When we talk about feasibility as it relates to real estate development most people immediately think "financial feasibility" in terms of will it work (make enough money to succeed) and can the developer pay for it/finance it.
But, the truth is that feasibility considerations go far beyond mere financial concerns. It wasn't until the early 1970's that there was even a framework in place for what we consider modern day real estate feasibility studies. That all came about due to the work and thinking of Wisconsin professor James Graaskamp who is still regarded as the father of real estate feasibility studies.
Graaskamp's greatest contribution to the methodology used today was what he called the FOUR LEGS OF FEASIBILITY. Of course, one was "financial", but the other 3 legs were equally as important even though they required different considerations. They were likened to the 4 legs that support a table - the table isn't stable if it's missing even one of the legs.
The first LEG was "ethical" - referring to the developer's own soul-searching about whether his or her proposed development is the right thing for the community and the right thing in order to succeed. In other words don't delude yourself about the rightness of your development for any consideration other than, is this the right thing for this particular location?
The second LEG was "regulatory" - referring to zoning, legal and other entitlements that must be attainable in order to permit the development of the planned project. This LEG is typically greatly influenced by the next one.
Finally, the third LEG was "political" - referring not to municipal government, but rather to the people of the community who Graaskamp called the "stakeholders". What this leg of feasibility asks is "who do we look to please?" Who is our customer? Will the stakeholders support what we propose to do?
In the case of Wellington, the clear stakeholders are the residents of Wellington who, as a community, are the owners of the K Park parcel. The question is, what do the residents of Wellington want at the K Park site? What do they not want? And, have we done our best to both inform them and listen to them?
Without gaining the political support of the people for a proposed project, it follows that the regulatory leg can be problematic because zoning and permit approvals are influenced directly by the political support or lack of support that a project has with the people. It's really nothing more than a simple and compelling exercise in local democracy and community involvement. It represents the best of how local government works on behalf of the people.
This is a big reason why we took our Wellington Gardens development proposal directly to residents of Wellington - to gauge and hopefully enlist their support for what we proposed to do on the K Park property. See our survey results for what Wellington residents had to say.
In our Wellington Gardens proposal we look to fulfill all FOUR LEGS of feasibility as they have been clearly established over the past 45 years. By doing all that we can to best demonstrate Wellington Gardens "feasibility" for the K Park site our hope is that there is a greater appreciation among Wellington residents and with Village Council for our project, the homework that's been done, and the thoughtful consideration that has been given to the community.
Even if there are those within the community who, in the end, don't agree with our outcome -our Wellington Gardens project proposal - at least they, perhaps, won't find too much fault in our process and our goal of working to fulfill the highest possible standards of feasibility.
But, the truth is that feasibility considerations go far beyond mere financial concerns. It wasn't until the early 1970's that there was even a framework in place for what we consider modern day real estate feasibility studies. That all came about due to the work and thinking of Wisconsin professor James Graaskamp who is still regarded as the father of real estate feasibility studies.
Graaskamp's greatest contribution to the methodology used today was what he called the FOUR LEGS OF FEASIBILITY. Of course, one was "financial", but the other 3 legs were equally as important even though they required different considerations. They were likened to the 4 legs that support a table - the table isn't stable if it's missing even one of the legs.
The first LEG was "ethical" - referring to the developer's own soul-searching about whether his or her proposed development is the right thing for the community and the right thing in order to succeed. In other words don't delude yourself about the rightness of your development for any consideration other than, is this the right thing for this particular location?
The second LEG was "regulatory" - referring to zoning, legal and other entitlements that must be attainable in order to permit the development of the planned project. This LEG is typically greatly influenced by the next one.
Finally, the third LEG was "political" - referring not to municipal government, but rather to the people of the community who Graaskamp called the "stakeholders". What this leg of feasibility asks is "who do we look to please?" Who is our customer? Will the stakeholders support what we propose to do?
In the case of Wellington, the clear stakeholders are the residents of Wellington who, as a community, are the owners of the K Park parcel. The question is, what do the residents of Wellington want at the K Park site? What do they not want? And, have we done our best to both inform them and listen to them?
Without gaining the political support of the people for a proposed project, it follows that the regulatory leg can be problematic because zoning and permit approvals are influenced directly by the political support or lack of support that a project has with the people. It's really nothing more than a simple and compelling exercise in local democracy and community involvement. It represents the best of how local government works on behalf of the people.
This is a big reason why we took our Wellington Gardens development proposal directly to residents of Wellington - to gauge and hopefully enlist their support for what we proposed to do on the K Park property. See our survey results for what Wellington residents had to say.
In our Wellington Gardens proposal we look to fulfill all FOUR LEGS of feasibility as they have been clearly established over the past 45 years. By doing all that we can to best demonstrate Wellington Gardens "feasibility" for the K Park site our hope is that there is a greater appreciation among Wellington residents and with Village Council for our project, the homework that's been done, and the thoughtful consideration that has been given to the community.
Even if there are those within the community who, in the end, don't agree with our outcome -our Wellington Gardens project proposal - at least they, perhaps, won't find too much fault in our process and our goal of working to fulfill the highest possible standards of feasibility.
RSS Feed