APPENDIX C CHARACTERISTICS OF THE ENERGIZE PHOENIX CORRIDOR

Similar documents
Arch-Laclede s Landing Station

TEMPE REDEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY

Downtown Stations: 8 th & Pine and Convention Center

Central Corridor Forecasting Methodology

Existing Land Use. Typical densities for single-family detached residential development in Cumberland County: 1

Section 5: Fair Housing Index

Introduction. Charlotte Fagan, Skyler Larrimore, and Niko Martell

Generic Environmental Impact Statement. Build-Out Analysis. City of Buffalo, New York. Prepared by:

2014 Plan of Conservation and Development

Detroit Neighborhood Housing Markets

2011 Census Bulletin #4 Dwellings & Structure Type in Metro Vancouver

Downtown Housing Policy

4 LAND USE 4.1 OBJECTIVES

410 Land Use Trends Comprehensive Plan Section 410

Town of Prescott Valley 2013 Land Use Assumptions

Chapter 1: Community & Planning Context

SJC Comprehensive Plan Update Housing Needs Assessment Briefing. County Council: October 16, 2017 Planning Commission: October 20, 2017

SCOPE OF WORK DEVELOPMENT OF A SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR THE PRELIMINARY REGIONAL HOUSING PLAN FOR THE SOUTHEASTERN WISCONSIN REGION

Cultural Policy Center at the University of Chicago. Irving B Harris Graduate School of Public Policy Studies

How Fair Market Rents Limit Voucher Households to Live in Better Neighborhoods: The Case of Baltimore Metropolitan Area

RESOLUTION NO ( R)

NNN LEASED INVESTMENT OR OWNER/USER OPPORTUNITY

CASS COUNTY MASTER PLAN July 1, Appendix C LAND USE

Ch. 14 CAPITOL HILL. Historic Districts - Apartment and Multi-family Development

6. Review of Property Value Impacts at Rapid Transit Stations and Lines

JASPER PLACE NEIGHBOURHOOD HOUSING ASSESSMENT NOVEMBER West Jasper Place. Glenwood. Britannia Youngstown. Canora

How Does the City Grow?

MONTGOMERY COUNTY RENTAL HOUSING STUDY. NEIGHBORHOOD ASSESSMENT June 2016

4.2.8 Westwood/VA Hospital Station Area

IHS Regional Housing Market Segmentation Analysis

Housing and Homelessness. City of Vancouver September 2010

Condominium Conversions in. Determinants

Download Presentation

2016 Census Bulletin Changing Composition of the Housing Stock

CHAPTER 2: HOUSING. 2.1 Introduction. 2.2 Existing Housing Characteristics

Census Tract Data Analysis

PLANNING COMMISSION WILLIAMSBURG, VIRGINIA WORK SESSION AGENDA Wednesday, May 23, 2012

A. Land Use Relationships

Development Impacts Report for 388 Lerwick Tim Hortons

The Philadelphia Code. Table : Commercial and Commercial Mixed-Use Districts {For a printable PDF version, click HERE}

Demographics Review Multi-family Housing Data & Characteristics. Triplexes, quadplexes, and apartments. Development Potential Future Considerations

2.2.2 The Land Use Setting

HOUSING AFFORDABILITY

Affordable Housing Case Studies: Massachusetts & Maryland

Carver County AFFORDABLE HOUSING UPDATE

8Land Use. The Land Use Plan consists of the following elements:

Valuing Diamonds in the Rough: Utilizing Highest and Best Use Valuation Principles in a Mass Appraisal Environment

The rapidly rising price of single-family homes in. Change and Challenges East Austin's Affordable Housing Problem

PHOENIX MOUNTAIN PRESERVE SITE 1431 East Dunlap Avenue, Phoenix, AZ 85020

Implementation. Approved Master Plan and SMA for Henson Creek-South Potomac 103

Town of Frisco 2015 Land Use Profile

A project of Neighborhood Projects for Community Revitalization At the Center for Urban and Regional Affairs (CURA) University of Minnesota

Appendix A: Guide to Zoning Categories Prince George's County, Maryland

Family Dollar. Turbeville, South Carolina RYAN D O CONNELL. CONTACT:

Briefing Book. State of the Housing Market Update San Francisco Mayor s Office of Housing and Community Development

3804 Wilson Boulevard (Staples Site) Special General Land Use Plan Study

The Planning & Development Department and the Legal Services Division recommends that Council:

White Oak Science Gateway Master Plan Staff Draft AFFORDABLE HOUSING ANALYSIS. March 8, 2013

Las Vegas Valley Executive Summary

PRICE REDUCED!! 100% LEASED OFFICE BUILDING FOR SALE

Carver County AFFORDABLE HOUSING UPDATE

San Diego County Vol. XX, Issue I Rental Trends Executive Summary March 2007

SUBSTITUTE ORDINANCE

Housing Needs in Burlington s Downtown & Waterfront Areas

Table of Contents. Title Page # Title Page # List of Tables ii 6.7 Rental Market - Townhome and Apart ment Rents

RENTAL MARKET REPORT. Manitoba Highlights* Highlights. Housing market intelligence you can count on

Northwest Quadrant. Aerial Photographs. I th Ave Atlantic Ave 1 st St. SW 10 th /Atlantic SW 8 th /Atlantic

Applying Lessons from The 606 to Map Displacement Pressure in Chicago

Residential August 2009

FOR SALE FORMER MANUFACTURING COMPLEX OF C. 266,470 SQ FT 1 THE GREEN, TULLYNACROSS ROAD, LAMBEG, LISBURN

Secured Market Rental Housing Policy

Missing Middle Housing Types Showcasing examples in Springfield, Oregon

A STUDY OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA S APARTMENT RENTAL MARKET 2000 TO 2015: THE ROLE OF MILLENNIALS

Marketing Presentation 5550 Crowder Boulevard New Orleans, Louisiana 70127

Social Indicators and Trends 2014

FOR SALE 605 Industry Ave DISTRIBUTION WAREHOUSE FACILITY Asking $395,000

M A N H A T T A N 69 THE FURMAN CENTER FOR REAL ESTATE & URBAN POLICY. Financial District Greenwich Village/Soho

Advance Auto Parts Building For Sale

Kane County. Division of Transportation. Technical Specifications Manual for Road Improvement Impact Fees Under Kane County Ordinance #07-232

EAST-WEST CORRIDOR EXISTING CONDITIONS

Town of Cary, North Carolina Rezoning Staff Report 12-REZ-27 Morris Branch Town Council Public Hearing January 24, 2013

Westgate Entertainment District

The New Starts Grant and Affordable Housing A Roadmap for Austin s Project Connect

Market Analysis and TOD Locations

Community Partnerships to Examine Local Housing Markets: A Neighborhood Profile

CITY OF HAMILTON PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Economic Development Division

ATTACHMENT B DRAFT NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS ANALYSIS. Prepared for City of Sonoma. Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

Martin Young (870)

Retail & Restaurant Opportunity NEW SHOPS, PAD and DRIVE-THRU AVAILABLE. W/NWC Scottsdale Rd & Thomas Rd Scottsdale, AZ

H o u s i n g N e e d i n E a s t K i n g C o u n t y

Water Use in the Multi family Housing Sector. Jack C. Kiefer, Ph.D. Lisa R. Krentz

North Hanley Station. o Flower Valley Shopping Center o Cross Keys Shopping Cente #49 North Lindbergh MetroBus

Provide a diversity of housing types, responsive to household size, income and age needs.

Appraisers and Assessors of Real Estate

Glenmont Sector Plan Staff Draft AFFORDABLE HOUSING ANALYSIS

Carver County AFFORDABLE HOUSING UPDATE

Portland Streetcar Development Impacts

From Policy to Reality

Prepared for the Rauch Foundation

Carver County AFFORDABLE HOUSING UPDATE

Transcription:

APPENDIX C CHARACTERISTICS OF THE ENERGIZE PHOENIX CORRIDOR BACKGROUND ON RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS IN THE EP CORRIDOR The 10-mile EP corridor (Figure G1) is a highly diverse, mixed-use L-shaped region centered on the Phoenix central business district (CBD) and following the Valley Metro lightrail starter rail line. The light rail, opened in December 27, 2008, now binds this corridor into a single, diverse linear region. Fifteen of the light-rail s 27 stations lie within the EP corridor. The corridor radiates north from the CBD along Central Ave. and east along Washington and Jefferson Streets. This section of the report provides background on the corridor and the potential residential and commercial energyretrofit participants within it. It analyzes the residential and commercial electricity customers according to some of the characteristics that may prove important in determining participation rates and energy savings. Existing electricity usage, however, is summarized in Appendix D: Base Year Energy Use. as well as lower-income single-family homes on the fringes of the CBD. The North Central Ave. part of the corridor functions as an extension of downtown and contains a narrow corridor of high-rise residential and commercial buildings, St. Josephs Medical Center, office buildings, retail, schools, and some of Phoenix s most important public institutions, such as the Burton Barr Public Library, Phoenix Art Museum, and Heard Museum. The commercial blocks bordering Central Ave. transition rapidly to middle-income residential land use and some of Phoenix s oldest historic neighborhoods. Finally, the east-west part of the EP corridor connects the CBD to Sky Harbor Airport, and includes a variety of commercial and light and heavy industries, Gateway Community College, and airport-related offices, hotels, and industries, as well as generally lower-income and minority-dominated residential. Land uses in the corridor are summarized in Table G1. Of 8,236 total parcels, the Maricopa County Assessor s Office classifies 2,925 as residential, 4,222 as commercial (or other non-residential uses such as government), and 755 as vacant land. The commercial land, however, includes 502 commercially operated multi-family residential parcels, 94% of which are classified as rental. RESIDENTIAL MAKE-UP OF THE CORRIDOR Overall, the corridor is home to over 37,000 people in over 15,000 housing units. More than 35% of households fall below the poverty level. The corridor includes over 2,400 commercial and institutional establishments totaling over 125 million square feet and 83,000 employees. The Phoenix CBD, while relatively modest for a city of its size, contains a typical mix of functions such as banks, courts and associated law offices, government buildings, university buildings (ASU s Downtown campus), theaters, hotels and convention center, and two professional sports stadiums that serve the entire metro area. There is less residential than in many other American downtowns, but there are a few highrises and some new transit-oriented multi-family housing, Residential population densities are highest in the areas northeast, northwest, and south of downtown (Figure G2). Other areas of dense population lie on the eastern and western edges of the North Central Ave. corridor. The residential areas in the EP corridor are diverse. Figure G3 shows maps of six different socio-economic and demographic variables for all census block groups in or overlapping with the corridor. Note that a number of block groups in Figure G3 lie partially outside the EP corridor boundaries. 11

POPULATION DENSITY PERCENT WITH COLLEGE DEGREE MEDIAN AGE MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME PERCENT WHITE AND NON-HISPANIC AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD SIZE Source: Census 2000. 12

PERCENT RENTER OCCUPIED The percentage of residential properties that are rented was taken into account when allocating stratification zones to SES classes. Zones with higher percentages of renters tend to have residents with lower socioeconomic status. Figure G5 shows the breakdown of owners vs. renters by census block group in and overlapping with the corridor, as well as number of housing units. Owner occupants predominate in the two areas with the highest SES: north of Camelback Rd., and between McDowell and Thomas Rds. In most other areas, renter-occupied housing is most common. However, given that census block boundaries do not align perfectly with the Energize Phoenix corridor boundaries, this figure is not a precise estimate of the breakdown of owners vs. renters in the corridor. While there is noticeable correlation of these socio-economic status (SES) variables, there are also numerous areas where the variables do not vary in the same direction. To simplify the picture, these six variables were used to stratify the census blocks in and overlapping with the EP corridor into four similar groups, as shown in Figure G4. See Appendix J: Behavioral Survey Design, Administration and Preliminary Results for details on the statistical procedure used. The map shows the North Central corridor to generally have higher SES, with the highest levels north of Camelback Rd. and between Thomas and McDowell Rds. Only one census block on this northern corridor is in the lowest SES class, and it lies largely outside of the EP corridor. The downtown area is largely a mix of the two lowest SES strata. The Washington St. corridor east of downtown falls largely into the lowest SES category, with the exception of a somewhat gentrified block east of 7th St. and the block that includes Sky Harbor Airport. * The above corridor boundary includes some areas not included in the final official Energize Phoenix Corridor. Specific locations of multi-family housing and apartment buildings are shown in Figure G6. Multi-family housing and apartment buildings that reserve 67% of their units for lowto moderate-income families may participate in the Energize Phoenix Rental program. There are higher concentrations of such housing in the Garfield district, northeast of downtown, as well as north and south of I-10 west of Central Ave. 13

Table G3 shows a breakdown of the commercial parcels in the corridor according to property-use code. The most common type of commercial parcel is miscellaneous commercial, followed by multi-family residential, municipal buildings, office buildings, and warehouses. Figure G7 below shows the relative proportions of residential buildings of various building sizes. While there is a long tail to the right, there is a more normal distribution among residential properties than there are for commercial properties (see Figure G11 below). The mean size for these properties is 1,380 sq. ft. COMMERCIAL MAKE-UP OF THE CORRIDOR There are two main data sources available for characterizing the non-residential make-up of the EP corridor. The Maricopa County Assessor s Office maintains a database of commercial parcels, with parcel and building data classified by property-use code. The Maricopa Association of Governments maintains a separate database of employers, with data by individual establishment classified by type of industry. Large multi-unit commercial parcels, such as office buildings or industrial parks, may contain numerous separate establishments with employment in different economic sectors. Also, apartment buildings and multi-family housing is classified as commercial property use codes in the Assessor s data. Overall, 90% of commercial properties are classified as rental, meaning the buildings are leased to users. Owner-occupied buildings may represent good targets for energy conservation retrofits because the owners can benefit most directly. The property-use categories with the highest percentage of owner occupancy are amusement (50%), private schools, and clubs and lodges (both 40%), converted-use properties (35%, primarily residential-tooffice conversions), various private owners exempt from property taxes (27%, largely charitable organizations and community groups), motels (24%), and office buildings (23%), warehouses (17%), and auto sales and service (16%). In absolute terms, categories with the most owneroccupied parcels are miscellaneous commercial (90), office buildings (58), warehouses (41), multi-family residential (30), convenience and grocery stores and strip malls (29), and converted-use properties (28). 14

Age of the building (vintage) may also turn out to be an important factor in the choice of a building owner to retrofit. While many parcels in the Assessor s database do not have data on year of construction, those that do were used to create figures G8 and G9. Figure G8 shows the property-use categories by decade in which they were built. The individual categories have been combined into broader categories. Note that Figure G8 includes all residential parcels with year of construction, not just commercial multi-family parcels. With the exception of residential, led by the 1920s and 2000s, and government/school buildings, with more built in the 2000s than any other decade, most other property-use codes in the corridor are on parcels built on mainly between the 1940s and 1980s. Figure G10 shows the geographic distribution of employment in the corridor. Sky Harbor Airport, the Phoenix CBD, and the North Central corridor from just south of Thomas Rd. to Indian School Rd. are the major employment centers. Figure G9 shows the same data on a percentage basis, where each property-use group adds to 100% across each curve. Overall, the decades from the 1940s through the 1980s each saw construction of at least 10% of the current structures, with the 1950s and 1980s as the top two decades for construction in the corridor. The residential construction boom of the 2000s is quite evident in both figures. *A small percentage of parcels and businesses included in the above map were not included within the final Energize phoenix boundaries. Source: Maricopa Association of Governments 15

Figure G11 represents commercial properties by square foot. The majority of properties fall at or below 50,000 square feet. Although there are properties 50,000 square feet and larger, the mean (28,535 sq. ft.) remains under 50,000 sq. ft. Finally, Figure G12 shows a histogram of commercial property size for properties under 50,000 sq. ft. Again, the data skews very strongly to the left-hand size, with most properties falling below 10,000 sq. ft. The mean size is 5,709 sq. ft. This appendix has reviewed the potential customer base for energy retrofits in the Energize Phoenix corridor. Which of these factors prove most important in determining participation and savings will be the subject of analysis over the next two years. 16