Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
SSC2011_Scott Bernstein 2011
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
526
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
14
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Helping Places Work for People—New Tools for Measuring & Applying Location Efficiency to Deliver Community Benefits
    Scott Bernstein, President
    Center for Neighborhood Technology
    Solutions for Sustainable Communities, NHC/CHP
    September 27, 2011
    scott@cnt.org
    www.cnt.org
    www.cntenergy.org
    http://htaindex.org
  • 2. What Is Infrastructure & Why Is It Important
    Shared area-wide assets that provide essential services to a common standard
    Involve tangible networked distribution to neighborhoods and communities
    Generally currently delivered through regional governments or utilities
    Starting to be delivered through distributed networks
    The cost of land + infrastructure == ½ the full cost of delivering the built environment
    Natural gas, electricity, water, sewerage, stormwater, local roads, highways, mass transit, telecommunications and fire/school/police
    $50-$100k/unit + land
  • 3. Similar Choices Comprise a Vision:
    Bottling Rainstorms and “Treating” Them
    Streets to Maximize Traffic & Speed
    Bypass Communities with Long-Distance Highways & Aviation
    Expand Electric Utility Capacity
    Expand Car Ownership
    Invest to Promote Consumption
    Catching Raindrops Where They Fall
    Streets to Connect People and What They Do Routinely
    Reconnect Communities with Inter-City Rail
    Increase Buildings & Community Efficiency
    Communities that Come with Local Amenities and Shared Vehicles
    Invest to Increase Productivity and Reduce Cost of Living
  • 4. Requires
    Smart use of existing data sources
    New data
    Ability to apply in ways that support better decisions
  • 5. Purposes
    Review research into the location efficiency of neighborhoods and regions and its application to estimating the combined costs of housing and transportation
    Examine some recent applications: foreclosure research, mortgage lending, counseling, State QAP tax-credit allocation, transit area planning
  • 6. What Do State and Regional Transportation Goals Say About the Economy? Too often out of synch…
    MnDOT Statewide Transportation Plan 2009-2028
    Met Council Regional Development Framework
    Maintaining infrastructure
    Minimize travel time delays through expanded highways and transitways
    Expand networks for safe biking and walking
    Connect to national high-speed rail network
    Link to cost-competitive high-speed rail network
    Provide access to all persons & businesses w/ no undue burden on one community
    Maintain consistency with State energy & environmental goals
    Accommodate growth in a flexible, connected & efficient manner
    Slow the growth in traffic congestion while improving mobility
    Encourage expanded choices in housing locations and types
  • 7. A Century Ago
    Home economics movement taught household budgeting and cost of living reduction
    “Keep your carfare at 3-5 percent of income”
    “Don’t ever go into debt for an automobile”
    Auto companies countered with installment loans and palm cards to help sell
    Home ec was squeezed out by Drivers Ed
    Kids today are taught exactly how to go into debt at age 15
  • 8. U.S. Household Expenditures
    Housing
    Transportation
    Both costs are driven in part by location
    High transportation costs can make seemingly affordable housing unaffordable.
    Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 
    Consumer Expenditure Survey, 2007;
    and personal communication as of November 2008.
  • 9. Sample Performance Measure:What Is Location Efficiency and How Can It Help Address the Perfect Storm of Climate Change and Economic Recession?
  • 10. How is Location Efficiency Determined- Explain Using Regression?(Memorize This…Or….. )
    Peer-reviewed by
    Brookings and National
    Academy of Sciences 2008
  • 11. Easily Visualized Graphically— Location Efficiency: As Density + Transit Choice Increase, VMT Goes Down. Curve Works for 337 US Regions, London,
    Paris, &and 37 Japanese Cities
  • 12. Even Easier to See:Mapping the Benefit
    Good transit access yields one less car per household
    Lowers cost of living by $5-8,000
    Equivalent of increasing income 10-20 percent tax free
  • 13. Another Approach— Indexing Truer Affordability
    https://htaindex.org
    How Housing Affordability is Usually Calculated—Then and Now
    • Historically: Traced to 19th Century ideal—A Week’s Pay for a Month’s Rent
    • 14. Today benchmark affordability is defined as housing costs/Income less than or equal to 30 Percent of target population AMI
    • 15. Problem—Doesn’t include cost of transportation
  • Transportation Cost Model
  • 16. Housing + Transportation Costs Vary by Place Across the US
    Percentages for working families with incomes between $20k - $50k
  • 17. Effect of ‘Drive ‘til You Qualify’: Transport Costs Can Exceed Housing Costs for HHs Earning$20-$50,000
    Transportation emissions can also equal or exceed emissions from residential energy
    Creates “driving to green buildings” challenge
    % Income
    10-15 miles out
  • 18. Chicago MSA 1999-2008Median Income Grew from $51046 to $61295 Mean Grew from $67768 to $82623
    Growth in median income was $854/month
    Growth in H+T costs was $803
    Left just $51/month for all other expense increases, e.g., food, medical, mortgage resets
    Better in places with more transport choice, worse in the exurbs
  • 19. Distribution & Disposition of Household Incomes in the Greater Bay Area 1999 and 2008
    All cohort shares
    <$100k dropped
    Largest decile share went
    From $50-75k in 1999 to
    $100-$150k in 2008
    Household income grew $11033 or $920/month
    Housing + Transportation costs grew $917
    Left just $3/month to pay for all other increased expenses: food, medical, mortgage resets
  • 20. http://htaindex.org
  • 21. Chicago MSA Mirror Images—Net Net Density 0-347 HH/RA v. 6600 to 30,400 VMT/HH/Year
  • 22. Mirror Images Again—Net Density 0-347 vs.0.5 – 2.2 Vehicles Per Household
  • 23. One Click Shows Area of Highest VMT
  • 24. Another Shows Urban Form or Lack Thereof
  • 25. Another Shows Area of Lowest VMT
  • 26. Explaining the “affordability squeeze” in Chicago…
  • 27. 4170/5898 areas are affordable at H<=30% AMI3198/5898 areas are affordable at H+T<=45% AMI388,000 additional households financially stressed
  • 28. In most efficient areas, cost of living increase from spike kept to 2%, in least efficient areas increased 9%
  • 29. Similar effects in Metro Portland OR…
  • 30. Or in Metro Portland Maine
  • 31. For AMI SF Bay Area Households:1.5/2.6M HHs in 2690/4571 = 59% in H<=30, Drops to1.2/2.6M HHs in 2201/4571 = 48% in H+T<=45
  • 32. For Households Earning 80% of AMI:Housing-Only Affordability from 5 to 107 w/ Avg. = 40%H+ T Affordability from 18 to 129 w. Avg. =58%
  • 33. Sample Applications
  • 34. We Can Use This Knowledge To—
    Protect consumers against “hidden” costs by providing better information
    Analyze trends & compare across HH types
    Define housing needs for public policy purposes
    Encourage coordination of housing and transportation policies
    Inform sub-Federal planning efforts
    Predict the ability of a household to pay rent or mortgage
    Improve financial / housing counseling
    Help make the case for and package alternative financing for accelerated transit system build-out
  • 35. Index is Being Adopted At Several Levels
    HUD and DOT are using to screen sustainable communities and TIGER grant applications
    MPOs in Bay Area, Chicago, DC and elsewhere using to re-screen, prioritize LRTP investments
    Experimental counseling tools—Phoenix, East Bay, Chicago
    MTC in Bay Area used to justify helping capitalize TOD investment fund
    State of Il. new act requires five agencies to screen investments
    City of El Paso TX now uses to direct affordable housing to areas of low transportation costs
    Portland, others using to help create a typology of TODs that takes affordability and equity into account
  • 36. Can Gas Price Spikes Help Provide Early Warning of Defaults and Foreclosures?
  • 37. The lower the TCI, the greater the number of foreclosed properties by Census Block Group
    Foreclosures increase once the average annual VMT per Block Group exceeds 15,000
  • 38. Ten Years of Foreclosures in Metro Chicago—A Central City + Suburban ProblemHighest in Areas with Large Transportation Cost and Use of Variable Rate Financing.
    1998
    2008
    Analysis of public
    filings by CNT
  • 39. Foreclosure Rates in Chicago 2000 and 2008Highest in Areas of High T-Cost and Extensive Use of Variable Rate Financing
  • 40. Count of Bankruptcies in Chicago Metro Area 2007 and 2007-2010Source: PACER
    2007
    2007-2010
  • 41. Location Efficient Mortgage Demo 2000-2005, Idea Was Well Received, No ForeclosuresSeems to Have Outperformed Market
  • 42. 41
    H+T Index and Affordable Housing In Illinois, 2001-2008
    2005 Illinois Comprehensive Housing Plan
    2010 H+T Affordability Act (PA 96-1255) requires 5 agencies (Housing, Transportation, Economic Development, Capital Development, Finance) to take combined costs into account in siting or awarding of support
    Chicago Metropolitan Agency on Planning or CMAP’s Go To 2040plan, 2010
    National support – Partnership for Sustainable Communities
    Increasing state and local interest
  • 43. 42
    What We Examined
    CNT analyzed 248 developments approved by IHDA from 2001-2008 in the Chicago region
    Evaluated whether the Housing Task Force, QAP, comprehensive housing plan and other policies have impacted transportation costs and job access of IHDA-financed developments
    Identified national best practices and opportunities to improve policies and programs
  • 44. 43
    IHDA is leading the way
    2010 QAP promotes TOD, jobs-housing balance and proximity to services
    IHDA has been a partner in innovative programs like the Regional Housing Initiative and Preservation Compact
    Housing Task Force and linkages working group
    But continued improvement is needed to remain on the cutting edge…
    43
  • 45. 44
    We examined distribution of LIHTC-funded developments in metro area
  • 46. 45
    T Costs in IHDA Developments Outperform the Regional Average
  • 47. But Transportation Costs Rise as Transportation Choice Shrinks
    46
  • 48. 47
    Used GIS to Determine Rail Transit Access for IHDA Units
  • 49. 48
    Rail access of newly approved LIHTC-funded units improved between the two periods
  • 50. 49
    Walkable Transit in ¾ of Suburban Units
  • 51. Three Case Studies
  • 52. 51
    Casa Morelos
    Annual T Cost: $7,094
    Pilsen Neighborhood
    CTA Orange Line, Metra BNSF
    Walkable street network in compact neighborhood
    Close to bus routes, stores and Pilsen Industrial Corridor
  • 53. 52
    Ogden Manor
    Annual T Cost: $8,846
    Downtown Naperville
    Less than one mile to Metra BNSF station
    Across from high school
    ¼ mile to shopping
    Job-rich
    AHPAA non-exempt
    (9.4% affordable)
  • 54. 53
    West Line Apartments
    (Prairie Station)
    Annual T cost: $10,233
    Adjacent to Hanover Park Milwaukee District West Station
    Good job access
    RTA TOD plan
    Few nearby amenities
    Not walkable
  • 55. 54
  • 56. IHDA Recommendations
    Add transportation cost criteria to QAP
    One-click access to Index by property address via Abogo at
    http://abogo.cnt.org
    55
  • 57. 56
    Recommendations
    Leverage geographic set-asides to better target desirable neighborhood characteristics and reward walkable access to amenities
  • 58. Recommendations
    Improve Live Near Work scoring category with LED data—
    Cooperative federal data venture between Census, BLS and BTS
    57
  • 59. LA-Southland showing all current Metro, Metrolink, Amtrak lines + proposed Expo, Foothill Extension, Orange Line North BRT, Pettis Valley, SB E St BRT & Wilshire Lines
  • 60. Existing Stations on Metro (84 stations on 6 lines) & Metrolink (53 stations on 7 lines)
  • 61. Metro service only—Avg in ½ mile around stations
    • Avg net density =12.2, High = 38 at Wilshire/Normandie, Low = 2.75 at Douglas/Rosecrans Gr
    • 62. Avg block size = 8.64 Acres, Low = 1.28 at 5th St. Blue, High = 47.1 at El Segundo/Nash Green
    • 63. Avg % workers who take PT, Bike, Walk or Work at home =23, High = 63 @ Little Tokyo/Arts,
    low = 3 @ Mariposa/Nash Green
    • Avg Autos/HH = 1.2, Low = 0.36 @ Pershing Sq., High = 2.04 at Aviation Green
    • 64. Avg % HHs owning Zero or 1 Car = 65, High = 95 @ 7th/Metro Center, Low =32 Orange BRT
    • 65. Avg T-cost as % Median Income = 17.7, Low = 10.5 @ 7th/Metro Ctr, High = 24 Mariposa/Nash Gr
  • Metrolink service only—Avg in ½ mile around stations
    • Avg. net density = 4.5 HH/Res Acre, High = 14.3 in Burbank, Low = 1.28 in Commerce/Orange
    • 66. Avg. block size = 23.2 Acres, Low = 3.73 in Downtown Pomona, High = 53 in E. Ontario Station
    • 67. Avg. % Workers Who Take PT, Bike, Walk, or Work at Home = 6.2, High = 51 Oxnard, Low=3 Industry
    • 68. Avg. Autos/HH=1.6, Low = 1.04 in Sun Valley, High = 2.29 in Industry
    • 69. Avg % of HHs Owning Zero or 1 car = 48, High = 75 in Sun Valley, Low = 28 in Industry
    • 70. Avg. T-Cost as % Med Income = 20.1, Low =14.9 in Downtown Pomona, High = 28.5 in Upland
  • Comparing MTA station areas, Metrolink station areas, and Regional Averages (Unweighted)
  • 71. Thank You!
    scott@cnt.org
    www.cnt.org
    http://htaindex.org
    http://toddata.cnt.org
    http://abogo.cnt.org

×