Mixed-use launch depends on communication, community need

Terry Delahunty is an attorney and partner in the Orlando office of Foley & Lardner LLP, a national law firm. He says that mixed-use projects make sense for Florida.

“The trend for development — certainly in urban development — is to a mixed-use project,” Delahunty says. “It’s considered a smart growth type of a trend that we’ve seen much more of recently, because it allows for an intensive use of the property and brings together different types of users into one spot, which is appealing.”

Delahunty concedes that developers can face public objections, which are most effectively handled preemptively. He suggests finding a point person in the community and setting up meetings prior to the finalization of project plans to discuss their concerns and address them accordingly.

“You don’t just announce that this is what’s going to happen, take it or leave it,” Delahunty says.

Patrick Slevin is president of The Slevin Group Inc., a Tallahassee-based public relations firm that has helped developers manage community reaction to multi-use projects. He agrees that developers should plan on early communications. He believes Florida’s notice and hearing process requiring developers to contact the community and receive feedback about land use is archaic.

“It doesn’t work,” Slevin says. “Given Florida’s tremendous growth, it’s just not enough to educate the public to merits of the application.”

He says that NIMBYism (“not in my backyard”) — the affectionate acronym for people who object to major real estate developments on the grounds that it affects their property — results from a breakdown between the bureaucratic process and the developer. Slevin advocates that developers initiate contact with neighboring communities early in the planning process, even though the law does not require it.

“It’s an emotional process. The law doesn’t prescribe applicants to meet with the public to build consensus,” Slevin says. “Many developers operate with the tendency to fly under the radar. This is where you see community conflict. Developers don’t see the value of third-party input.”

Slevin estimates that 80% of conflicts are from homeowners who have heard gossip about how the project might negatively affect them, arising from a lack of communication from the developer.

“The genie’s out of the bottle and now the developer has to defend himself at the hearing in front of the elected officials,” Slevin says.

Mitchell Rice, chief executive officer of RMG Property Group Inc., a Tampa-based development company, agrees that rumors can generate negative reactions from residents of communities adjacent to proposed multi-use projects.

“The rumor mill ... can often run rampant and out of control,” Rice says. “It’s important to be communicative with the neighborhood, because in the absence of information, people assume the worst. The worst, of course, would be everything they don’t want.”

Rice says the two main objections to multi-use projects from neighboring areas are about increasing traffic for existing neighborhoods and building height. He suggests meeting with the neighbors to understand their specific objections and then demonstrating how the development would benefit the area.

Delahunty finds the issue of school overcrowding a considerable objection in many areas.

“Many Florida schools are overcrowded. Legally, if you want to bring a project online, the developer has to figure out a way to address overcrowding,” Delahunty says.

But, developers who cannot find that solution in a timely fashion can buy their way out.

“If there’s a problem, the developer’s allowed to pay a certain amount for a future solution,” Delahunty says.

Slevin recommends engaging the media, consensus-building, and identifying key contacts, such as a homeowners’ association president in a neighboring community, prior to finalizing project plans.

“The end result is that you want to get the elected officials to vote favorably for your project,” Slevin says. “What you find is when community opposition shows itself, you will see elected officials voting against these good real estate projects.”

Slevin says that this type of interaction creates “impressions of goodwill.”

As a former elected official — Slevin served as mayor of Safety Harbor — he understands the political process of project approval. He says the developer ultimately benefits by proactively engaging the community in discourse.

“There’s a perceived caring that the developer achieves,” Slevin says. “Quite typically, what happens is when the developer goes out early, often, and ongoing with public participation, then they’re going to win more political capital when the application comes up for a vote. You’re mitigating conflict; you’re making it easier for elected officials to vote in favor of your application.”

Ultimately, Slevin states that facing objections at the front end of an application costs less than handling them later.

“You avoid costly concessions, delays, lawsuits, and possibly rejection of your application,” Slevin says.

He points out that rapid communication allows people of common interest to organize quickly and effectively, and undercut valuable real estate projects.

“It’s the mother of four who’s really the Goliath now,” Slevin says.

It’s difficult to imagine a firm like Mitchell Rice’s as a David. RMC manages 80 shopping centers encompassing 8 msf throughout Florida, and currently handles three mixed-use projects, including one under construction. The projects incorporate retail, with a Publix anchor at two locations, vertically integrated with residential units and parking garages. Rice says that there is no typical reaction to mixed-use projects, but that his firm has not faced substantial objection to its current plans.

“We avoid it by identifying projects that the community is calling for,” Rice says.

Rice points out that many Florida city planning departments have adopted new land use regulations and do not necessarily have zoning regulation for multi-use properties. He suggests that developers work with public officials and local land planners to learn what is important and appropriate to each city.

Don Madden, chief public information officer for Osceola County and its 1,322 square miles of land, says that with 4 million more people making Central Florida home by 2050, it is important that development projects fit the county vision. Osceola County has traditionally been comprised of rural communities and has considerably less population density than the rest of Florida — 130 people per square mile compared with 296 people per square mile in Florida overall, according to 2000 U.S. Census figures.

Madden says that developers of multi-use properties are welcome in Osceola, as long as they understand the county vision, which apparently is not that of a bucolic countryside.

“We do have people who prefer we leave it in a rural situation,” Madden says. “If we try and say no as a way of staying rural, we’ll lose the county piece by piece ... People have property rights.”

Madden says that the county’s urban planning includes putting in developments that include employment and shopping opportunities, villages, town centers, and provisions to constrain traffic. He says that developers will face the least resistance if they look at the county’s comprehensive plan before embarking on multi-use projects.

“We’re focusing on building communities rather than just land development,” Madden says.

Maria Teresa Fojo, zoning land use development division chief for Miami-Dade County, faces a different landscape insofar as her county has some of the highest population density in Florida — with 1,158 people per square mile and a total population exceeding 2.4 million. She says that several of the county’s districts, such as Kendall, Princeton, Goulds, and Naranja, encourage multi-use properties and developers will likely face little objection by residents.

According to Fojo, plans for these districts were established after many meetings with community leaders, architects, and developers. She says that a series of charrettes helped establish a unified vision. A charrette is a specific type of meeting designed to solve a problem or issue. Typically, it is an intense, one-time, highly planned event that involves experienced leadership, detailed evidence, public input, and a tight focus on tangible results.

Fojo has not seen substantial resistance to multi-use projects in the above-mentioned areas, some of which are still recovering from Hurricane Andrew in 1992 and have a low income, high minority population. She states that multi-use projects help keep housing and services within the urban development boundary lines.

“Everything we’ve done, the citizens have seen as very favorable,” Rojo says. “We’ve had very little objection.”

Fojo says that in some of the more affluent areas of Miami-Dade County, residents do object to multi-use projects.

“We will always have community members coming out and saying they have concerns with traffic and schools,” Rojo says. “Usually what happens is that they will come to the board meetings and voice their concerns to their community councils. At that point, the community councils encourage the developers to meet with the neighbors.”