HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-06-22 - SupplementalT �&
ZM%
,Ai
-RiAw-=
JAI`
J
J
Q C
7
Joseph T. Janczyk, Ph.D.
Empire Economics, Inc.
Neal Payton
Torti Gallas and Partners
Jeffrey Tumlin
Nelson Nygaard Consulting
Dr. Joseph T Janczyk, president of Empire Economics, has performed 500+ economic
studies on behalf of public entities during the past thirty years to assist them with evaluating
the creditworthiness of newly developing residential and commercial projects, resulting
in the issuance of $14+ billion in municipal bonds, primarily in the area of land -secured
infrastructure financing.
The methodology formulated by Dr. Janczyk's for economic studies has a strong track record
of providing accurate/reliable forecasts for the absorption of newly developing residential and
commercial projects by utilizing a unique approach. Although econometric models provide
a strong statistical foundation for forecasting, of equal importance is the compilation of real-
time market data to detect newly emerging economic and real estate market conditions. With
this approach Dr. Janczyk identified the formation of a housing market bubble in early 2005,
due primarily to the shift towards creative mortgage financing structures; his subsequent
economic reports included a discussion/disclosure of this risk factor in municipal bond
offerings.
Dr. Janczyk received his Doctorate in Economics from the University of California —Riverside,
and was a tenured Economics Professor at California State University —San Bernardino. As
an educator, he sought to have students not only learn the principles of economics but also
understand how to gain critical insights into the functioning of the economic -political system.
Dr. Janczyk continues his role as an educator through his participation as a speaker/panelist
at numerous municipal bond seminars and events.
Neal Payton is an architect, urban designer, and a principal with Torti Gallas and Partners,
where he created and directs the firm's west coast office in Downtown Los Angeles.
Neal's work focuses on the intersection of Transit Oriented Development, Placemaking
and Affordable Housing. Some of his recently completed efforts include leading the urban
design component of the Westside Extension of the Purple Line subway, in Los Angeles,
the Master Plan for the revitalization of 3-mile stretch of Coast Highway, Historic Route
101, in Oceanside CA (which won a California APA award) and the Specific Plan for the
redevelopment of an abandoned shopping mall into a new Downtown for the City of
Westminster, Colorado in suburban Denver.
His current work includes the Downtown Specific Plan for the City of Santa Monica, a
master plan for the reclamation of a quarry site in Pleasanton, CA and the redevelopment
of a public housing site near a new rail station in Honolulu.
Jeffrey Tumlin is an owner and sustainability practice leader of Nelson Nygaard Consulting
Associates, a San Francisco -based transportation planning and engineering firm that
focuses on sustainable mobility.
Over the past 19 years, he has led station area, downtown, citywide, and campus plans,
and delivered various lectures and classes, in 20 U.S. states and five other countries. His
major development projects have succeeded in reducing their traffic and CO2 emissions by
as much as 40%, and accommodated many millions of square feet of growth with no net
increase in motor vehicle traffic.
These projects have won awards from the General Services Administration, American
Planning Association, American Society of Landscape Architects, Congress for the New
Urbanism, and Urban Land Institute.
City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Department
Notes:
City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Department
EMPLOYMENT -HOUSING FORECASTING MODEL FOR RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PRIMARY CONCLUSIONS
1. RANCHO CUCAMONGA HAS RECENTLY EXPERIENCED ROBUST EMPLOYMENT GROWTH,
AND THIS HAS GENERATED A STRONG DEMAND FOR NEW HOMES.
2. HOWEVER, DUE TO MOST OF THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY IN THE CITY ALREADY
BEING DEVELOPED, THE POTENTIAL SUPPLY OF NEW HOMES IS CONSTRAINED.
3A. THE CITY HAS AN EXCESS DEMAND FOR NEW HOUSING, MEANING THAT
SOME HOUSEHOLDS EMPLOYED IN THE CITY RESIDE ELSEWHERE.
3B. THE EXCESS DEMAND FOR NEW HOMES PROVIDES THE CITY WITH THE ABILITY TO
DECIDE THE PARTICULAR RESIDENTIAL PRODUCT TYPES THAT FULFILLS ITS VISION.
4. CONSIDERATION ALSO NEEDS TO BE GIVEN TO THE UNIQUE CHARACTERISTICS OF
THE CURRENT HOUSING MARKET RECOVERY, AS MILLENNIAL'S ARE PREFERRING
DIFFERENT PRODUCT TYPES THAN THOSE OF PRIOR GENERATIONS.
r.
1. ECONOMIC -EMPLOYMENT MODEL: DEMAND FOR NEW HOMES
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA:
EMPLOYMENT BY FIRMS AND HOUSEHOLDS
90,000
80,000
70,000
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
78,243
73,433 75, 74,350 -� - 0 73,500
67 69,300 600 71,SO8 69,567 70'� 70,000 69,800
65,86 ---
71,253
65,139 CA 66,188
60,591 61,188
59,054 58,210
56,545
2,496
45,503
41,124
36,830
29,037
26,684
---24,0- --__-----__
18,404 16 888--
15,109
11,686 12,000 11,376 10,946 11,090
8,612 7.716 7117
`
_ ___r____ 4,747 4,140
ryocP ,voa', �ooti ,voo'� ,vaoa tiooh ryoo`O �oo� ryoo� ryoo°j tio'.° ,vo1'• ,vatiti moo.,'' tio.,o. �y�S�
,yo
tHouseholds Residing in Rancho Cucamonga -4-Firms Located in Rancho Cucamonga Households vs. Firms
FORECAST OF EMPLOYMENT FOR RANCHO CUCAMONGA
(Employment reported by firms/entities located in Rancho Cucamonga: some of these employees may reside elsewhere.)
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA: RECENT/EXPECTED
LEVELS OF EMPLOYMENT BY FIRMS LOCATED IN THE CITY
100,000 - 90,000 99,077
s6 z73 —
83,355
80,343
80,000 - -
74,10
71,253
70,000 964,35g �i6,3ffff
65,1363,884
62,974 61,188
60,591 59,054
60,000 s6s4s- �
52,496
50,000 45,503
41,124
40,000 36,83 - -
30,000
20,000
10,000
0
00 M O ti N m R 4- 4- 4- LL 4-
O O O O O O O O O O'
O O O O O O O O O O
O
N
Shares of Employment by Core Sectors and Support Sectors
(Employment reported by firms/entities located in Rancho Cucamonga; some of these employees may reside elsewhere.
RANCHO CUCAMONGA: SHARES OF EMPLOYMENT BY ECONOMIC SECTORS
(EMPLOYMENT IN SECTOR / TOTAL EMPLOYMENT)
0% 2% 4% 6% 811", 10% 12% 14% 16%
CORE SECTORS
Ad min istrative-Su pport...
Manufacturing
Restaurants/Hotels
Construction 11111110 7.1
Transportation/Warehou... 6.4%
Wholesale Trade 4.8%
Professional Services 4.5%
Management Services 1.2%
Information M 0.4%
SUPPORT SECTORS
Retail Trade
Government
Health Care
Finance & Insurance
Other Services
Real Estate 1. k
Educational Services 1.2
Arts, Entertainment 0.8%
7.9%
12.2%
14.1%
City of Rancho Cucamonga: Recent Changes in Employment by Core Sectors and Support Sectors
(Employment reported by firms/entities located in the City; some employees may reside elsewhere.)
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA: CHANGES IN EMPLOYMENT BY ECONOMIC SECTORS
COMPARING 2014 TO 2010; IF NEGATIVE -NOW LOWER IF POSITIVE -NOW HIGHER
OVERALL GROWTH RATE + 20%
-60% 40% 20% 0% 20% 40% 60%
CORE SECTORS
inistrative-Support Services
Manufacturing
Restaurants/Hotels
Construction
Transportation/Warehouse
Wholesale Trade
Professional Services
Management Services
Information
SUPPORT SECTORS
Retail Trade
Government
Health Care
Finance & Insurance
Other Services
Real Estate
Educational Services
Arts, Entertainment
OVERALL
AVERAGE
2% 11
45%
80%
Payroll/Emplovee, Average by Core Sectors and Support Sectors:
Full & Part -Time Employees
(Employment reported by firms/entities located in Rancho Cucamonga; some of these employees may reside elsewhere.)
RANCHO CUCAMONGA: AVERAGE PAYROLL PER EMPLOYEE BY ECONOMIC SECTORS
■ Payroll -Avg; 2014 $39,784
$0 $10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000 $60,000 $70,000
$80,000
CORE SECTORS
Administrative -Support Services $23,856
Manufacturing 1 $55,916
Restaurants/Hotels $16,908
Construction $52,838
Transportation/Warehouse $32,985
Wholesale Trade $58,732
Professional Services $53,448
Management Services $70,434
Information $57,290
SUPPORT SECTORS
Retail Trade $31,309
Government $48,470
Health Care $37,675
Finance &Insurance $59,195
Other Services $29,895
Real Estate $43,414
Educational Services $30,462
Arts, Entertainment $25,391
Recent Trends of Unemployment Rates for San Bernardino County and Rancho Cucamonga
(Unemployment reported by households residing in the County/City; some may be employed elsewhere.)
COMPARISON OF UNEMPLOYMENT RATES:
RANCHO CUCAMONGA VERSUS SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY
16%
14%
73_Sy
12.7% 12.9%
12%
10%
7% 9.8%
8.5% 8.6%
8.0% 8.1%
8%
_..
6.0% 6.3% 6 00.5%
5.8% 5.
6%
4.8% 4.8% 8%
4°�
9% 0%
OA
3. 170
2%
0%
1.8% _2.2% -2.3% -21% -1.9% -2.1% -2.1%
°
-2.9% -2.8% -2.5%
-4.2%
-6%
■ San Bernardino County ■ Rancho Cucamonga Difference: City vs. County
II. HOUSING SUPPLY
RANCHO CUCAMONGA: NEW RESIDENTIAL HOMES
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
■ Rancho Cucamonga Single Family Permits Rancho Cucamonga Attached Permits
■ Rancho Cucamonga Apartments
Recent Housing Price Patterns for the LA-OC Region and Rancho Cucamonga
COMPARISON OF HOUSING PRICE TRENDS SINCE 2000
RANCHO CUCAMONGA VERSUS LOS ANGELES - ORANGE COUNTY REGION
t anoi
160% +
140% '--
120%
100% �—
80%
60%
i
40%
20% i ICU%
0%
CD M
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
N N N N
147%
112
1061b5c,
97% —81% -21% w
�1%
57% 62%
55%
56 6°i° 55°!° 5%
4700/46
5%
0 o O 0 O 0 0 0 '+ 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w
O
N
0 LA -CC Region ■ Rancho Cucamonga
CHARACTERISTICS OF CURRENTLY ACTIVE NEW RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS
EMPIRE ECONOMICS PERFORMED COMPREHENSIVE MARKET SURVEYS - SEPTEMBER 2015
➢ CURRENTLY 8 ACTIVE RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS WITH FOR -SALE HOMES;
➢ TOTAL OF 640 HOMES; OF THESE 258 HAVE CLOSED ESCROWS.
➢ BASE PRICES OF $675,720, HIGHER THAN THE PROJECTS IN SEPT. 2014 BY 15.3%.
➢ BUILDER INCENTIVES OF SOME $4,500
➢ LIVING AREAS OF 2,832 SQ.FT
➢ VALUE RATIOS OF SOME $236 SQ.FT. AN INCREASE OF 9.8% FROM THE PROJECTS IN SEPT. 2014.
➢ THE TOTAL TAX BURDEN FOR THESE PROJECTS AMOUNTS TO 1.24%.
➢ ESTIMATED SALES RATE OF 272 HOMES PER YEAR.
11
RECENT DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY IN THE APARTMENT MARKET
Comparing the rents of September 2015 to September 2014, rents have increased by approximately 8.4% during that 12
month time period.
Product Types
Flats (1 story — up or down):
Townhomes (2 story):
Townhomes (3 story)
Living Areas
871-1,248 sq.ft.
1,343-1,536 sq.ft.
1,048-2,030 sq.ft.
September 2014
$1,70041,950
$2,415-$2,650
$1,925-$2,800
September 2015
$2,088 - $2,279
$2,817 - $2,867
$1,965 - $2,987
12
NEWLY DEVELOPING PLANNED COMMUNITIES IN ORANGE COUNTY
(POTENTIAL FOR SPILLOVER/COMMUTERS TO RANCHO CUCAMONGA)
Specifically, there are several new major Planned Communities that are now underway in OC; their
characteristics and development status are as follows:
➢ Villages of Irvine Development potential for about 21,000 homes, thus far some 17,000 homes/apartments
have been sold/leased.
➢ Great Park Neighborhoods Potential for some 9,500 new homes; first phase with about 750 homes closed -
out; next phase of about 900 homes started in August 2015.
➢ Rancho Mission Viejo Potential for about 14,000 new homes. Sendero with 941 homes has closed out, and
the second phase with 840 homes stated in September 2015.
The value ratios (price/living area) amount to about $425/sq.ft. for the Irvine projects; by comparison, the
value ratio for new homes in Rancho Cucamonga is about $236/sq.ft., about 45% less.
13
3. EXCESS HOUSING DEMAND
Recovery of Recession Job Losses and New Demand for Housing
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN EMPLOYMENT CHANGES SINCE 2006
AND THE DEMAND FOR HOUSING WITHIN VS. OUTSIDE THE CITY
7,000
6,275
6,000
5,000
4,000 3,902
3,000
2,373
2,000
1,000
0
Employment Growth Actual New Demand Going
and Housing Homes/Apts. in the Outside the City
Demand City
FORECAST OF EMPLOYMENT FOR RANCHO CUCAMONGA
(Employment reported by firms/entities located in Rancho Cucamonga; some of these employees may reside elsewhere.)
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA: RECENT/EXPECTED
LEVELS OF EMPLOYMENT BY FIRMS LOCATED IN THE CITY
100,000 - - - - - -
90,000 89,077
86;273
83,355
80,343
80,000 - - -
74,10
71,253
70,000 - 65,139
663
64,35862,974 63,884
60,591 61,188
,054 .210
60,000
59
s2,a96
50,000 45,503
a1,124
40,000 36,830 - —
I
30,000
20,000
10,000 - - -
0
O ti N M V N �D 1� 00 at O rl N M O yi LL LL LL LL LL
o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. .+ .+ .» c
O O O O O O O O O S O O O O O W
V1 O O O O O
O
N
V)
w
Q
z
O
H
a
O
Ln
co
a
J
a
z
z
a
700
600
5()U
�11
300
200
100
i
0
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATED ABSORPTION SCHEDULES
FOR THE DESIGNATED FORTHCOMING PROJECTS
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Other Projects
Existing Projects
LAFCO Sphere
Annexation
Empire Lakes
■ Carnesi
■ Ben Anderson Project
Richland Project (2)
■ Richland Project (1)
■ Tracy Project
4. UNIQUE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE CURRENT HOUSING MARKET RECOVERY
FOR SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
I. FAVORABLE CORE FACTORS:
➢ STRONG EMPLOYMENT GROWTH; NEW PEAK LEVELS
➢ FAVORABLE MORTGAGE RATES
➢ TOTAL NEW HOMES (FOR -SALE HOMES AND APARTMENTS) CLOSE TO LONG-TERM AVERAGE
II. EXTRAORDINARY FACTORS: ,
➢ MILLENNIALS' PREFERENCES AND FINANCES �.
➢ MAJOR SHIFT FROM FOR-SALE/SINGLE-FAMILY TO APARTMENTS
.r*
tf �4,1
III. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS GEOGRAPHICALLY TRANSFORMED:
➢ URBANIZED AREAS: NEW FOR -SALE - MODERATE; NEW APARTMENTS - RECORD LEVELS
➢ SUBURBAN -RURAL AREAS: NEW FOR -SALE AND NEW APARTMENTS - SLOW RECOVERIES
NOTE: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA IS USED AS AN EXAMPLE HEREIN, • SF BAYAREA HAS A SIMILAR PATTERN
17
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA:
NEW FOR -SALE HOMES
AND APARTMENT RENTALS
120,000
109,000
100,000
J
7
Q
Z
80,000
Q
N
CLOSE TO
H
LONG-TERM
W
60.000
LONG-TERM AVERAGE IS-56,000
AVERAGE
a-
-------------
--
-
--------------52,86
LL
O
J
W
w
40,000
-
J
20,000
IC it I co it m'
CO 0 CO 0 CO CO 0 0
-• --� N N N N
0 O O O O O
N N
O O
N N N N N N N N N N
O O O O O O O O O O
O 0 CO O CO CO 0 0
O N W A Cn m V
O 0 O O O O
W W O -+ N W
O O
? M
O O O O >
O V O C0 O N W A CT
EMPLOYMENT GROWTH IN URBANIZED/COASTAL AREAS *TYPICALLY*
GENERATES SPILLOVER TO SUBURBAN/RURAL INLAND AREAS
Goxa
ODx 1
tmr NNaN �a DD Va{h�
s eme, r.rrmxl
- "I",xivw '
inna Pornh
ipinpanMf y
Aun
OLancaMe
LosPYee
L�°R13et
Wllnr
Na 41mvx Bmax
x4xxl fyrrRrY Lm. EIhaNML1a` Qx4W
IN w aw La Dal
it fx°fl
Grxn vNNY
en YxMau
aM� grxalox FI WM'
y Cmlar aYwEc
a znnr
61..n
uemrca C n L I F 0 R N I A,Yvan.. YxarcalRe
u..J.e SpnnV
CNY VaMy
uIMMn v15%
N PaarOlaWrn -•
- - f=lt. AVVLL YNM
LbleS OtRk O
_ Qh Mau
M%
vdV h, RNRp
Vttall .ner.. lrSble
<^�l vale,
LYMN
eanl CwP1>e 1'A r°L MW Fit
,� a M �B
Raxnna 1.
Puny CaY VM Bag4AYb-�.,:..nBbMm
p Nvminra¢
5pnnm
CMB an. vr�
inem C°ma
5�r*
alaela
nam
P cn an
ONx sma
�ILDI>�x
Value
[e"".. ferlrWR
°
Y
XaxalY Form -. s.°enr,.re.w xalaw r>aw
u•• •, •,� .' L CrM CJ:brY[a LYe rwWn
.. •kLRl
BF.Sl,ni
...-a� -.... bPe °CamYb
YdIQ' CnAM �.LeG t
: .Nan Mrharnreetl Bq
LF�IIIIWB Behr Sme GeAYe Bq&h
FRB .
,TWg
n Srhar Sft.I.
^
'AgoxrnlRi
IIEOA, I RnNWlxl.,.
CO aganaM I4fff9 p—Mia
R41tf'r
°clOprx P.
df�ur: �9�R JYs
i 4
GkrMak1u
n5n 01
4lentlwi Dlgh 0
Rarn3 1•/evlN
RevnNllrlla o °�MOOd BMxtle La Ymne G � rdw Fu<A Fda
Bxu!'ry _ m1,
r.�,a
� PpnO u
rn �vWm xl..r
aW
Los Angeles
�-wr:1 - xa�s% ReaYgr :am.r r1.Yw
a SaYa Wrmra` a
enY` CuwY . �CaWex
11a�e11r
6=4
bbd
P •".• MBkta0M1.
�'. D,ya
SwwIYW Megltli • b Nml
�.
r f
Wean
0o; U.
V.w PoP_
la Mvatla � Yl1� F
Lawn4ale-
L.
L.
-NMWalk x.
Fu�,M'
ReaoMDBeYR
- SUBURBAN
LerrAiw RURAL
t4rrance- Yreff
. Pm^enKi1
L"',
Reacll -Golden Gl Yoe
CLarg oe
Pmlw PabP` ;-a,m. Iunrn. SL+eeMD rxpeevN FeOVYtl
$eel8eae11 -
YmGn v
$a1RaAna ixa Cal .S ay En
F°uNan Yallry:
R�
yam., _ YM'VCAet
�•. J lf.
.:per, tetrlRtlpae vale
fxN11RIBlDn�
RRaCII _ Lake F;OMf
obrMrn vw- A( YMons
Co5a4esa o.e v
YkNgM -3;" Ra lYe L- `AMn l ""
Bnar^eNx MM
LtARI• sMnx qn
L,,..&.h° '*Mm cketlYW YWrieW Wrelhltl SrAtgs
F a c i
f i c O c e a n
v NeroDY ThRmBa
SYIl n rMex
T. xrr,..i
OYY Porn' C° Del¢ Rxai
San Ck M.
°
r
r'I' •
fa,•w .ow F�Dyo PYe
AVabn
pal)YaY T
�fae
SIR RIR
glnai `{.Jell
Di Yw 4uf
EXTRAORDINARY FACTORS REDUCING THE DEMAND FOR FOR -SALE HOMES
MILLENNIALS' (18-34) PREFERENCES AND FINANCES 4 HIGHER -DENSITY / URBANIZED HOUSING
PARENTS: GENERATION X (AGES 35-54) IMPACTED BY IMPLOSION OF HOUSING PRICE BUBBLE
CULTURAL PREFERENCES
➢ PROXIMITY TO COMMUNITY AND URBAN ACTIVITIES
➢ PROXIMITY TO OFFICE - MINIMIZES COMMUTING TIME
➢ RESORT -LIKE AMENITY PACKAGES: CONCIERGE SERVICE, GYM AND SWIMMING POOL
➢ CONVENIENCE: NO YARD WORK OR MAINTENANCE OR REPAIRS
➢ WAITING LONGER TO GET MARRIED AND STARTING A FAMILY
FINANCIAL FACTORS
➢ SIGNIFICANT STUDENT DEBT: ADVERSELY IMPACTS DOWN PAYMENT AND MORTGAGE
QUALIFICATION
➢ RENTING PROVIDES MORE JOB FLEXIBILITY (CHANGE JOBS/FIRMS MORE FREQUENTLY)
➢ SOME EVEN PAY VERY HIGH RENTS, RATHER THAN PURCHASE A HOME
20
EXTRAORDINARY FACTORS REDUCING THE DEMAND FOR FOR -SALE HOMES (CON'T.)
OTHER FACTORS POTENTIALLY RESTRAINING THE DEMAND FOR SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES
1. HOMEOWNERSHIP HAS DECLINED REDUCED DEMAND FOR NEW SINGLE -
FROM 60%-2005 TO 54%-2014 FAMILY HOMES
2. INCREASES IN SINGLE FAMILY REFLECT A TRANSFORMATION OF THE
RENTALS ==> EXCESS HOUSING MARKET BUBBLE
SINGLE-FAMILY OWNERSHIP TO RENTALS
3. MODERATE FUTURE PRICE RESTRAINED BUYER CONFIDENCE
EXPECTATIONS
4. SIGNIFICANT SUPPLY OF NEW WILL CONTINUE TO PROVIDE COMPETITIVE
APARTMENT PROJECTS IN THE ALTERNATIVE TO HOME OWNERSHIP
PIPELINE
21
COMBINED IMPACT OF FAVORABLE AND CONSTRAINING FACTORS -
NEW HOMES: HIGHER SHARE OF APARTMENTS
MILLENNIALS ARE RAISING THE SHARE OF NEW APARTMENTS TO VERY HIGH LEVELS:
APARTMENTS: CURRENTLY 62% SHARE OF PERMITS VS. THE TYPICAL 38%
100%
90%
rn
80%
w
a
J
70%
O
F
p 60%
w
!r
= 50
F
Z
w 40%
F
tr
pQ 30%
Q
20%
10%
0%
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA: APARTMENT SHARE OF NEW PERMITS
The long-term average is 38%
43% \
n 23% r
N N N N N N N N N
co co (o w O to w w O w O O O O O O O O O
to (O O (o (o O w CO O O O O O O O O O O O
O N W A M W -4 W W O N W A M m V W
62 %
N N N N N N N
00 O O O O O O
O O + N W A Vt
ALTHOUGH EMPLOYMENT GROWTH IS STRONG,
EXTRAORDINARY SPECIAL FACTORS ARE CAUSING MAJOR MARKET SHIFTS
9kume�
GvmanR �4 ObM'
� °
"-
aaG V 0 '
aFy
S EEeq° feinnvM °
'iArt<Pviraz ° A �es°pe
fl<aman
Ni VAtla
1M bfMs
y
LaRCJSM!
0
LtlIIUJ=5
'µj
4'i6
Prvman
Los Padres
Ne.1
Ef bdh ltYe 4191 M In a
FyramHCake °
as
TS l O lla
,i faeel
Green Valley
fi
e
E elinAe
oil Mounkin
i3
Cook,
Cenkl
A'kPlYa
G�PB
R.aehal
V.., loaf -
( .'k
C A L I F 0 R p 1
i. Yq°nTe
A Nimco,ir
JtMISOn Cale MMLIa HMSpnng
Cldbe Von, 'R Iln _
p
P bloapm
°
Apple Valley
IAiluie
S l'hu'S,mn'
V M
Font.
BaM a
_unmefbN MBars Ma Su^pAu�
Vd VMCP D R :A
ft
Junes lb
VUy&rt:9
lap °MreMHe � p w
A,u Ge "aJ. 14 V Rauadna
° aPheam
°MnaaM
-. --, a Can".
P rto Oak Vi[w
fimre > np
" 6udAvm '-Humpnreya
caaitassime,
PSeawaSaHf
Me Pouts
Samar,
Clarrta ch.e mew
wodob..
.'Name
Vi�pinu
_wa enl^nv
MparWrko
Colony SYn FanenGo
Valit{o nkM
$aIIYS
M1 Ik`�� °
Ba
�
� sra aCemM
Son
V.11W Cho dh La Cr„
OJmmeq G
0
0
a'p
�'�✓`hank
!% sm na
Ibl .
Thousanll0aks
4 �HJO�°k
Ali
Hill." CY "Y Ca¢ntla�
Patel Mls9e Too CeNe i
T'p" Weq
1.ak Cam
no
Cll•.RI lares kinW
°
Maelp, A. s Angeles
b.erx
Vakef
Lnpa Yrsk
p BeF c
Jp
-Them Cu.o
Ton. Pelrh°
sV op°c
°c.an VagMwaC
Argekes
Sail
-, Gjen JunMen Bem Bemeadrna Nat.Ifaeat
pAaW forest
uwml:anirb ra l[.NVA
Fa
L Looke
Oxk
.
Pool, /VIONtNY
LS CMMOs
We#Fah
'saeaa
'Be eea Lem
' V iEe
p
�
PimrXa
�Mpekrs OskS
"norad ak 'Malibu suXa Manka M yw a ' La Puc
Arya R11e1a InglewoodBL 116 Gen.
g.n SueAa
lad
Lai
Ham[Q'Mls Glad
fa F orp" A
RetlpM. BeezN
CGL0
BM
wll'I V+IVake
J� fieinlL LpaP fMiG
Torrance ----
Lomita' -Long Beach -Garden C M Al mm�a 14
Tust?i Menlo,, PAi
Fannin.PMGs° Seel Bean :- ° ' ubefli
,SalaayLR,�
inlr>p
T.nl Cena ;yII CA
Yerau - F° t V uey°
- IMge "ReYip ° -
„zrM� hugging oR Mew e_ LYrc
Y] .i �- LemaW iJe,
Beach:: lake F.reM
Costa Mcva °p MmLn Mid° i9 VaGmer�
XewparG Aksp, LigMI. XM. S,n
Juan HM
Bash vex Lgln. Spanps
lsBlw Bwsh° .91 iongloutl Mall
P a c i f i c
Hathealit
O c e a n Felten
hem
sw,k Boohoo.
Sanm Lap°.; Gunn
bLeml
Two Hama. B.n. Page � e°O A.Luz
sit Clemente -
saau C-alaLh, ° Camp PenmOm
°`O
kh,d _ Manes' a fWrmk°
Mine, a .
Pool
Chual
bM.L
3,neal
Cebnese
q Qvry Velry
>-°>Op BY•IM P
• • ..�aen NMspH^Ha
• Glman HM
spnna
°S Jp bAp
P21
Egan
Yakh Ae
Lake
Saxe s
SklnzT epe
°Markle Hot Spmgs coo
1QFTmlxlY
1 Reeee' �Aguaa
PM
A
Ih Ro, Plemoiv ley
Am..
Vetley
-CMa
nLL®Il.ltla, �'�. Ti °
Carlshs10 IaleSni
`oreFvr E.n"
Mares
YN Gran
�EscpMitlp
r vw
o
n ity
of "Walkable Urban
ps'll,
r.
u 0ln Lw
e S
a
L.
I
{
s
WAS
1p
w UL
i
F "
� r
A
s `
t +
L w
f
f
a.
�a e
� �•... ate.
RI
6'
H
A study 619 regionally significant WalkUps—in
the 30 largest U.S. metropolitan areas.
A "Walkup" is a Walkable Urban Place
Include Ease of Mobility (Transit) — Diversity of
Land and Housing— Placemaking
Substantial and growing rental rate premiums
over Drivable Sub -urban
• walkable urban office (90 percent),
• retail (71 percent)
• rental multi -family (66 percent)
• Combined = (74 percent) rental premium
over drivable sub -urban.
Walkup market share growth increased in all
30 of the largest in all categories between
2010-15. Indicators for future (Development
Momentum):
• many metros currently highest in walkable
urbanism lead the Development
Momentum Ranking: New York, Boston,
Seattle, and Washington, DC.
• Others gaining steam: Detroit, Phoenix, and
Los Angeles.
Walkups
Achieve
Success Across
Multiple
Sets
of Criteria
WESTMINSTER MALL, 2010
SUBURBAN MA
r
TRANSFORMED
DOWNTOWN WESTMINSTER 2024
Some Characteristics of High Performing Walkups Environments
They promote friction, collaboration and serendipidous encounters.
Ln
• Residential Density Supports 18-hour environment
C_
o Overall Density over 1 F.A.R. building seldom exceed 8 stories
• Pedestrian Friendly Environments — At some point everyone is a pedestriz
Ln
• At least four means of circulation: biking is playing a bigger role
v
Q • Access: Small block size — high intersection density
• Tend to be 'underparked' 2/1000 at most for retail; 1 space per unit;
sometimes less
4-1
• Wide variety of uses: retail, office, residential, entertainment, institutionc
etc.
0
V' High number of events per year: at least 2 per week
• Loaded with quality of life amenities: plazas, parks, bike lanes, art, fun
• High number of monthly check -ins on Social Media
• High number of events per year: at least 2 per week
Emerging Factors Effecting These Districts
• Rediscovery of urban life
• Millenials flocking to urban environments — There is a battle for Talent —
Graduates pick their city before there job — They drive less, take transit and
bike more
• Retail is Changing: Retail Footprint is 1/3 smaller for same $$$
• We have discovered that exercise can help us live longer, and bring down
heath care costs
• 40% of GHGs from transportation — Walking, Biking and Transit reduce GHGs
• We Plan for Wealth, not Traffic
• Affordable Housing and Workforce Housing Crisis
• Lean Solutions - Tactical urbanism —Try it, quickly, cheaply and see if it works.
• Uber/Lyft, ParkMe, CurbStand, etc / Data Driven Urban Design
Where is venture
Capital Flowing in
Los Angeles,
County
2004-2014?
To the most
walkable areas
Top 10 zip codes:
Rank
Neighborhood
1
Santa Monica
2
Venice
3
Santa Monica
4
Santa Monica
5
ElSegundo
6
Hollywood
7
West Los Angeles
8
Culver City
9
Torrance
10
Downtown Los Angeles
Zip Code Funding
90401
$150.594,000
90291
$134.885.000
90405
$86.468,855
90404
$64.617.000
90245
$60.000,000
90028
$59.350,000
90025
S43,000,000
90232
$30.300,000
90501
$29,300.000
90017
$28.420.000
Plan for Wealth, Not for Traffic
Sufficient Density
Complete Streets
Pedestrian Friendly
PEACENED STREET SPACE
tiPUBd IC RIGHT-OF-WAY C
FRONT FRON ;
SETBAC K S€TBAC K
Encroaching Habitable Space (4.5.9)
Projecting Canopies (4.5.9)
Encroachment!• (
Prorecvon Area �--'�
(
(
)
(
1i'4�
r .� tip_►
Property Line
Imp
DPW
What is Meant by `Complete Street'
r
Traditional road classifications emphasize vehicle movement.
The Policy? Roads are Designed
and Managed for Everyone.
Complete Street Types emphasize the character of the
entire street.
gmen oes�
C..n,
Blryde YeNCW .V Curhsltle PeEes4iari
Component Compvtart ManagennComponent
Cortnexnr
Bulldog 6FumfsNng BWW"&FurnkNng
Component Component
This is an IN -Complete Street
IiNoroll
r I
,
liw
Ail
:FPO-
if WKd Sidewalks
c Sector Designs;]
Why is street design important?
• Streets are the primary component of public space.
• Complete Streets can provide the location for public life to
flourish
• Complete Streets are designed as much for the pedestrian as for,
the motor vehicle.:,
How do we make Complete Streets?
• Prioritize the pedestrian experience
(1) Sufficient space and safety
PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE
• Wide sidewalks
• Articulated Crosswalks
• High Intersection Density
PUBLIC/PRIVATE STREETSCAPING DISTRICTS
(2) Amenities & Activities
• Greenery, shade
• Seating, lighting & furniture
• Public Art, vendors
DESIGN STANDARDS & CODES
(3) Attractive street wall
• Human scale buildings
• Articulated Facades
• Active Frontages
{fY !s �-
' I
•fie f _ j
'y y Via`•,'_
k i
IY.
112
_ s lam �1►�
t � _
Az-
� -F.�.� z '� d � _- .,,,� tea.• � -
w
f1w," hJou
r •S
�, _ j.,.
��
's � -
��
�� ��y�
�:.� '�.
The Street Grid
Ray Street
St John court
�
Street Names: 29
St John Street
5 nn Mreet KottingerUnve
Streets: 16
a
Avenues:8
St Mary Street
g
c
Courts:2
Division Sn, rt
=
E _
Drives: 1
a
MryrV
"^
Lanes:1
Rose Aven, a
a
S�`
Ways: 1
g_
2
Angela Stree,
,i NeaJSrr�r
o
q
� naS
3
Linear Miles of Streets: 7.4
gema tAVenue
v
u
v
y
V
c
_ N
n ann ♦. . ��
Public Open Space
Public Open Space
Intersection Density
T
+
Ir
+
+ F
y
F T
+
+
j f
f T +
+
+
?'
i'
♦
r
� i j
of ,,
Y
Ji 4
i.
Number of Intersections: S8
Intersections per Square Mile: 182
AWalkable Neighborhood
gay Street
ottlnger Drive
bbir.
0 100
m
Why is Intersection Density So Important
subleux" UsAwl.
Alternative to Major Arterial
-fTzro
I
Ad -
� y C tii
r4. .. -•'! . �r � Imo. - 1 p�; K '•t '?.j i�� .'.i
Aye • • � � � . �� .: - - - � , _ - FS
r
Kaka'akq Maste%lan: Clvwl& Design
Highway at Washington, Oceanside, CA
00
Not pleasant to walk or bike
i 't.os—
Streetscape
7 ice_ - s - ... a. s. ,iy'�-p�_yj�' T. J• ��
eClriaMe�C'kIt' yam:
V
ryi
ing walls make it pleasant to walk, but not bike
CIO, �
s� C
Bike Lanes add Economic Value
BETTER BIKING,
MORE CUSTOMERS
When San Francisco reduced car lanes and installed
bike lanes and wider sidewalks on Valencia Street,
two-thirds of merchants said the increased levels
of bicycling and walking improved business.
Only 4 percent said the changes hurt sales. 14
Source: Emily Drennen, "Economic Effects of Traffic Calming on Urban Small Businesses, San Francisco State
University, 2003
BIKE SHOPPING: SMALLER TRIPS, MORE VISITS
People who arrive to a business on bike spend less per visit but visit more often, resulting
in more money spent overall per month. 12
In Portland, OR, people who traveled to a AVERAGE SPENDING AVERAGE SPENDING
shopping area by bike spent 24% more per PER TRIP PER MONTH
month than those who traveled by car. niiiiiiiiiiiiiiiin® _
Studies found similar trends in Toronto
and three cities in New Zealand.
Auto Bike Auto Bike
Source: Clifton, Morrissey and Ritter, "Business Cycle: Catering to the Bicycling Market", TR News, 2012
A SHIFT TO CAR-LITE LIFE
The average young person is driving less and
biking and taking transit more.
BIKE LANES PART OF
SALES BOOST
In New York City, after the
construction of a protected bike
lane and other improvements on 9th
Avenue, local businesses saw up
to a 49% increase in retail sales,
compared to 3% increases in the rest
of Manhattan. 15
9th Avenue
49% Increase In sales
Rest of Manhattan
Source: NYC DOT "Measuring the Street: New Metrics
for 2111 Century Street, 2012
TODs Require Less Parking —Over
time
TOD residents are:
• 2x more likely not to own a car
as U.S. households
• 5x more likely to commute by
transit than others in region
Self selection:
• People who use transit often
choose to live near transit
• Responsible for up to 40% of
TOD ridership bonus
aeon AT&T 3:41 P 7 * 100%E
a
Tmnsil Taxi POOV41
Bike Ms,
Memo Qu nce Ulllilles
u� AT&T' 4'.20 PM 1 * 100%1Z5,
91 Sign in with Facebook
,. , Email Sign Up
Cancel
CURDSi AND
e PAYMENT
FREE PARKING
w AT&T ? 3:24 PM + $ 100-- • r
M,
P
tm% :n 1' I
Q 2 Hours. Starting Now = , `
Markel/S.n Pedro '
3rd Sti,"
-rrmmntm f _
A
e—o AT&T P Was PM 1
Taxi
Cl
-b lyR
eer
..,k ab=,11,
View of Rosslyn-Ballston Metro Corridor Development
• Get Community Buy -In by Identifying Growth and Non -Growth Areas
• Aggressive Pedestrian, Bicycle and Transit -Oriented Policies and Design Standards
• Transportation Demand Management
• Quantify Metrics, and Adjust, based on What Works, and What Doesn't
Results
• Development 1970-2006
- + 15 m sq ft Office
- +2m sq ft Retail
- +19,000 Residential Units
- $12.7 Billion Invested
- Office rents exceed other areas of
Arlington by 18%
• Travel 1996-2006
- Transit use +37%
- 51% of all trips non -auto
- Reduction in Auto Traffic
t
•'a, p IV I. i�� ••TN. o • . ' ss •
� .N„ � . T ,H■1...: Iq )Ili g..
No
4. •'"s are: T � Jpu■. 1■•p.UO
�••`••.' • rc.MDNf aT
{LL
4•.• N
N ,'✓n•eaa
9' FF
`t � •.. •. C� 1` r N G 1
' ,, � �••• a 5, k r,v
a,
•....\ ... _ M .gyp . '1� •
,... � • %IL•jtr�!_�`_ _L.-- ♦ �� Ayr � �.
� +
Is
IUs IN's
s
/ .1
111L••• � � ' a �' � ,�rrsri 1.' 1 dllUw�i.l
16,
'•�. ,•••• •T.� ��iY� '.�, a:. s .iit.� ..•p..n u.u.nn ' o
• : • •.. f ' . ui=No poll ...1 ■ 1 u n.1 ,
is Is
Is,Yf 1 Is
Oall . . . . 111111111 �:: :111-
A• « , . .� .. n..., 1� ■ m
A .. . , 1■N.■ . t
•• ••. .� da,•1. •.1.1 ....., �� m
Is
I
• , •� r
1 `.. ;•• i 1 , •': �� �♦ rr ■■. poll■ ■/ a
U ••••~,D ... y'•`'...■N•/1/■1111 y rM3.n.11n.�
No IN jD
so
Is
MOP
• •tT � 0 sll i41.4 mop
U
m
In
In
0
3
00
O
In
Q
O
O
co
N
-% .�. f � r
� � � �
��►.:/ ��
.� ;�.
�0� Yr
� J
_ .% ! � M
�..,..�
[[�'�1`
� s� i ��-' ° �:�
'! �.,: u
� �` � � �
�- ,�.
v -- .. _ _
4 � .Y sR
.L
:t. � fit., �.' r�. , ,`� 5
,�� � f � W .
p :.F 0.,: E t,��g�
", � �� `�
a,
...�
ti 11f
(< i
O ,�,tw Jj.
�'t � )L.'Y
,._
5 R-B Corridor Stations
12.9% 1.0%2.0%
3.E
7.5%
❑ Walk
Metrobus
❑ Other
Bus/Vanpool
71 Auto (incl. Drop-
off)
71 Other
■ No Response
Coast Highway — Vision Plan - Oceanside
Multiple Neighborhoods along a 3-mile spine
Y
•"• TORTI GALLAS AND PARTNERS
15 an Architects of Sustainable Community
Coast Highway — Vision Plan - Oceanside
Detail of One of these Neighborhood
a W-MIWI
' Tremont Street _
yAy
CJ v Land Street
TORT[ GALLAS AND PARTNERS
i—E'i Architects of Sustainable Community
Coast Highway "Road Diet" - Oceanside
Transformation through Public and Private Actions
'ffili' TORT[ GALLAS AND PARTNERS
it ai Architects of Sustainable Community
Coast Highway "Road Diet" - Oceanside
Transformation through Public and Private Actions
j g
;
Y
�< < VT.
ONE OR TORTI GALLAS AND PARTNERS
im ai Architects of Sustainable Community
y
Coast Highway "Road Diet" - Oceanside
Transformation through Public and Private Actions
I' TORTI GALLAS AND PARTNERS
ip am Architects of Sustainable Community
WESTMINSTER MALL, 2010
r" A SUBURBAN MALL '
TRANSFORMED
DOWNTOWN WESTMINSTER, 2024
�. � ;� f "�.... t+ ,f.'it�''Y" 'a >a".�%r r ;:: . ,.mot '� - _ :, +�'�Gbrw..._►.>..
jat ♦ _: plq/dyV'ki:>. .Tin z' 'C
Promenade
w ~Project Sit
Future FasTracks `
Station
tityHall
7
I ell
I , ;
i ol
I �
I ` -%
/ :R
/*v ••
•a•aaas,
"g R"" r J Ate �e :�a � . .._� • ♦ , st
1 � '' MH .. « "���,a ' •Y{i S1110 � ♦♦ ♦ • "t1• •�SS•••en
.tea• is} :,�""'. •a� Est"}�uf kca. "iaiiesf �aae••••
i� � �a� ✓• fir, � �I
•'•�MllatlfYN{� •n•�e •dye e,{ •�111 ^�..♦
,F, / ,�,.
I
-----------
ii
)LIL
i
— �a VI
L�
�a O
'�I
w
is
ji
-
h
y i\
s
a. ' - jam. :i, _® ti. • ��.. • .. .._�1
"AIL
jjK
"m
0
os m
7
3.4.2 Westminster Boulevard - Center
Step -out strip
Permeable paving
Raised landscaped
- curb extensions
Sidewalk seating area
-{ Concrete walk
la'y�7
eC �rV 110 F9
VD I`� Il.d
so st
t �
Figure 3-S: Westminster Boulevard Street Design Diagram
AY. sidewaR uld. parkway. P. parking Aare; t: travel fare; t(: n.rmng lane
Key Plan
63' 7'
Curbsade parking
Step -out Strip
Tree planter below
suspended pavement
system
Garners at perimeter
of dining area
Sidewalk dining/
amenity Zone
Build -to line
Table 4.2.4.1.
Bka freMage Standrds
Bleckfrom
I
II
III
iv
v
A
Hi
Build -To le, O'co, Ro W
7'
0'
NIA
WA
WA
15'
WA
Min Seback
WA
WA
5'
S'
S.
WA
5'
Max. Setback
WA
WA
10'
10'
10,
WA
10'
Min. ironuge Octupemy
90%
90%
75%
75%
fi0%
75%
90%
Sesv:eA At[ea Poets
NP
NP
P-1
P-2
RI
P-1
w
Table 4.2.4.2:
Pemiludi homage Type
Bkaeklrom
i
ii
IN
b
v
of
MI
swell nt
x
I X
X
X
X
X
X
sair.0 nt cafe
X
x
X
X
X
X
x
urbm Ronlage
X
X
X
X
X
teecourt
X
X
Cooryard
X
X
X
Stoop
X
X
I X
Table 4.2.4.3:
Permitted Bulldirg Types
BICQ
A-2
A-3
Bd
44
Row House
X
X
X
IIexAAh
X
X
X
carrtyard
X
X
X
X
Mbar, Bbci
X
X
X
X
lee Mh Garage
x
X
X
ExpA Garage
X(1)
X(l)
X(li
Podium HighAise
X
X
X12)
X
Urban Arxhor
X
X
X
urban Sopc.merket
X
X
X
Mn_ a al Types
2
2
7
1
(1) May er k be ,.posed us block 1mn1 r and then ally abrne the 9.d floor.
(21 PermHet wslh City aPPoval and rNsares shadow study b leaded, shedny of Center Prk.
4.4.5 Stoop
Stoop Illustrative Section
The entry in a building is raised above the
sadoualk.
Stoop Illustrative Photo
4.3.8 Podium High -Rise
Building
Podium High -Rise Diagram
A roused buiA7mg mass may exceed the base
height kmir of 65 Leer.
Podium High -Rise Illustrative Photo
i
_ i \rmee Inn Cnn9 fYM/a1xM
C-7l\
€
D6
B-7
C �P/P
A_5 d" 36
Ua
e-s
9b hnNn '
C-5
a3
A-4 C ]i
Csfw
8d W d
A-3 D-2 4
B-3
G3
ann rw.a
A-1
Bi
-1d CI
a�
em wrn A-] y i
H-1 C-1
sp 99 V
l,"R s ,
P, W.G.Sp Min
Kx•-Pi
me�egbm�
SaMM
uae�r�
a°Ye
r��
6v,5W,-fir�iloiw�V'
0 -gym
For a Wtvmr er,, HE
Ire pk6i row
Lis
qw,
mdow-0
Jeffrey Tumlin
Ithie
cm(
Mt
r. Mo
livo
4 .
4f
A W
If r,
Y am`Aw I.M., NO
L
N
NELSON
�� .�rw�Yrr 1�4T�
:lefb �'�ilA'�►NA1IYr4J��'Rlhi psn.
OW Y
Autxbs
owA O%N44ry
10pe,ArmanCR,
Amm iyour ear
munan a"" &-C�id
�s.Y eti..•.M.1 IV 11\I. MIII �.wl.i.
r rr11N •.WTr rr.q-+�u
}[. arre�. rwT.�. •uy Wr...Y
/..f Ww .1 •«rprr �.I u � Tu.h
rrr. ry n W yrwr nPJr TrI.I.I pr�1l.wr
r14.r rev Tnrr grlrr, Ye
�I-
-r,�
T£ co
nar crrrrr
G.,CUwr
' THE TEXAS COMPANY
TEXACO DEALERS IN ALL 41 STATES
t I
`t�
I
4r
hQ
m
X
�am"Mw — I �pr
AV Lkk
AWW
�_ 1
� rat
rr
r-_
•
I
a
I [ I
• l iyr=ra i I iTTI Wire
THE BEATINGS
WILL CONTINUE
UNTIE. MORALE
IMPROVFaS.
Feao�
Systems Thinking
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 1985
(*BMI >_30, or N 30 Ibs. overweight for 5' 4" person)
VP
■No Data 0 <10% 0 10.14%
All slides. Centers for Disease Control
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 1986
(*BMI >_30, or N 30 Ibs. overweight for 5' 4" person)
VP
MNo Data <10% 10-14%
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 1987
(*BMI >_30, or N 30 Ibs. overweight for 5' 4"
person)
LJ
.No Data <10% 10.14%
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 1988
(*BMI >_30, or N 30 Ibs. overweight for 5' 4" person)
W
■No Data M <10% N 10-14%
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 1989
(*BMI >_30, or N 30 Ibs. overweight for 5' 4" person)
.No Data <10% 10-14%
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 1990
(*BMI >_30, or N 30 Ibs. overweight for 5' 4" person)
1.
.No Data M <10% S 10.14%
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 1991
(*BMI >_30, or N 30 Ibs. overweight for 5' 4" person)
LJ
.No Data <10% 0 10.14% 15.19%
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 1992
(*BMI >_30, or N 30 Ibs. overweight for 5' 4" person)
W
■No Data m.. <10% 0 10.14% 15-19%
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 1993
(*BMI >_30, or N 30 Ibs. overweight for 5' 4" person)
.No Data <10% 10-14% 15-19%
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 1994
(*BMI >_30, or N 30 Ibs. overweight for 5' 4" person)
.No Data . <10% 010.14% 15-19%
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 1995
(*BMI >_30, or N 30 Ibs. overweight for 5' 4" person)
Pi
.No Data 0<10% 10.14% 15.19%
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 1996
(*BMI >_30, or N 30 Ibs. overweight for 5' 4" person)
r
.No Data M <10% 10.14% 15-19%
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 1997
(*BMI >_30, or N 30 Ibs. overweight for 5' 4" person)
AW
4
.No Data . <10% .10.14%a 15.19% 0 20.24%
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 1998
(*BMI >_30, or N 30 Ibs. overweight for 5' 4" person)
!A
.No Data <10% 10-14% 15-19% M 20.24%
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 1999
(*BMI >_30, or N 30 Ibs. overweight for 5' 4" person)
.No Data M <10% 10-14% 15-19% ■ 20-24%
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 2000
(*BMI >_30, or N 30 Ibs. overweight for 5' 4" person)
4
■No Data <10% 10.14% 15-19% 0 20-24%
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 2001
(*BMI >_30, or N 30 Ibs. overweight for 5' 4" person)
.No Data <10% 10-14% 15-19% 0 20.24% 25.29%
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 2002
(*BMI >_30, or N 30 Ibs. overweight for 5' 4" person)
UN
.No Data . <10% .10-14% 15-19% N 20-24% 25-29%
f
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 2003
(*BMI >_30, or N 30 Ibs. overweight for 5' 4" person)
■No Data M <10% 10.14% 15-19% .20.24% 25-29%
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 2004
(*BMI >_30, or N 30 Ibs. overweight for 5' 4" person)
W
■No Data <10% 10.14% 15.19% 20-24% M25.29%
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 2005
(*BMI >_30, or N 30 Ibs. overweight for 5' 4" person)
V
.No Data M <10% M 10-14% 15-19% N 20-240/6 M25-29% 0 2 0%
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 2006
(*BMI >_30, or N 30 Ibs. overweight for 5' 4" person)
.No Data <10% 10-14% 15-19% M 20-240/9 025.29% E >30%
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 2007
(*BMI >_30, or N 30 Ibs. overweight for 5' 4" person)
.No Data . <10% ®10-14% 15-19% M 20-24% 25.29% >_30%
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 2008
(*BMI >_30, or N 30 Ibs. overweight for 5' 4" person)
Ir
.No Data . <10% 10-14% 15.19% M 20-24% 25-29% >_30%
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults
BRFSS, 2009
(*BMI >_30, or N 30 Ibs. overweight for 5' 4" person)
W
■No Data 0 <10% 10-14% 15.19% 20.24°/. M25-29% >_30%
J�J
,4j,dm, 16 0
J-
r=•
,. ' J �4;
� � i u
IV
r
AN
I
C
r
--
wh
�TAir
-�I Now
Image source; Dan Burden
Image source: Diabetes Daily
r
Mixed message?
Image source; Diabetes
Image source; Carbolic Smokebaii
• �s
1. Think like an economist
Personal Mobility: Most Inefficient Sector
• Cars used only
5% of useful life
• Only 25% of
capacity used
i
Transportation Demand Management
• Making more efficient
use of existing
infrastructure
• Making sure mobility is
always available, a)
whenever needed E
i=
Quantity
Traffic Economics
2:00 AM 7:00 AM Noon
7:00 PM Midnight
2. Measure What Matters
.O S Average delay in
seconds per
vehicle
I J, 1 10.1 — 20
Description of motorist
pereel}(iun
Free-flov.1 trit ic.: ""Good--
LOS
Reasonable tree -flow
C 20.1 — 5 Stable but unreasonable
Belay begins to occur
l) }5 I 55 Borderline '.Lbid" LOS
L' _ 55.1 — 0 $, Bad"" LOS: long queues
80 Unacceptable: very high
delay, eonrtestion
-a
IN•
l�
ALICIA'S
A, a Mexl erican
-oom. She slams the do
;6/
teen, out of
r and throws
T A 7!'1 Y' Yl Y'N -1 1 v^ r 1 . I-
Level of Service A
e ., 4
Y
� i g
-i 1, r 1• * ' +
of Y:
7 r 1� •r s d
b -' 'r� � • �,;�
1,
.;
�Mrtr. lb.
Level -of Service P
4
Source: Downtown San Jose Blog
What's important depends upon perspective
V
Traffic engineer: F A
Economist: A F
Problem 1: Last One In
NNELSON
NYGAARD
Problem 3: Vehicle Delay, Not Person Delay
a�
O 5 20 20
2
4W
O
Z
_
O
50 75 sq ft
20
oft
Walk at 3 Bike at Bus at 30 mph
mph 10 mph with 40-60 pax
150-400 sq ft
1,500 sq ft
/IM\
oI r(
Single Occupant
Car at 30 mph
5,000 sq ft
Single Occupant
Car at 60 mph
1 P
Problem 5: Mitigations — Shrink the Project?
3
Problem 6: Mitigations — Move the Project?
1
S ' 1
�.
L
_ 'cit7
r
y
Problem 7: Mitigations — Widen the Road
spa an r
T
i
M SVf
. owft
rRAW Jt
.�
Lj
NNELSON ��
NYGAARD
Induced and Latent Demand
More Peop
Drive
V
Widen
oadway
Overreliance on LOS is
Creating the Problems
It was intended to solve
Speeding
decreased by
16%, while median
speeds increased
by 14%
Injury crashes fell
by 26%
■
49% fewer
commercial
vacancies (compared to
5% more borough -wide)
1
74% of users
prefer the new
configuration
SP .1 �M
1
'Fr
bic
Maintenance
172% increase
in retail sales (at partner agreement`
locally -based businesses compared to 18% A �' - r AV*;
borough -wide)
BID held 27 public`^,
events in 2012lir
jrY
�• Pedestria
seated pedestrians
14% increase in
sales at fronting
businesses
r
.
cs;r
V
V
Seasonal seating
���curbside lane ! 7
California Shift: Senate Bill 743
Regional
Average per
Os Capita
Vehicle Miles
Traveled
3. Use the Right Tools,
and Use them Correctly
"All models are
wrong, but some
are useful."
L.
George E. P. Box,
Empirical Model -Building
and Response
Surfaces (1987)
r
i
rr•
let :w �.�
141000
121000
101000
8, 000
61000
4.4000
2, 000
0
■ 2001 Per Capita
VMT
■ 2009 Per Capita
VMT
N< � `L 3 3 0 R 4§ h � to '1 A 0
Fig. 4. NHTS person miles of travel change. Source: Author's analysis of NHTS.
4. Reward the Private Sector for
doing the Right Thing
•_ tt,¢�� '"`' qir •:. �r+z:-1�=••wry�yAv '_3�iP y`3-
., • ♦ sVik
r
awNUmw.
al
-
J � i. AIN%
Parking Cost Break -Down
c
0
to
I
0&M Cost
Construction Cost
Land Cost
Source: Adapted from Victoria Transport Policy Institute, 2012
Genen6us
• Focused service on areas
with
• No viable public transit
alternatives
• Longer, more arduous and
costly commutes
• high density SF
neighborhoods
• 38 GenenBuses serving 27
commuter routes with over
3,500 riders per day
Map Key
For route planning assistance,
visit gride.gene.com, send us an oRide
email at gride-d®gene.com, or n
call the gRide Hotline at x55000
IN,
•
r1i
r%i
o
C)
25
C)
a)
C)
r)
r-tl
-7
(D
<
L
o
(D
C:
rt
CD
-1
(D
0-
-0
(D
M-7
3
W-11,
q=g -
07 0-
0
(;
(D Ln
LA
ED
m
U3
gRide Assistance
vmjxw-
0
dl
1
I\-9GO
*Employees can contact gRide for help with
programs, personalized commute planning, or
any other questions they might have.
— gRide Hotline: 6:00 AM to 7:30PM
— Simple Email address to gRide team
— gRide website
— gRide Phone App with schedules
— SMS Text Alerts
— gRide FAQs, discussion forum, gRide Blog
Business Drivers and Impacts
• Master Plan and Capital Expense
• Lower parking ratios = reduced capital expense for
parking
• Less parking = better, more productive use of
real-estate
• Best Place to Work
• Recruitment, retention, quality of life
• Differentiator compared to other Bay Area biotech
Business Drivers and Impacts, Cont'd
• Productivity enabler
• >12,000 GenenBus WiFi sessions per month:
— N$2M gained productivity
• DNA intra-campus shuttle facilitates face to face meetings
• Carbon Footprint
• N12.5% of GNE CO2 emissions are from commute travel
• gRide has eliminated over 63.4 million lbs. of CO2 since
program launch
Figure 4 All Campuses Neighborhood Mode Choices, 2006 —
10
a
7
6
4
3
F
1
Nov'06 OWN Apr'0a OWN Apr'D9 Oct'09 Apr'10 Oct'10 Apnl'11 Oct'ii Oct'12 Oct'13 Nov'14
■ Dme Alone ■ Carpool ■ Transit ■ Vanpool ■ Walk
c
45,000
u
�i
v 40,000
E
i5,uuu
O
.LA30,000 E
Cu
m 25,000
0
H 2O,000
v
0
0 15,000
a
aEi 10,000
4-
0
5,000
7 0
Z
2006 2007 2007 2002
(Nov) (Jan) (Oct) (Apr;
Year
Total Emissions (metric tons)
I
all
4.5
M
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
2008 2009 2009 2010 2010
(Oct) (Apr) (Oct) (Apr) (Oct)
Numberof employees —* Emissions per employee (metrictons)
VI
c
O
u
v
E
v
v
T
0
a
E
v
0
c
0
E
uw
Lafayette
i,
Case „ $,�,yd : North 'Badshore
Men Gate National � 13
Recreation Area 0 a k l and
San Francisco
Alameda
O" San,
9
Oaly, City
South San
Francisco
Pacifica
Mi11 ae
Y,. San Mateo
State Game Ref ge
\381�sland
San Car osJ
92 Redwoo City,
Half Eas
Moon Bay 84
O,
Da e
t Tassajara
San R �mo+n
Los Altos Hills
UnioCity
82
64
La Honda C perti o.
nton
C
*11
Fc
r"f1
411
_,A' ,
oils
114-1 v -1
e;,A
IV
ke
IN --Imqtr * IF -1 NN
,IPM
Ara
Case Study: North Bayshore
• Regulate building character:
— Height, setback, stepback
— Materials and design
— Form Based Code
• Manage traffic directly:
— Cap vehicle trips
— Require TDM
— Limit parking
• Monetize Trip Reduction
• Design for pedestrians and transit first
• Change performance metrics and analysis guidelines
North Bayshore Program
• Up to 3.4 million square feet of growth
• Areawide peak motor vehicle trip cap
• 45% maximum drive alone rate for new buildings and applicants'
existing buildings
• Transportation Management Association
• Common investment in walk, bike, transit
• Annual monitoring and enforcement
• Roadway pricing if program fails
• Next step: Vehicle trip cap and trade program
Google Dome
Y&I
S. Put the Needs of Daily
Life within Walking
Distance
...and make the walk
delightful
6. Make Cycling Safe and
Pleasant for All Ages
Strong & Fearless
Will ride regardless of facilities
Trip distance not an issue
Interested but Concerned
Not attracted by bike lanes
Not comfortable in traffic
Will ride in low -volume, low -speed
conditions (boulevards, off-street)
Enthused & Confident
Comfortable in traffic with
appropriate facilities
Prefer shorter trip distances
No wa
Source: City of Portland Survey 100
Left tuo bays -
35% decrease In T'
_ andsignal r
41
injuries to all street phase
Users (8thAve)
i
58% decrease in
injuries to all street -
users (9thAve)
�,Y,- � �:�'—iN izhrgzorresior�
�--bicycks endlleft._..
Up to 490/6 turning vehicles
increase in retail°
sales (Locally -based
businesses on 9th Ave from I �� a
23rd to 31st Sts, compared t t
W 3% borough -wide] ,.
' t
P destrian safety
islands ,
r. � -
1
7. Make Transit
Fast, Frequent, Reliable
and Dignified
WIN it In III ■ MAExmwu to
monsoon
.r-.
F v
�111� Nov PON �—
i T¢
w
Space Needs per Person
O 5 20 20
O
Z
_
O
15 50 75 sq ft
m
1,500 sq ft
/AMV
o�
150-400 sq ft
Walk at 3 Bike at Bus at 30 mph Single Occupant
mph 10 mph with 40-60 pax Car at 30 mph
5,000 sq ft
/AMV
�o1 �,
Single Occupant
Car at 60 mph
MOVING CARS
MOVING PEOPLE
Consulting Associates, Inc.
8. Adopt the Right Street
Design Manual
and Use It
Urb
� r�
-4
Str
"" AMA AC-k)]K* AA'M&--
11
"a.*
9. Be Smart About Parking
arking
mow
Don Shoup!l
Parking Worsens Housing Affordability
• Each residential
parking space:
— Price of unit
increases 15-30%
— Number of units
that can be built on
typical parcel
decreases 15-25%
• Fannie Mae: Getting
rid of a car = extra
$1oo,000 in mortgage
• At >300 sq ft, parking
space consumes more
space than an
efficiency apartment
Sources: "A Heavy Load: The Combined Housing and Transportation Burdens of Working
Families," Center for Neighborhood Technology, 20o6. "The Affordability Index: A New
Tool for Measuring the True Affordability of a Housing Choice," Center for Neighborhood
Technology, 2008. Sedway Cook studies of parking and housing costs in San Francisco
and Oakland. Image: Sightline Institute
NNELSON 112
NYGAARD
MONTHLY RENT DUE w w « w w «
TOONE PARKING SPOT
'0 'N ;O 'O 'N 'O 'N
cl
CHARLOTTE
DALLAS S O'
RICHMOND • HOUSTON O0 1
MIAMI • ATLANTA
BALTIMORE a' Oi4
DENVER
WASHINGTON D'AC. N1 ��
NATIONAL AVERAGE 18,000 :
, M
ST. LOUIS • PITTSBURGH O$ I,N�
SEATTLE •SAN DIEGO LII
4
LOS ANGELES « � '3 \O
MINNEAPOLIS N0 , � ,
_a_...r ___ ..... ..... ..... ..... .s.. __1_._.. 1__...�
pO O
PHILADELPHIA 8 CS•
A P
CHICAGO • BOSTON A L '
-I
SAN FRANCISCO
� S
NEW YORK CITY
ZZ�
8N C _1 _.. _ -----
n0
O N�
MONTHLY RENT AS A V - r
PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL N `J
CONSTRUCTION COST 2 ° aN o 0 3E
m
z
Parking has Equity Implications
American Residents without Household Access to Automobile
Source: US Census data adapted from "Socioeconomic Differences in Household Automobile Ownership Rates: NELSON
Implications for Evacuation Policy," by Alan Berube, Elizabeth Deakin, and Steven Raphael. N�'a
Parking Produces Traffic Congestion
■ Poorly managed parking
results in motorists
circling for a parking
space, from 8 to 74 % of
traffic in many
downtowns.
■ Eliminating just io % of
vehicles from any
congested location makes
traffic free flowing.
■ Why provide more
parking than you have
traffic capacity to access
that parking?
I
ki
NNELSON ii5
NYGAARD
Parking confers status
NNELSON
NYGAARD 116
Parking is an Extension of our Territory
joa
SqA
D NO PAKING!_,r
DIYLOL.COM
NNELSON n8
NYGAARD
Source: Michael Sivaka & Brandon Schoettlea, "Update: Percentage of Young Persons With a Drivers License Continues to Drop." Traffic Injury Prevention, Volume 13, Issue 4,
zolz. Page 341.
1. Residential Permits
■ May be necessary to
address fear of spillover
■ Deed restrict new
buildings from
participating.
■ Switch to market pricing
when permit becomes a
"hunting license."
Source: theexpiredmeter.com
NNELSON
NYGAARD 122
2. Smart Meters
■ Are your parking meters
1947 technology?
A
NNELSON
NYGAARD 1�3
2. Smart Meters
■ Meters must:
— Accept all common
forms of payment
— Call you up to ask if
you want more time
— Provide data on
usage
Allow easy
adjustment
■ Put your customers
first.
4
NNELSON ��4
NYGAARD
3. Smart Technology
NNELSON
NYGAARD
.ounty
jarage
ateo
N'ARS
LEGEND
■F fee every evening and alt day Saturday and Sunday
;See vgns at these faabues for dreads!
r--t First 1 S hours Free or
u First 4 hours Free with a va lldahon from Century Theatres
15ee sgm at these facilities fw dreads)
25 C per hour, Monda y - F riday, 1 Oa m to 6pm
(F a E E alarr M1 Wrrn and •1 daY Ltu�daY and sv^E+ri
Z $ ( per hour, Monday -Saturday, loam to 6pm
(FREE after 6 OOpn aM al dry Sunday:
■50C per hour, Monday - Saturday, loam to 6pm
IFaEE a(trr6 norm arw atl day Sunday)
arage
IN
Hours of Operation
Sunday -P Thursday
11 AM to 8 P
Friday - Satu,rday
11 AMto 12 midnight
Except holidays
1
I ! _
° k[
. ♦ F
€-�
s •;
8. Eliminate Minimum Parking Requirements?
Narking Raw
12,40 Mxoi~
I.NN'INbl Mw+MwhxNw
(1tlINRi NH•d
W'Cl/ Fjf""
1,24 61144f lhNN.
174 OW, OW 911) MI",
WhhW AIM
■ Most cities levy minimum
parking requirements
■ Key aim: avoid spillover
■ Usually based on
standards in neighboring
cities, or derived from
ITE Parking Generation
r
NNELSON
NYGAARD
PATAPHYSICAL PARKING REQUIREMENTS
Land use
Parking requirement
Adult entertainment
I space per patron, plus I space per employee on the largest working shift
Barber shop
2 spaces per barber
Beauty shop
3 spaces per beautician
Bicycle repair
3 spaces per 1,000 square feet
Bowling alley
1 space for each employee and employer, plus 5 spaces for each lane
( ins station
1.5 spaces per fuel noale
Health home
I space per 3 beds and bassinettes, plus 1 space per 3 employees, plus 1
space per staff doctor
Heating supply
3.33 spaces for every 1,000 square feet of sales and office area, plus 2
spaces per 3 employees on the maximum shift, plus 1 space for every vehicle
customarily used in operation of the use or stored on the premises
Heliport
I space per 5 employees, plus 5 spaces per touchdown pad
Machinery sales
1 space per 500 square feet ofenclosed saleshemal Boor area, plus I space
per 2,500 square feet of open sales/rental display lot area, plus 2 spaces per
service bay, plus I space per employee, but never less than 5 spaces
Mausoleum
10 spaces per maximum number of interments in a one -hour period
Nunnery
1 space per 10 nuns
Rectory
3 spaces per clergymen
Swimming pool
I space per 2,500 gallons of water
Taxi stand
I space for each employee on the largest shill, plus 1 space per taxi, plus
sufficient spaces to accommodate the largest number of visitors that may
be expected at any one time
Tennis court
I space per player '
Sources: Planning Advisory Service (1964, 1971, and 1991); Witheford and Kansan H972)
Flt UftE
FAST FOOD RESTAURANT WITH DRIVE-IN WINDOW (836)
Peak Parking SpaceS OCcupled vs: 1,000 GROSS SQUARE FEET
LEASABLE AREA
Ona:WEEKDAY
PARKING GENERATION RATES
Avarage Rango o7 Sranlsrd Numoer 0' Artrage'."GSF
Aare A'ara3 Daritrteon stvdiea LaaWfe Area
9R5 355-1592 3.41 18 3
44
42
Lu 40
38
U
Qu 36
m 34
w
a 32
31)
i 28
Y 2.
C
K
a 24
z
w 22
a 20
a 18
16
14
DATA PLOT AND EQUATION
CAUTION —USE CAREFULLY —LOW R'.
t 2 3 4 5 g
% = 1000 GROSS SQUARE FEET LEASABLE AREA
.- ACTLtAL MIA PONTG --- FITTED CURVE
Fitted Curve €,1uation: P - 1.$-5;X; • 20.0
W - 0 039
132
Pv#iRA Gr+rrwi,v+�'lmwlc ofTmn,4v al.aa En��x..cnw 1y8'�p.A},:c 1:ti
Tailor Parking
Requirements?
■ Parking demand varies
with geographic factors:
— Density
— Transit Access
— Income
— Household size
■ Cities can tailor parking
requirements to meet
demand, based on these
factors
■ Does not seek to
constrain demand
NNELSON
NYGAARD
9. Replace Minimums with Maximums
These cities have abolished minimum parking
requirements, citywide or in districts:
■ Coral Gables, FL ■ Portland, OR
■ Eugene, OR ■ San Francisco, CA
■ Fort Myers, FL ■ Stuart, FL
■ Fort Pierce, FL ■ Seattle, WA
■ Los Angeles, CA ■ Spokane, WA
■ Milwaukee, WI ■ United Kingdom
■ Olympia, WA (illegal in entire nation)
NNELSON NVGAARD 134
10. Design Well
■ Design parking garages to
look like buildings, with
active ground floor uses.
■ Encourage below grade.
■ Require at- and above -
grade parking to be
wrapped in landscape or
active uses.
NNELSON
NYGAARD 135
1 1. Be Careful with Driveways
36
12. Unbundle
■ Separate the price of
parking from the price of
rental and multifamily
housing.
■ Separate parking from
commercial space leases
— and require parking
cash -out
NNELSON
NYGAARD 137
13. EnWrage Tandem/Stack/Valet
�41 , y — — — h • •r a a a
» / lip lit
� �� � � ° � �}
.\ � f . \y ,
m x^ \ � \
rl
I"
L
O
3
Mixed Use, Park Once District
Work
op
School
Results:
• <1/2 the parking
• <1/2 the land area
• 'A the arterial trips
• 1/6t" the arterial turning movements
• <'A the vehicle miles traveled
10. Create a New Vision
It's not sustainable if it's not beautiful
A ` I
a
GeniQ�e
mar
•3
x
w
.ail,^AN—
w
n
y �w
For More Information
Jeffrey Turn in
NNELSON
NYGAARD
Mobility Accessibility Sustainability
116 New Montgomery St, Ste 500
San Francisco, CA 94103
USA
Tel: +1 415-284-1544
jtumlin@nelsonnygaard.com
www.nelsonnygaard.com