitatively measure the select ed properties. All data were then synthesized to draw conclusions and to answer the research questions that are the subject of this thesis. Conclusion The case study m ethod is a method that can be used to study something such as the quality of affordable housing, which is not something that could be done in a survey. This is due to the fact that a survey could not obtain the field results such as photogr aphs, which enhance the validity of the case study. It is also to be noted that some information that was originally planned to be collected was unavailable and outside the scope of this paper. All in all, with a research topic such as this the methodology used, while not perfect in all senses was the correct and right methodology to be employed on a project such as this thesis.

PAGE 23

23 CHAPTER 4 RESULTS List of Case Study Sites with Addresses 1. Am ber Garden 1301 NW 23rd Street Miami, FL 33142 2. Santa Clara 2000 NW 12th Avenue Miami, FL 33142 3. Santa Clara Apartments II 1250 NW 21st St Miami, FL 33142 4. West Brickell 955 SW Second Avenue Miami, FL 33130 5. Congress Building 111 NE 2nd Avenue Miami, FL 33132 6. Hadley Gardens 3031 NW 19th Ave Miami, FL 33142 7. Town Park Village I 1680 NW 4th Ave Miami, FL 33136 8. Casa Isabel 300 SW 4th Ave Miami, FL 33130 9. Holy Comforter Senior Housing Apartments 190 SW 13th Ave Miami, FL 33135 10. Town Park Plaza South 1798 NW 5th Ave Miami, FL 33136

PAGE 24

24 Map of Locations Figure 4-1Map of Locations

PAGE 25

25 Photographs and Description of Each Site Amber Garden Finished in 2008 this 10-story residential structure is located in the Allapa ttah section of the city of Miam i. Containing 110 units it is designed for elderly housing only. Features include a two story parking garage and several common areas for its resi dents. It is also located two blocks from the Metrorail. It is located on .5 acres and has a dens ity of 220 units per acre. Figure-4-2. Looking at entr ance from NW 24th St

PAGE 26

26 Figure 4-3. Looking at back of building from NW 23rd St Figure 4-4. Looking at SW corner of building

PAGE 27

27 Santa Clara Built in 2001 this 9-story residential structure al so located in the Allapattah section of the city of Miami. Containing 208 units it is the fi rst building in a two building complex. It is located right next to the Santa Cl ara Metrorail station wh ere it gets its name from. However, one feature that is striking is its placement next to the City of Miami waste transfer center, however there was no detectable odor during all visits. It is located on 2 acres and has a density of 104 units per acre. Figure 4-5. Looking East from 13th Ave

PAGE 28

28 Figure 4-6. Entrance showing keycard security system Figure 4-7. Solid Waste Department Tran sfer Station direc tly across Street

PAGE 29

29 Santa Clara II Located approximately fifty yards to the Nort h of Santa Clara this building was built in 2005. A very unique project as th e lower five floors are parki ng garage floors dedicated to Metrorail riders. The building is a total of 17 floors including the parking garage and has 204 units. It is very similar to Santa Clara in construction techniques, yet was built by a different developer. It is located on .5 acres and has a density of 102 units per acre. Figure 4-8. Looking SE from NW 13 Ave

PAGE 30

30 Figure 4-9. Metrorail station that is located directly next to complex Figure 4-10. Playground that was bu ilt in conjunction with project

PAGE 31

31 West Brickell One of the first LIHTC buildings in Miami, this building was constructed in 1995. It contains 130 units on 14 floors. Located just sout h of downtown in the Brickell area of Miami, it is dwarfed by the large condominiums that now su rround it. It is located on 1 acres and has a density of 130 units per acre. Figure 4-11. Looking SE from SW 2nd Ave

PAGE 32

32 Figure 4-12. Looking at the south side of building Figure 4-13. Back of building

PAGE 33

33 Congress Building One of the most interesting affordable housing projects in all of Fl orida this building was originally constructed in two parts. The first pa rt was a five story building built in 1923 with an additional sixteen stories cons tructed on top of it in 1926. Th e building is a neo-classical skyscraper that was rehabbed and turned into a ffordable housing in 1997. It is located in the heart of downtown Miami. It is located on .22 acres and has a density of 586 units per acre. Figure 4-14. Looking NE from NE 2nd Ave

PAGE 34

34 Figure 4-15. Entrance way located on NE 2nd Ave Figure 4-16. Lobby of Congress Building

PAGE 35

35 Hadley Gardens An affordable housing complex for elderly residents built in 1986 with 150 out of the 151 units receiving assistance. This complex is is olated from the surrounding community and is not readily accessible to anything other than single family housing. It is 5 stories in height. It is located on 2 acres and has a de nsity of 75 units per acre. Figure 4-17. Sign and entrance to lobby

PAGE 36

36 Figure 4-18. Rearview of building facing west Figure 4-19. Unused security feature

PAGE 37

37 Town Park Village I A sprawlin g residential complex built in 1986 consisting of two story apartments located in the Overtown area of Miami. This was th e only case study complex that was not primarily dedicated to affordable housing. However, was adjacent an in similar condition to affordable housing complexes in the vicinity of it. It is lo cated on 7 acres and has a density of 21.5 units per acre. Figure 4-20. Looking at south at part of complex from NW 17th St

PAGE 38

38 Figure 4-21. Typical exterior of units Figure 4-22. Units being rehabbed

PAGE 39

39 Casa Isabel Located nea r the Miami River in the Little Havana area of Miami. This three story complex was built in 1980. This three story complex has single floor units on the ground floor and two-story units on the second. There is several on site parking spots for residents on the side and in the front of the building, as well as having parking on the stre et. It is located on .34 acres and has a density of 44.1 units per acre. Figure 4-23. Casa Isabel fr om E on South River Drive

PAGE 40

40 Figure 4-24. Rear view of building from SW Figure 4-25. Rear stairwell

PAGE 41

41 Holy Comforter Senior Housing This three story com plex was built in 1971 and is located in the Little Havana area of Miami. It has forty-two units a nd is located a block of the main st reet of Flagler. It is located on 1.5 acres and has a density of 28 units per acre. Figure 4-26. Side view of building looking SW

PAGE 42

42 Figure 4-27. Rearview of comple x from sidewalk on SW 2nd Ave Figure 4-28. Looking West on SW 13th Ave into parking lot

PAGE 43

43 Town Park Plaza South This com plex was built in 1972 and consists of 2 story apartments spread out over a large lot. Located in the Miami area of Overtown this complex contains 116 units. There is plenty of parking in front of all residences It is located on 6 acres and ha s a density of 19.3 units per acre. Figure 4-29. Looking W into th e south end of the complex

PAGE 44

44 Figure 4-30. Looking N into middle of complex from south parking lot Figure 4-31. Typical front of buildings

PAGE 45

45 Table 4-1. Matrix of findings

PAGE 46

46 CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS The results in the previous chapter dem onstrat e the patterns that have emerged throughout the history of affordable housing construction within Miami, Florida. The following sets forth the conclusions that have been derived fr om the results of the case study as well as recommendations for further follow-up studies. Conclusions As discussed in the m ethodology section of this paper, the purpose of a case study is to address the questions of why a nd how the elements that are the subject of the study have changed. The first section of this conclusion fo cuses on the answers that this case study has provided with respect to how construction tech niques have evolved, while the second part of discusses why such techniques have changed. Finally, the conclusion to this paper will close with a brief analysis of potential future directions for affordable housing in Miami, Florida. This case study has provided three answers to the question of how affordable housing construction techniques have changed. The first is that the density of the affordable housing complexes that were studied in the case study has increased enormously over the years. All of the newer generation affordable housing complexes are of a significantly hi gher density than the older generation complexes that were the subject of this case study. Taking note of this shift is important to an understanding of how construction techniques in affordable housing have changed because higher density buildings (i.e., ta ller and more complex structures as opposed to complexes with several two story structures) spr ead out over large areas. The second conclusion that can be derived from the case study with resp ect to the evolution of construction techniques is that, in more recent developments, builders of affordable housing have employed similar construction materials and techniqu es as those that are used in non-affordable housing buildings

PAGE 47

47 in neighboring areas. The West Brickell building is a prime example of this trend: from an aesthetics perspective, it fits in with the surroundi ng neighborhood perfectly and does not resemble what one might traditionally expect an affordable housing building to look like. In contrast, the appearance of Town Park Plaza South is in stark contrast to its environs; a person not familiar with construction terminology woul d most likely describe the building as a project. This modernization of the construc tion techniques used in affordable housing has helped residents to feel that there are fewer s tigmas attached to living in an affordable housing complex and also created a higher quality of life for those residents. This modernization of construction techniques can be at tributed to higher density and the need for firms with higher technical capabilities to be involved in the constr uction of these larger buildings. These higher densities can be attributed to the fact LIHTC does not give credit for land acquisition and also the fact that large parcels of la nd are prohibitively expensive in th e Miami, Florida area. Finally, the integration of mass transit w ith affordable housing in recent years (as can be seen in Santa Clara II, with the transit parking garage) shows a synergy between construction and planning as an innovative means of mixing both parking and housing that has only been made possible by the evolution of new constr uction techniques. The case study was also desi gned to find out why affo rdable housing construction techniques have changed within the Miami, Fl orida, and the answers are provided by both the literature review and the case study data. One explanation is there has been a major overhaul of the system pursuant to which affordable housing is being constructed. The creation of a system in which rental vouchers are not the primary means of delivering affordable housing has resulted in a competitive structure in which the government has more oversight. Stated another way, builders of affordable housing cannot develop a project for which the government will supply

PAGE 48

48 rental vouchers anymore. While this method was efficient for producing large numbers of housing units available for governmental assistance, it created an environmen t that facilitated the colloquial cutting of corners on the constructi on of those units. Unfortunately, many builders settled for quantity over quality, in the absence of any economic in centives to do otherwise. The LIHTC system, by striking a balance between government-funded housing and total private enterprise, has ensured that a greater em phasis is placed on using proper and modern construction techniques. A competitive system is su ccessful only if there is regulation in place to let it function properly. This thesis and, in particular, this case study have shown that affordable housing in Miami, Florida has evolved significantl y over the past 75 years. This evolution, however, may be slowing. The LIHTC program has proven itself capable of providing innovative affordable housing that suits the needs of the citizens of this state, and a proper balance between government and private enterprise has been struck. Yet this is not to sa y that affordable housing construction techniques will not continue to ev olve unless building companies are careful to monitor that affordable housing construction techniques keep pace with developments and improvements in private construction. Further Studies Although this thesis has answered a num ber of questions with respect to the evolution of construction techniques in affordable housing with in Miami, Florida, just as many questions are raised and remain unanswered. Further research on the subject of this paper could be undertaken (e.g., to determine whether similar de velopments in affordable housing construction techniques in Miami detailed herein can be seen in other parts of the stat e). Another area that could be looked at further is a study of ener gy efficiency within different generations of affordable housing. A case study focusing on the work of a single affordable housing

PAGE 49

49 construction company or developer that has been working in this field for several decades would also shed more light on the evolution of cons truction techniques. Such a study would, however, require detailed access to blueprints, shop drawings, and other documents that are not available to the public at large. A sim ilar case study could also be conduc ted to study the evolution of construction techniques used in private housing and then compare those results to the ones achieved by this study.

PAGE 50

50 LIST OF REFERENCES Bratt, R.G., Stone, M.E., & Hartm an, C. (2006). A Right to Housing, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA. Florida Housing Finance Corporation. ( 2008). Overview. Florida Housing Finance Corporation. Orlebeke, C.J. The Evolution of Low-In come Housing Policy, 1949-1999. Housing Policy Debate, Fannie Mae Foundation, 11(2), 489-520 Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing. (March 2, 2009). Florida Housing Data Retrieved March 2, 2009, from www.shimberg.ufl.edu Tam pa Housing Authority. (March 3, 2009). An Overview of the HOPE VI Process at Belmont Heights Estates Retrieved March 3, 2009, from http://www.thafl.com/depts/CFAH/summary.asp U.S. Census Bureau. (January, 17 2009). Florida Population Data Retrieved January 17, 2009, fro m www.census.gov U.S. General Accounting Office. (2002). Fed eral Housing Assist ance Com paring the Characteristics and Costs of Housing Pr ograms U.S. General Accounting Office. Wright, R.O. (2007). Chronology of housing in the United States McFarland & Company. Jefferson, NC. Yin, R.K. (2003). Case Study Research: Design and Methods 3rd Ed, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.

PAGE 51

51 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Benjam in Ward Bolz was born in Miami, Florida on September 5, 1981. He was the youngest of three children of Henry and Wendy Bolz. He graduated from Ransom Everglades High School in Miami in 2000. After spending two years of school at the University of Vermont, he transferred to the Univer sity of Florida. He graduated magna cum laude with a B.A. in geography in 2004. After working as a ci ty planner for several years, he returned to receive his masters in building construction at the University of Florida.