Share of Regional Jobs 2005 and 2030
DC Core
Mixed Use Centers
Employment Centers
Suburban Employment Centers
Emerging Employment Centers
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
2005 2030
Year
Perc
en
t
Center Classifications
and Projections
Average Job Density 2005 and 2030
DC Core
Mixed Use Centers
Employment Centers
Suburban Employment Centers
Emerging Employment Centers
Tysons Corner - COG
Tysons Corner - Pushing the Envelope
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
2005 2030
Year
Jo
bs/A
cre
2020 Smart Growth “Compass”
Treasure Valley Futures (Trends )
2000 2020 Compass
2020TVF
Metro 84% 83% 60%
Small Cities 5% 4% 7%
Rural
Counties
11% 12% 33%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Pe
rce
nta
ge
of
Off
ice
Sp
ac
e
wit
hin
Se
cti
on
s o
f M
etr
o A
rea
s
In Downtown In Secondary Downtowns In Edge Cities In Edgeless Areas
Core dominated Balanced Dispersed Edgeless
Source: Lang, Edgeless Cities Brookings, October 2003
Source: Lang, 2003, Edgeless Cities
11
– Regions grow around multi-dimensional regional centers
– Employment, education, civic, and recreation combine to serve
the region’s population and economic activity
– 35% to 40% of regional employment locates in defined
employment core
– These are the places that benefit most from mobility connectivity
– Minimum Core Size (Total Jobs): 15,000
– Average Core Size (Total Jobs): 50,900
– Minimum # of Jobs per Acre (exceptions include airports,
catalysts and universities with lots of open space):2
– Average # of Jobs per Acre 15.3
– Minimum Core Size (Total Jobs): 5,000
– Average Core Size (Total Jobs): 22,400
– Minimum # of Jobs per Acre (exceptions include airports,
catalysts and universities with lots of open space):2
– Average # of Jobs per Acre 7.4
Source: RCLCo
0123456789
1011121314151617181920
100 300 500 700 900 1,100 1,300 1,500 1,700 1,900 2,100 2,300 2,500 2,700 2,900
Nu
mb
er
of E
co
no
mic
Co
res
Employment (1,000's)
Denver Philadelphia Cincinatti DetroitHouston Nashville Atlanta ChattanoogaRaleigh-Durham Minneapolis-St. Paul Salt Lake City CharlestonPhoenix Central FL 2009 Tampa-St. Pete SarasotaSan Diego 2008
Number of Employment Cores Relative to
Total Employment
Selected Metropolitan Areas
Source: RCLCO; SANDAG; Moody’s Economy.com; BLS
R2
= 0.81
10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000
Metropolitan Area (Predicted/Actual)
(Predicted/Actual)
(Predicted/Actual)
(Predicted/Actual)
(Predicted/Actual)
Cleveland 8/9 9/12 12/15 16/19 29/13
Indianapolis 11/11 14/12 19/16 29/18 62/22
Portland 10/11 12/11 15/16 20/21 34/35
St. Louis 10/10 12/10 15/13 20/18 34/28
Source: Bogart (2006)
RCLCo, 2011
Source: RCLCO
Percent Difference in Density from Trend for 62 ScenariosPercent Difference in VMT from Trend for 62 Scenarios
Source: Bartholomew and Ewing, Land Use-Transportation Scenarios and Future
Vehicle Travel and Land Consumption, JAPA Winter 2009
15% higher
San Diego region
0.63
-24.8%
1.81
-8.6%
.047
-13.3%
0.78 1.51
-23.5%
-9.0%
MASTER PLAN SCENARIO
.047 2.20
1.88
0.60
1.03
BALANCED LU SCENARIO
Differences in Jobs/Housing Ratio in 2050 and Changes in VMT
Source: Bartholomew, Ewing etc., 2010
1. Calculate standard ITE trip generation for site components
2. Define LUs & distances between each
3. Estimate unconstrained internal capture rates for all LU pairs on site
4. Calculate balanced internal trips between LU pairs
5. Calculate overall internal capture for site
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Downtown
infill
Urban infill Suburban
infill
MXD large MXD medium
size
MXD small
Pe
rce
nt
Re
du
cti
on
Source: PB based on research review, 2009
Notes: MXD large is more than 300K sf of non-res. uses; MXD medium is 100-300K sf of non-res. MXD small is less than 100K sf. of non-res.. Ranges reflect daily capture; peak capture, especially PM, are higher
– Retail, Office, Restaurant and Residential Uses present; lower if have 2 or 3 of these; hotels and cinemas a plus
– Walk distances between primary uses is between 600 and 1000 feet
– Project is large
– Project is isolated (limited competition)
– Ratio of Office plus Commercial Uses increases over 80 sf/hh
Top Related