District 2040

Building Towards a Sustainable DC

Matthew Steenhoek January 8th, 2013 UAP-5974: Methods Independent Study: Market, Economic Impact, & Fiscal Impact Methods Dr. Terry Holzheimer Rev. 1

Table of Contents
Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................................... i Table of Figures ............................................................................................................................................ iii District 2040: Building Towards a Sustainable DC ........................................................................................ 1 FUTURE MARKET STUDY ............................................................................................................................... 3 A. I. II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. VIII. IX. X. XI. B. I. II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. C. District-wide Growth and Demand Projections ................................................................................ 3 Population Projections .................................................................................................................. 3 Household Projections .................................................................................................................. 6 Age Group Projections .............................................................................................................. 8 Housing Demand Implications ................................................................................................ 10 Employment Demand Projections .............................................................................................. 12 Future Office Development Demand ...................................................................................... 14 Future Retail Development Demand ...................................................................................... 15 Hotel and Tourism Projections................................................................................................ 16 Museum, Memorial, and Cultural Demand ............................................................................ 17 Performing Arts and Musical Venue Demand Analysis............................................................... 18 Local Parks and Open Space Demand ..................................................................................... 20 Residential Supply Analysis ......................................................................................................... 26 Office Supply Analysis ................................................................................................................. 30 Retail Supply Analysis.............................................................................................................. 32 Hotel Supply Analysis .............................................................................................................. 33 Museum, Monument, and Cultural Supply Analysis................................................................... 35 Performing Arts and Musical Venue Supply Analysis ............................................................. 37 Local Park Supply Analysis ...................................................................................................... 38 District-wide Supply Projections ..................................................................................................... 22

Policy Implications and Recommendations .................................................................................... 42

Works Cited ................................................................................................................................................. 45 Appendix ..................................................................................................................................................... 49 Appendix A: Sustainable DC Population and Household Growth Projections ........................................ 50 Appendix B: GMU Based Household Projections.................................................................................... 51 i

Appendix C: Sustainable DC Based Age and Household Projections ...................................................... 52 Appendix D: WDCEP Pipeline Summary.................................................................................................. 53 Appendix E: WDCEP Major (1M+) Long Term Development .................................................................. 54 Appendix F: DC DOES Based Employment Projections ........................................................................... 55 Appendix G: Hotel Demand and Visitor Volume Projections ................................................................. 56 Appendix H: Housing Demand Calculations............................................................................................ 57

ii

Table of Figures
Figure 1: Summary of DC Population Growth Projections............................................................................ 3 Figure 2: Summary of DC Household Growth Projections ............................................................................ 7 Figure 3: Washington DC Population Growth Projections by Age Group to 2040 ....................................... 9 Figure 4: Washington DC Proportion of Population Projections by Age Group to 2040 .............................. 9 Figure 5: Researcher's Projected Employment Distribution ....................................................................... 13 Figure 6: District of Columbia Development Pipeline, key investment class assets ................................... 24 Figure 7: Major Long Term Development Pipeline ..................................................................................... 25 Figure 8: Project Housing Supply and Demand to 2040 ............................................................................. 27 Figure 9: Summary of Researcher's 2040 Supply and Demand Projections ............................................... 42

iii

District 2040: Building Towards a Sustainable DC

The Washington, DC region is growing. Nowhere is this more apparent, perhaps, than in the District of Columbia itself. The District has seen tremendous growth in recent years and has bold ambitions to sustain this trajectory. Employment opportunities in the District have increased by an average of 1,000 jobs per month over the past 15 months, and DC population grew by 2.7%, faster than any state in the nation, between 2010 and 2011 (Office of Mayor, 2012). Further, tourism numbers continue to increase in the District with 17.9 million tourists visiting the city in 2011, breaking a record high that was set pre-September 11th (Destination DC, 2011). Through the Sustainable DC initiative, Mayor Vincent Gray has set a goal of adding 250,000 new residents to the District of Columbia over the next twenty years and, though his Five-Year Economic Development strategy, the Mayor has identified an ambitious plan to create 100,000 new jobs over the next five years.

Geographically constrained, with much of the potentially available open land under Federal control, and already densely developed, the District has many challenges that must be addressed in order to achieve the Mayors vision and to continue on a path towards sustainable development patterns that maintain a high quality of life and equity for new and old residents alike. On a regional level, coordination of transportation infrastructure, cooperation on economic development issues, and a realization that a well-planned regional growth will ultimately be a benefit to the entire region, will all be necessary to accommodate the region-wide housing and workforce development needs. While this study largely focuses on the direct implications to the District of Columbia proper the regional context is important to note and should be considered as part of any larger vision plans for the region. Housing, transporting, and employment for the regions growing population will be the key to success for all jurisdictions, particularly in the direct metro region.

In this analysis, the market study component will focus on growth patterns and projections for the District of Columbia in the context of the larger region and in the context of the Mayors Sustainable DC vision. It will further

look at demographic shifts in the population and the impacts on policy, review the foreseeable supply pipeline in the District, and, finally, it will touch upon other policy options that may be necessary to achieve the Mayors ambitious targets.

FUTURE MARKET STUDY

A. District-wide Growth and Demand Projections
I. Population Projections

While the population growth targets set forth in Sustainable DC form the analytical framework for the projections of household and population growth in the District through 2040, a number of other sources were analyzed to provide additional context to the Sustainable DC targets. These sources include direct projections provided by the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (MWCOG), linear extrapolations of recent data from the U.S. Census Bureau (Census), and analysis of population and household projections completed by the George Mason University Center for Regional Analysis (GMU). See Figure 1, below.

Figure 1: Summary of DC Population Growth Projections

As illustrated above, the GMU based and Sustainable DC based population projections align very closely with the while the MWCOG projection and Census based projections differ widely.

Achieving the Sustainable DC goal of adding 250,000 new residents to the District of Columbia over the next 20 years means that by 2032 the population of DC would grow to approximately 885,000. Growth at this rate will bring the population of the District to more than one million people by the year 2040. Similarly, the GMU-based population projections indicate that the population of the District of Columbia could pass the one-million resident mark sometime around 2038. The 2040 Sustainable DC projections represent an extension of the blend of the straight line projected absolute population growth numbers and growth rate necessary to reach the Mayors population growth targets by 2032, see Appendix A: Sustainable DC Population and Household Growth Projections for additional detail. The 2040 GMU population projections use the projection of adding over 122,000 new households in the District of Columbia by 2030 that was stated in the Housing the Regions Workforce report and the MWCOG household size projections to identify additional population growth, see Appendix B: GMU Based Household Projections for additional detail.

The MWCOG projections are a more conservative projection of population growth that does not accommodate the level of population growth needed to meet the Mayors aspirational Sustainable DC goals. These projections are created by the State Data Center, a division of DCs Office of Planning, in collaboration with MWCOG and because they are used for fiscal long range regional planning must remain more conservative. They reflect a more moderate growth projection and act as a counter point to the Researchers aggressive Census data based population projection. The Census based projection uses the strong growth seen in the District between 2010 and 2011 to set the trajectory for growth. This methodology provides population projections that would anticipate the population of DC doubling over the next 30 years and are not likely sustainable or realistic. As with many things, the truth will lie somewhere between the overtly conservative projections of MWCOG/OP and the admittedly

aggressive projections of the Researcher that are based on an uncharacteristically strong period of growth in the District.

According to US Census data, the District reached its population peak of 802,178 in 1950. From then until the 2010 Census, the District saw sustained population decline. Through the Sustainable DC vision, the District would finally break this record high 75 years later in 2025. Many of the problems of disinvestment and systematic abandonment that plagued the District of Columbia and urban areas across the nation during this period of decline have been rectified, there are growing trends towards repopulation of urban centers, and the District is poised to achieve these strong growth projections. However, achieving the Mayors vision for growth will require a concerted effort, forward thinking policy, and strong leadership from the private sector, the federal government, and the District government.

II.

Household Projections

Household projections based on the Sustainable DC population growth projections show that the number of households in the District of Columbia will increase by almost 175,000 by 2032 when the Sustainable DC targets are targeted to be reached. Carried out to 2040, this represents an increase of approximately 251,000 households above 2010 levels. Projections were completed using the alternative household growth projections that show increases between 73,000 and 308,000 during the same period. In accordance with the population projections, the official MWCOG projection is significantly lower than the Sustainable DC projection and the Researchers Census based projection is the highest. The population-to-household relationship is largely driven by assumptions about household size. In the MWCOG projections, average household size fluctuates between 2.26 and 2.30 people per household while the Researchers Census based projection remains static at 2.11, the average household size reported in the 2010 Census. Further detail on these projections can be found in Appendix C: Sustainable DC Based Age and Household Projections.

GMU household projections are based on the finding from the Housing the Regions Workforce report that indicated that by 2030, the District would add 122,613 households from the 2010 baseline. Household growth projections were then calculated for the intermediate periods between 2010 and 2030 and for outside of the 2030 projection window to provide projections on a 5-year cycle out to the 2040 study year. Using this methodology, by 2040, the District would add an additional 71,000 households above the 2030 projections. See Appendix B: GMU Based Household Projections for further detail.

Sustainable DC Projections for household growth looked at recent local trends towards shrinking household sizes. Analysis of US Census data from 2000 and 2010 as well as American Community Survey (ACS) from 2005 shows that, on average, household size in the District of Columbia decreased by 1.1% every five years. Using this data, household size is projected to drop from 2.11 in 2010 to 1.97 in 2040. Because of this reduction in household size,

population is projected to increase by only 69% from 2010, while total households are projected to increase by 94%. This increase equates to an additional 251,000 net new households in the District in that 30-year period. Figure 2, below, provides a summary of the four household growth projections discussed above. Household

Figure 2: Summary of DC Household Growth Projections

growth and composition directly impacts the demands placed on existing and new housing stock. These impacts will be discussed further in the report.

III.

Age Group Projections

The Researchers Sustainable DC household projections show a very different picture of age demographics for the District. These changes are a function of decreasing household size, increasing number of people that stay single or stay single longer, changes to retirement age, and couples that have children later in life. The Sustainable DC projections illustrate the impacts of the following trends: a youth age group that maintains approximately static real population numbers but which represent a declining percentage of the overall population a retirement age group that triples in real population numbers and increases from 10.0 percent to 17.7 percent of the total population a potential workforce age group that increases roughly 70 percent in real population numbers but maintains an approximately static percentage of the overall population of approximately 72 percent See Figure 3 and Figure 4 below

These critical changes to the composition of the DC population have profound impacts on the demands of the built environment and on services that need to be offered to this population. See Appendix C: Sustainable DC Based Age and Household Projections for more detail.

Figure 3: Washington DC Population Growth Projections by Age Group to 2040

Figure 4: Washington DC Proportion of Population Projections by Age Group to 2040

IV.

Housing Demand Implications

The growth and demographic changes illustrated in the Researchers Sustainable DC projections have several impacts on the housing needs of the residents of the District of Columbia and on the services that these future residents will demand. Increasing numbers of people that live alone or live as a couple will reduce the need for large residential units and will increase the need for quality studio and one-bedroom housing stock in the District. Decreasing average household size will also limit the demand on of larger family sized residential product and may lead to the repurposing of older housing stock. Opportunities for expanding affordable housing options should be considered through the potential repurposing of otherwise obsolete housing stock. The sheer volume of additional housing that will be needed to continue to house the retires that leave the workforce but do not leave the region as well as the new residents that replace those positions and fill newly created ones will demand higher density housing. An increasing aging population with limited physical mobility will make much of the split level residential housing stock (typical multistory row houses and single family homes or walk-up garden apartments) less desirable, increasing the demand for flat residential units such as elevator apartment and condominium buildings. The increase in retirement-age population will demand greater healthcare and assisted living options, including communities that are designed for entire life cycles so that residents can age-in-place. Age-inplace amenities can include conveniences like being located in transit rich and pedestrian friendly environments with neighborhood service oriented retail opportunities located near-by. The increase in retirement age population may also drive demand for more full-service apartment and condominium residential options as well as increased demand for buildings that have amenities targeted

10

toward retirement age population and may include age restrictions similar to those seen in 55 and better communities in the surrounding suburbs. The relatively static number of school age children will keep school demand at levels consistent with those seen in 2010. Accordingly, existing educational facilities should be right-sized and upgraded to be able to extend their functional life by another thirty-plus years. Facilities that are decommissioned for non-educational uses should be replaced in-kind in communities that have a high potential for future population growth and school demand. The rapidly expanding potential workforce should be housed in highly integrated mixed-use environments and near premium transit to facilitate better commuting options and reduce automobile reliance. Increases to allowable residential density, reductions in other regulatory cost barriers (such as parking minimums) and other economic incentives should be considered to ensure that significant housing stock is added to available dense, mixed use, transit oriented development sites. Housing opportunities that facilitate live-work scenarios and tele-working should be provided to better adapt to the changing dynamics of a modern workforce and initiatives at the government level to increase spatial efficiency and reduce congestion. Using an average net-square foot per new residential unit number of 675 square feet, this new housing demand of 251,000 units will require more than 192 million new residential gross square footage be developed by 2040 to match demand.

11

V.

Employment Demand Projections

Employment demand projections for this market study are based primarily on the Researchers analysis of employment projections that are completed by the District of Columbia Department of Employment Services (DC DOES). DC DOES issues ten-year employment outlooks for the District; the last one was completed for the 2008 to 2018 period. This most recent report was issued in 2011 and is entitled District of Columbia Industry and Occupational Projections 2008- 2018. The DC DOES report projects that across all industry sectors the job growth rate will be 1.01% per year, which takes the 2008 Total Employment number of 787,156 up to 870,104 in 2018 (District of Columbia Department of Employment Services, 2011). The three largest sectors Federal Government Employment, Professional and Business Services, and Education and Health Services are also the three fastest growing sectors. Taken together, these three industry sectors account for almost two-thirds of all employment in the District and 82 percent of new jobs created in the District. Service-Providing jobs account for 98 percent of all jobs in the District and these jobs are anticipated to continue to grow, while Goods-Producing jobs, namely manufacturing, are anticipated to continue to decrease.

When extrapolated to 2040, these employment projections indicate that the District will create more than 280,000 net-new jobs, see Appendix F: DC DOES Based Employment Projections. This rate of growth is significantly less than what has been targeted by Mayor Gray in his five-year economic development strategy, which would require job growth at an average annual rate of 2.5 percent over the next five years in order to meet the 100,000 new jobs target. While the DC DOES projections used for this reports job growth projections are below the ambitious targets identified by the Mayor, they are around 19 percent above the median annual growth rate in the District since 1950 (Office of Mayor, 2012).

The Mayors plan identifies five primary growth segments to achieve 100,000 new jobs Real Estate and Construction, Technology, Higher Education and Health Care, Retail and Professional Services, Hospitality, and

12

Federal Government and Contractors. These growth segments are largely supported by the DOES data, see Figure 5: Researcher's Projected Employment Distribution for further information. In particular, the six occupations with the most projected employment change on a percent basis are Network Systems and Data Communications Analyst (95.28%), Computer Software Engineers, Applications (67.28%), Network and Computer Systems Administrators (62.22%), Computer Software Engineers, Systems Software (55.36%), Computer Software Engineers (51.65%), and Database Administrators (49.34%), all of which are solidly within the Technology spectrum. Further, all of the largest and fastest growing industry sectors identified by DC DOES -- Federal Government Employment, Professional and Business Services, and Education and Health Services -- are aligned with the Mayors targeted vision for job growth. These findings further resonate at a regional level, the GMU report Housing the Regions Workforce, finds that of the 1.05 million net new jobs that are expected in the DC region by 2030, almost half will be from either the professional and technical services sector (370,000 net new jobs) or from the health services sector (117,000 net new jobs).
Projected Employment Distribution Trade, Transportation, and Utilities Information Financial Activities Professional and Business Services Educational and Health Services Leisure and Hospitality Other Services (Except Government) Total Federal Government Employment State govt., excl. education & hospitals Service Subtotal Construction Manufacturing Total SE & UFW, Goods Producing Subtotal All Jobs Total 2010 34,637 23,379 32,883 189,389 129,280 63,937 77,686 214,256 21,564 787,010 2,533 288 13,240 16,061 803,071 2015 36,415 24,579 34,570 199,107 135,914 67,218 81,672 225,250 22,671 827,395 2,663 302 13,920 16,886 844,280 2020 38,283 25,840 36,344 209,324 142,888 70,667 85,863 236,809 23,834 869,852 2,800 318 14,634 17,752 887,604 2025 40,248 27,166 38,209 220,066 150,220 74,293 90,269 248,960 25,057 914,488 2,944 334 15,385 18,663 933,151 2040 Increase from 2010 % Share 2030 2035 44,485 46,767 12,130 4.31% 42,313 30,025 31,566 8,187 2.91% 28,560 40,170 42,231 44,398 11,515 4.09% 231,358 243,230 255,712 66,323 23.58% 157,929 166,033 174,553 45,273 16.10% 7.96% 78,105 82,113 86,327 22,390 94,901 99,771 104,891 27,205 9.67% 261,736 275,167 289,287 75,031 26.68% 26,343 27,695 29,116 7,552 2.69% 961,415 1,010,750 1,062,616 275,607 98.00% 0.32% 3,095 3,254 3,421 887 351 369 388 101 0.04% 17,004 17,877 4,637 1.65% 16,174 19,621 20,628 21,686 5,625 2.00% 281,231 100.00% 981,036 1,031,377 1,084,302

Source: Researcher's projections using DC DOES Employment Projections

Figure 5: Researcher's Projected Employment Distribution

13

VI.

Future Office Development Demand

In addition to the 280,000 new jobs that will be created in the District by 2040, a large number of replacement jobs will become available as the existing workforce today begins to reach retirement age in increasingly larger numbers. There are almost 150,000 current residents in the workforce age group today that will be at retirement age by 2040. While not all workforce-aged residents are actively participating in the workforce, either by choice or due to unemployment, the replacement worker position represents a significant component of future employment demands in the District.

Of the 280,000 net new jobs that will be created in the District by 2040, more than 98% will be in Service-Providing positions, with the vast majority filling office type positions that can includes the Information, Finance and Insurance, Real Estate and Rental and Leasing, Prof, Scientific and Tech Services; Management, Education, Health Services, Leisure and Hospitality, Government/Public Administration, Military, or Other Services. Job growth in these sectors will drive future demand for office space in the District.

In July of 2011, the U.S. General Services Administration issued a report titled Workspace Utilization and Allocation Benchmark which quantified a number of findings related to Federal and private office usage including median office rental square footage per employee for both users. The GSA study found that the median rentable square feet for private offices is 222 square feet while the benchmark target for new Federal office space is 218 rentable square feet per employee. Averaging these two data points and accounting for non-rentable office building space provides an estimated 231 gross square feet of future office demand per projected employee. This equates to a future demand for new office space in the District of 63.7 million square feet by 2040.

14

VII.

Future Retail Development Demand

Currently, the District on the whole is considered to be underserved by retail. According to the 2007 Market Drilldown report by Social Compact, the District loses $1 billion dollars annually to retail leakage outside of the city (Office of Mayor, 2012). This is illustrated by the fact that the District has 14.1 square feet of retail space per capita compared to 23.3 square feet nationally and 26.1 regionally (Zipper, 2012). While it is expected that retail square footage per capita will be smaller in dense urban areas that are dominated by smaller format retail stores and restaurants, instead of traditional big box retailers, this difference is still significant. Eliminating retail leakage has been identified by as one of the Mayors six bold visions that drive his economic development strategy.

As of 2010, there was 8.5 million square feet of retail supply in the District (Zipper, 2012). To meet national standards, the District would have to add 5.5 million square feet of retail development, and, to be on par with regional standards, the District would have to add 7.2 million square feet. Retail demand will be driven not only by the latent demand resulting in this current undersupply but also by new demand created through the development of residential and office space needed to meet the housing and employment demands discussed above. If the Sustainable DC population targets are realized, the District would need to add between 15 and 18 million square feet of retail development by 2040 to match national and regional per capita standards, respectively. Using an average of 476 square feet per employee this new retail development will provide employment for between 31,500 and 37,800 new retail and service jobs (Mix & Jiang, 2009).

15

VIII.

Hotel and Tourism Projections

Destination DC reports in their 2011 Visitor Statistics publication that visitor volume to the District of Columbia reached an all-time high in 2011 with 17.9 million visitors. This record high represents the first time that preSeptember 2011 visitor volumes have been achieved (visitor volume in 2000 was 17.4 million). Growth projections for visitor volume to DC show a continued increase though 2015 and a projected visitor volume of 19.5 million that year, an average growth rate of approximately 2.15 percent in visitor volume each year 1. Growth in the hospitality sector is one of the key tenets of Mayor Grays Five Year Economic Development Strategy and to Become the Nations Destination of Choice is one of the Mayors six bold visions that drive his economic development strategy.

Currently there are approximately 28,700 hotel rooms available in the District of Columbia and more than 106,000 within the region (Destination DC, 2012). Projections for hotel demand in 2040, using this static visitor volume growth rate, show that the District of Columbia will need 53,000 hotel rooms to maintain the current hotel room to visitor ratio, see Appendix G: Hotel Demand and Visitor Volume Projections. The current hotel room-to-visitor ratio permits a healthy sector-wide occupancy of approximately 77 percent but does suffer from a certain amount hotel guest leakage whereby visitors coming to the District of Columbia will stay in the near-by suburbs instead of within the District proper. This indicates that, with the hotel room to visitor ratio remaining static, the District will need to add more than 24,000 net new hotel rooms by 2040. This demand equates to roughly 12 million additional square feet of hotel development capacity in the District.

Actual year-to-year increases projected by Destination DC vary between 1.3% and 2.6% per year

16

IX.

Museum, Memorial, and Cultural Demand

The District of Columbia, in particular the monumental core area, is continually under pressure to accommodate new museums, monuments, and other cultural institutions. According to the National Capital Planning Commissions Memorials and Museums Master Plan from 2001, an average of one new memorial was dedicated in the District each year for the past century. In addition to identifying the potential for fifty new memorials by 2050, NCPC notes that Interest seems to be growing as well among sponsors of new museums and cultural centers aimed at recognizing and displaying the contributions, traditions, and artifacts of American society (National Capital Planning Commission, 2001). Further, in the public review draft of the master plan for the Southwest Ecodistrict, NCPC discusses future museum demand, stating that trends indicate one new museum every ten years and that there is demand for up to three new museums in and near the monumental core by 2025. The potential development program baseline for the Southwest Ecodistrict master plan currently calls for between 1.0 and 1.2 million square feet of new cultural development (National Capital Planning Commission, 2012).

The most recently completed and currently under construction museums on the Mall, the National Museum of the American Indian and the African American History Museum respectively, are between 450,000 and 350,000 square feet (Clark Construction, 2012). This indicates that, while the Southwest Ecodistrict will likely have sufficient cultural supply to accommodate demand out to 2025, there will be demand for up to two additional museums between 2040 and 2050. This demand equates to approximately 800,000 square feet of cultural development opportunity and several potential memorial sites.

17

X.

Performing Arts and Musical Venue Demand Analysis

Additionally, while the District of Columbia and the immediate metro area is becoming increasingly recognized as a cultural and performing arts center, and is blessed with many world class performing arts venues, the District remains underserved by a significant outdoor performing arts and music venue (Forbes, 2012). A variety of high quality indoor music venues exist in the DC metro region including the 9:30 Club, Lincoln Theater, D.A.R. Constitution Hall, The Music Center at Strathmore, the Verizon Center, the Kennedy Center, the Birchmere, the Fillmore, Howard Theater, Warner Theater, and 6th & I Synagogue. These venues offer both a wide variety of capacity and easily access from metro.

All of the major outdoor music and performing arts venues in the region, however, are a located outside of the District of Columbia and none are easily metro accessible. Jiffy Lube Live, the areas largest amphitheater, has a capacity of up to 25,000 and is located more than 30 miles from the District (Nissan Pavilion, 2010). Wolf Traps Filene Center, part of America's National Park for the Performing Arts, has capacity for approximately 7,000 patrons (Wolf Trap, 2012). It is approximately 15 miles from the District and is not immediately accessible by Metrorail. The third major outdoor venue in the region is Merriweather Post Pavilion, with a capacity of almost 20,000 (Merriweather Post Pavilion, 2012). Merriweather is, again, located almost 20 miles from the District and is not served by high quality public transit. Significantly smaller than any of the major outdoor music venues in the region is the Carter Barron Amphitheater which is located within Rockcreek Park in the northwest quadrant of the District, part of the National Park system. Carter Barron has a capacity 3,700 and is not easily accessible by premium Metrorail transit, nor is it well served by surrounding commercial amenities and resources (The Shakespeare Theatre, 2007).

This survey of the existing venues in the region indicates that, across the region, there is a venue size of between 10,000 and 15,000 that is not being served. Additionally, there is a lack of significantly sized outdoor venues that

18

are centrally located, metro accessible, and within the District proper. With the continued growth and prominence of art, culture, and music in the DC region, a new venue that fulfills these gaps would be a valuable urban amenity that would provide residents of the District with a musical destination that is found in many competing cities such as the Mann Center for Performing Arts in Philadelphia, the Hatch Shell in Boston, Central Park Summer Stage in New York, Pier Six Pavilion in Baltimore, or, perhaps the best example, the Frank Gehry designed Pritzker Pavilion in Chicago.

19

XI.

Local Parks and Open Space Demand

Through the foresight and continued efforts of many federal and local representatives, the District of Columbia is blessed with a wealth of open spaces. These spaces range from the nationally significant and monumental spaces, such as the National Mall, to popular neighborhood parks, such as Dupont and Logan Circle, to major natural or naturalistic places, such as Rock Creek Park and the National Arboretum. Many of these parks and open spaces are critical components of LEnfants original plan for the City of Washington and, particularly in the Monumental Core, they hold a significant place in the mental geography of all Americans due to the many world changing events that have taken place or are represented on their grounds.

There are 7,617 acres of parks within the District. This puts the District second only to New York City in terms of percent of parkland per acre of high density cities. Washingtons parks cover 19.4 percent of the land area which equates to 12.9 acres per 1,000 residents (The Trust for Public Land, 2010). However, despite this wealth, all of the specific parks and spaces identified above, some of DCs best known and most loved, are not within the control or jurisdiction of the government of the District of Columbia. Like many other things in the District, the vast majority (almost 90%) of these spaces are controlled at a Federal level. This control falls under the administrative oversight of seven National Park Service management units: National Mall and Memorial Parks, National Capital Parks East, White House-Presidents Park, George Washington Memorial Parkway, Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historic Park, and Fords Theater (National Capital Planning Commission, 2010).

Due to this structure, the majority of park space in the District is restricted to uses that support the missions of the National Park Service, which may not always align with local plans or visions for how public open spaces should or could be utilized. Recently, the District has worked with the National Capital Planning Commission and the National Park Service through the CapitalSpace initiative to provide new strategies and opportunities for recreation and opens space for the residents of the District as well as regional, national, and international visitors. A recent

20

example of federal/local/private collaboration is the Yards Park in Southeast DC. This park was constructed on land owned by the General Services Administration (the federal building management organization), was funded through local Payment-in-Lieu-of-Taxes financing measures, and is managed by the Capitol Riverfront Business Improvement District (Office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development, 2010). Other major opportunities exist and are planned for around the District to provide more control of parks and open spaces to the local governments or through the private non-profit organizations that will operate, program, and maintain them. The success of the collaboration on the Yards demonstrates that the District and Federal interests should continue to work together to make better use of available underutilized land that can help to create new economic development opportunities and create funding for new world class neighborhood parks.

21

B. District-wide Supply Projections

The primary source utilized to analyze the existing or known supply projections was the Development Search database available from the Washington DC Economic Partnership (WDCEP). This database includes information on approximately 500 recently completed, under construction, near term, medium term, or long term development projects. This data set provides information including, but not limited to, size, use, mix, cost, location, construction type, designer, owner, and timing of each project. Only projects with estimated costs of more than $5 million are tracked on the WDCEP data base.

The WDCEP database provides the most comprehensive and up-to-date picture of planned development in the District. Some modifications were made to the data to correct for apparent errors or issues encountered by the Researcher in reviewing the data or for data gaps that were found 2. These modifications to the data set by the Researcher mainly affected major projects of over one million square feet and allowed for a more nuanced and accurate review of the development pipeline information.

In order to project pipeline development timing, the project status categories (Completed, Under Construction, Near Term, Medium Term, and Long Term) were provided with approximate timeframes for each of the groups as follows below. Development projections were evenly distributed across each time period and each group is
2

- The Total SF calculation for Riverside at Poplar Point Place only included projected Office development and did not include projections for other uses such as Residential, Hotel, or Retail. The updated Total SF was calculated using the information provided for the size of the Office, Residential, and Retail Components as well as the Researchers Projection for the Hotel SF. - The Total SF for the Armed Forces Retirement Home Zone A was provided (4,317,000 SF) but not detail was provided for the breakdown of square-footage by use. In order to project the details of the Armed Force project, the composition of the other similar major Long Term developments was analyzed and applied to the Total SF of the Armed Forces project. - The square-footage and mix for the Wharf development in the WDCEP database was not updated to reflect recent Planned Unit Development submissions to the Zoning Commission. All database categories were brought up to date to reflect a more accurate development plan for this development. - Development associated with the Southwest EcoDistrict proposal by NCPC have not been included in the WDCEP data base. This development is proposed for delivery in 2030. This information has been inputted into the WDCEP data base for the Researchers use. - One detail regarding the WDCEP Data Set is that Hotel SF is not provided; only Hotel Rooms are included in the database. In order to get a more complete understanding of project components projections of approximate Hotel SF for the major (1MM SF and over) Long Term developments.

22

sequential (no overlap between groups). This pipeline distribution method assumes that all projects currently known or being considered today will be complete by 2040. These pipeline projects represent virtually all of the remaining prime major developable sites in the District, many of which are public private partnerships though the Office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development. The projected delivery for each group of projects is as follows: Under Construction: Deliver between 2013 and 2014 Near Term: Deliver between 2015-2016 Medium Term: Deliver between 2017-2018 Long Term: Deliver between 2019-2040

Over this period, the development pipeline identifies more than 150 million square feet of development including over 135 million square feet of key investment class property types: multi-family residential, commercial office, hotel, and retail. See Figure 5 and Appendix D: WDCEP Pipeline Summary for additional detail.

23

Figure 6: District of Columbia Development Pipeline, key investment class assets

The 103 million square feet of Long Term development is composed of 150 different projects all valued at over $5 million each. This component of the pipeline accounts for two-thirds of the total pipeline projections for the District. Of this Long Term pipeline, more than half of the projected gross square footage is projected to be developed in 19 major development projects, each more than one million gross square feet in size. The vast majority of these projects involve some level of public-private-partnership (PPP). This demonstrates the important role that the District government, primarily the Office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development (DMPED), plays in orchestrating the select major projects that provide the greatest amount of potential pipeline supply. See Appendix E: WDCEP Major (1M+) Long Term Development and Figure 6, below, for further information on the size and composition of these 19 major long term development projects.

24

Figure 7: Major Long Term Development Pipeline

25

I.

Residential Supply Analysis

While the WDCEP database provides the most comprehensive outlook of future residential development, the database only includes projects valued at five million dollars and higher. This results in smaller scale redevelopments and projects being excluded from WDCEP projections. In order to account for this, building permit data available from the Census for new, privately-owned housing units was incorporated for projects four units and smaller 3. These smaller developments such as small infill developments, the division of larger homes into smaller condominiums, and conversion of smaller buildings (carriage houses, garages, warehouse, etc.) to residential uses, are projected to account for more than 10,000 new residential units by 2040. WDCEP data indicates a future supply of almost 63,000 residential units in over 64.3 million square feet of development.

More than 80 percent of the residential projects that are identified as rental or for-sale in the WDCEP database are anticipated to be rental 4. This shows an imbalance with the 2030 projections included in the GMU Housing the Regions Workforce report which shows rental and for-sale multifamily demand of 65 percent and 35 percent, respectively. This may be a result of current real estate trends in the DC region that are favorable for rental development and reflect sustained optimism for this housing type. The GMU report further indicates that approximately eight-percent of future housing demand in the District will be for Single-Family homes while the vast majority will be for Multi-Family product (Strurtevant & Fuller, 2011). This demand for Single-Family homes will be met through the small scale redevelopment projects not captured in the WDCEP data.

3 Census permit data collection groups all projects with five or more units together. Due to this limitation, this method may under count project with more than five units that are valued at less than $5 million dollars. To help account for this data gap, housing demolition numbers were not included in the projected net housing supply figures 4 Only 55 percent of the projected WDCEP supply of residential units are identified as either Apartment or Home Ownership

26

This combined supply of new housing units will create housing opportunities for approximately 373,000 households in the District by 2040. While this is a an increase in available housing units of almost 25 percent from 2010 levels, it still falls very short of projected housing demand which would require that an additional 145,000 homes be built by 2040 to match demand generated by achieving the Sustainable DC goals of adding 250,000 new residents in the next 20 years. See Appendix H: Housing Demand Calculations and Figure 7 below for more information on how this demand imbalance is projected to grow over time.

Figure 8: Project Housing Supply and Demand to 2040

27

This imbalance shows that the projected supply of more than 75,000 new units will only accommodate 34.5% of the projected need by 2040. The WDCEP projections indicate that the average gross square footage of the future residential supply unit is 1,023 square feet. With an assumed residential building efficiency of 88 percent, this results in an average net square footage of 900 square feet. A 900 square foot multifamily residential unit equates to a fairly efficient two bedroom unit which can easily accommodate between two and four residents per unit 5. Census data for the District from 2010 indicates that 82 percent of all households in the District are households without children and that more than half of these households are single people living alone 6. While individual preferences may vary, households of this size can be comfortably accommodated in studio or one bedroom units.

As household composition continues to change, populations age, and average household size drops, the demand for smaller units sized for single people or couples without children will continue to grow. This indicates that the supply that is currently planned may be oversized for the coming population needs and contributing to the supply and demand imbalance illustrated above. Reducing the average unit size by 25 percent creates an average net square footage of 675 square feet. This size is more closely aligned with the size of an efficient one bedroom multifamily unit and is, as an average, more appropriate for the projected needs of future District residents. Adjusting the unit composition to align with this reduced average net square footage would create more than 20,000 additional residential units within the same residential gross square footage already identified in the WDCEP data base. While this adjustment will help to close the projected supply and demand imbalance, a significant gap will persist. To expand this approach to an extreme, the use of micro-units 7 sized at 315 net

The DC Department of Housing and Community Development 2012 Inclusionary Zoning Affordable Housing Maximum Rent and Purchase price schedule set occupancy limits on 2-bedroom units of between two and four residents and an assumed average square footage of 850 NSF. 6 Of the total 266,707 households reported for the District in 2010, 37,517 are Husband-Wife households without own children under 18 years old (14%), 6,780 are Male householders without children under 18 (2.5%), 22,497 are Female householders without children under 18 (8.4%), and 153,992 are NonFamily Households (57.7%). Of these, 117,431 are identified as Householder Living Alone. 7 A number of major American cities with some similar demographics characteristics to the District, including New York and San Francisco, are evaluating modifications to building code regulations and pilot projects of micro-units to help address housing scarcity and affordability issues and to better match the changing character of their households.

28

square feet per unit could create almost 110,000 new studios within the same residential gross square footage already identified in the WDCEP database if all of the residential growth was in these small studio units. While the depth of the market is not going to be sufficient to support the extreme micro-units example, this does point to the important role that making reductions in average residential unit size can have in balancing supply and demand.

While the 64.3 million square feet of residential development projected in the WDCEP database represents the single largest development type planned for the District 8, the imbalance of supply and the demand associated with growing at the pace envisioned by the Sustainable DC targets, which would bring the Districts population to just over one million people by 2040, indicates that significant measures must be taken to expand housing opportunities within the District. These initiatives should focus on right sizing future residential units to meet the needs of a changing population, expanding residential opportunities on existing District controlled resources, looking for opportunities through federal partnerships to create new housing opportunities, bringing pipeline projects to faster fruition, and capitalizing on infrastructure investment to create the greatest opportunities for private residential investment. Increases to housing supply will help to improve housing affordability issues in the District by reducing the pressure caused by under supply and by producing dedicated affordable housing or affordable housing funds through District regulations and initiatives such as mandatory inclusionary zoning.

Residential development accounted for almost 42% of all planned developments identified in the WDCEP database. Office development, at 37.68% represents the next largest asset group in the WDCEP database.

29

II.

Office Supply Analysis

Office development represents the second largest planned development type on the WDCEP database. According to these projections, there are 57.8 million square feet of office development identified in the current pipeline. Employment-based projections for office square footage demand indicate that the 281,000 new jobs that will be created in the District by 2040 will require 63.6 million square feet of development by 2040 and an additional 25.8 million square feet of office development over the following decade. This indicates that office supply and demand are more closely aligned than their residential counterparts, however, it is unlikely that job growth potential will be able to be fully realized if the housing disparity is not solved. This also indicates that while existing supply may maintain a closer balance out to 2040, there is still an undersupply of almost six million square feet of office development in 2040 and a steep disparity does start to become apparent soon thereafter. The relative scarcity of available office space in the traditional downtown area today has led to an office climate that supports the 2nd highest asking office rents and among the lowest vacancy rates in the nation (Cassidy Turley, 2012). This office development pressure has also expanded office development opportunities in other submarkets such as NoMa, West End, Capitol Riverfront, and Southwest which are quickly expanding and stabilizing.

The 19 projects identified as Major Long Term Developments account for 30 percent of the projected office growth. These projects expand major office opportunities throughout the District by bringing a critical mass of employment density to neighborhoods that often have little or no traditional office development today such as Poplar Point, Hill East, McMillan, Walter Reed, St. Elizabeths, and the Armed Forces Retirement Home. These major developments will create new dispersed employment centers that are intended elevate the neighborhoods in which they are located. Many of these major office redevelopment opportunities require significant coordination or land transfer with federal landholders and play a crucial role in the Districts ability to meet future office demand.

30

As existing and new submarkets and neighborhoods become more established and reach office build out, the District should take initiative in order to continue to expand office employment opportunities and maintain the Districts position as the regional job center. These efforts should focus on expanding office development opportunities, creating business environments that support corporate headquarters relocating to the District, and creating office environments and incubators that foster innovation and have rental structures that facilitate entrepreneurial growth. Correcting the supply/demand imbalance by expanding office development opportunities will help to create more affordable or reasonably priced office space which can help to expand opportunities for smaller companies and start-ups. These innovation sectors should be created to reinforce the Mayors economic development agenda by focusing on growth and innovation in technology as well as government contracting opportunities and coordination with existing higher education and health care institutions.

31

III.

Retail Supply Analysis

The WDCEP development supply projections identify 9.2 million square feet of future retail development. Of this supply, 4 million square feet are projected to be constructed during the Under Construction, Near Term, and Medium Term developments timeframes while the remaining 5.2 million square feet are planned to be built during the longer time frame. Two-thirds of the long term projected supply is anticipated to be constructed as part of the 19 Long Term Major development projects. Similar to the office development patterns, these Long Term Major Developments will bring new retail opportunities to many communities that are traditionally underserved by retail, including the four neighborhoods identified by Social Compact has having the largest retail leakage: Greater Union Station -$1.05 M, Anacostia/Fairlawn -$91.2 M, Shaw/Logan Circle -$74.8 M, and Southwest Waterfront -$30.8M (Social Compact, Inc., 2008).

While 9.2 million square feet of retail is significant and will help to capture the leaking retail sales, it still accounts for only approximately 50% of the projected retail demand necessary to meet regional per capita retail levels for the Sustainable DC population projections. In order to meet regional or national standards, the District would have to add between 6.0 and 8.8 million additional square feet of retail development. Retail development at this level would result in a total retail inventory for the District of between 23.7 and 26.6 million square feet. It is reasonable to expect that resident-to-retail square footage ratios will be higher in dense urban centers when compared to surrounding suburbs or nationwide averages. Additionally, traditional retail demand may be augmented by the increasing popularity of online shopping.

32

IV.

Hotel Supply Analysis

The WDCEP database identifies more than 8,600 new hotel rooms in the pipeline for the District. Of these, more than half are identified as being Long Term developments and almost 60 percent of the Long Term projected hotel rooms are being developed as components of seven of the Major Long Term Developments. These 8,600 new rooms represent a 30 percent increase from the current hotel supply in the District but still fall well short of the demand needed to maintain the existing hotel room to visitor ratio with projected growths in tourism. Maintaining this ratio would require that hotel rooms be developed at a rate 2.8 times the current projections.

While traditional hotel demand may be moderately tempered in the future due to increased popularity in nontraditional lodging options, such as Airbnb, this gap is still significant and does not account for opportunities to attract visitors who come to the DC region to visit the historic sites and museums of the District but decide to lodge in surrounding suburban jurisdictions. Tourism plays an important role in generating tax base for the District. In 2011, the tourism industry generated $1.02 billion in tax revenue. Of this, more than $662 million was collected by local government (Destination DC, 2011). For a city that suffers a structural tax deficit estimated between $470 million and $1.1 billion, due to a number of factors including the high percentage of non-taxable federally owned land and a lack of commuter tax, this revenue stream is of paramount importance and steps must be taken to help grow it to its full capacity (DC Appleseed; Our Nation's Capital, 2008).

Expanding hotel offerings will help to make the Districts hotels more cost competitive with offerings in the surrounding suburban regions which, when combined with superior historical, cultural, and entertainment amenities, will make the District more attractive to lucrative group travel business, particularly for international visitors from countries such as China. By increasing the expansion of available hotel product, particularly near premium public transit and top tourist destinations, while focusing more resources and funding to agencies and

33

groups responsible for promoting the District as a destination, DC can continue to increase its market share of regional visitors, further expand its tax base, and realize its potential to become the nations destination of choice.

34

V.

Museum, Monument, and Cultural Supply Analysis

According to the WDCEP database 9 there are currently 2.3 million square feet of museum space currently under construction or in the pipeline. More than half of this pipeline supply is space identified through the NCPC Southwest Ecodistrict effort, and, at 350,000 square feet, the National Museum of African American History, which is currently under construction on the National Mall, is the next largest single project identified. Other major museum projects identified include a 200,000 square foot museum that is paired with an equally sized entertainment component at the Kennedy Center for Performing Arts, the 80,000 square foot Armenian Genocide Museum and Memorial, and the National Womens History Museum. At 300,000 square feet, the National Womens History Museum has yet to identify and secure a site for the museum, potentially a good candidate for one of the sites envisioned by the Southwest Ecodistrict. Other smaller museum projects between 25,000 and 55,000 square-feet are planned around District, none of which are on the National Mall, including the National Law Enforcement Museum in Penn Quarter, GWU Museum in Foggy Bottom, Randall School in Southwest, and ART Place in Fort Totten.

While the supply targeted in the Southwest Ecodistrict will likely be sufficient for museum demand in and near the monumental core through 2025 or 2030, further pressure by groups looking for a presence in the monumental core is likely to continue. The prohibition against any further commemorative works within the National Mall 10 from the Commemorative Works Act will exacerbate these pressures and increase demand for major future museum sites on locations that are seen as being near-by or adjacent to the Monumental Core (Straus, 2011). Groups or causes that are currently endeavoring to secure funding, approval, or a location to build a museum or include the National Womens History Museum, a museum celebrating gay and lesbian culture 11, the National

With Researchers additions to account for SW Ecodistrict project The Commemorative Works Act actually prohibits new works from being built on the Reserve which is defines as "the great cross-axis of the Mall, which generally extends from the United States Capitol to the Lincoln Memorial, and from the White House to the Jefferson Memorial", and is seen to be "a substantially completed work of civic art." 11 See for more information: http://www.bizjournals.com/washington/print-edition/2011/10/21/proposed-gay-and-lesbianmuseum-begins.html?page=all
10

35

Museum of the Jewish People 12, the National Museum of the American People 13, and the National Museum of the American Latino 14.

As demand for monumental commemoration continues to grow, the District should work with federal interests to help identify potential locations for future museums that have a location that is approximate enough to the monumental core to satisfy the museums donors and backers but does not conflict with the intent of the Commemorative Works Act and can be used to help generate retail and hotel demand through tourist patronage. Further, these museum sites should be developed as anchor uses in mixed use buildings, following the successful example of the Newseum which includes residential, fine dining, and office space in the same building complex as the museum (The Newseum Residences, 2010). Another example already in the works of a mixed-use museum in the District is the aforementioned Randall School redevelopment in Southwest DC which is slated to include hotel and residential uses in coordination with the art museum (Plumb, 2010). These innovative mixed-use developments create unique, marquee opportunities and help to ensure that the air rights space above lower-level cultural uses is captured and able to be utilized constructively to help meet the supply gaps identified for residential, office, retail, and hotel uses as discussed above.

12 13

See for more information: http://www.jweekly.com/article/full/63005/decision-coming-on-national-jewish-museum-in-d.c/ See for more information: http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/housingcomplex/2011/05/03/best-unbuilt-museumgets-best-unbuilt-plan/ 14 See for more information: http://americanlatinomuseum.org/

36

VI.

Performing Arts and Musical Venue Supply Analysis

Only two significant performing arts or entertainment venues have been identified on the WDCEP database for construction in the future pipeline. These are an expansion of the Kennedy Center of approximately 200,000 square feet and the development of multi-use cultural and performing arts hall at the Wharf development of approximately 145,000 square feet. Details regarding the expansion of the Kennedy Center are limited but a report by the US General Accounting Office indicates that the expansion would include a new pedestrian plaza, new buildings for administrative and educational uses, and facilities for exhibition space and free outdoor performances (United States General Accounting Office, 2003). Given the Kennedy Centers geographic constraints 15 and the fact that the entertainment venue planned for the Wharf is an indoor facility, it does not appear that the demand for a medium sized outdoor performing arts venue, particularly one that is centrally located and accessible by premium transit will be realized with in current supply projections.

In future redevelopments, the District should look for opportunities to provide a world-class open air music and performance venue. This will help to draw acts that might otherwise play at existing outdoor venues in surrounding states to the District. Further, it will offer yet another amenity to help increase the Districts standing as a world-class city and to increase quality of life for those who live, work, and visit the city. A marquee venue such as this has significant opportunities to raise the Districts profile with a signature architectural expression. Iconic institutions and structures like Bing Thoms renovation of the Mead Center for Performing Arts in Southwest DC, and Frank Gehrys Pritzker Pavilion in Chicago, can help to drive cultural tourism and stimulate other economic development (Gandhi, 2008) (Uhlir, 2006).

The Kennedy Center is surrounded on the west by the Potomac River, the north by the historic Watergate Complex and the Saudi Arabian embassy, the east by freeway and parkway infrastructure, and the south by the Memorial Bridge

15

37

VII.

Local Park Supply Analysis

As discussed above, the District of Columbia on the whole is flush with urban park and open space but only one tenth of this space is under District control, management, and operation. In the Capitol Riverfront area of Southeast DC, two new urban parks have recently opened to the public: Yards Park and Canal Park. Both of these parks involved federal land transfer from the General Services Administration and National Park Service 16, respectively, to the District of Columbia, a mix of government and private funding, and third party management by the local business improvement district (Canal Park Development Association, Inc, 2012). At 5.5 acres and 3 acres respectively, Yards Park and Canal Park are exciting new urban amenities that will help to continue and sustain development and growth in the greater Capitol Riverfront area. The land transfers, funding, and management partnerships utilized will provide a model for replication in other neighborhoods, both emerging and established, around the District.

Several of the major long term developments identified in the WDCEP data base will continue to add to the inventory of public space that is under local control and management. Project highlights promoted by the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development on their website identify major investments in parks and open spaces as key public amenities on many of these large projects such as Hill East, McMillian Reservoir, the Wharf, Saint Elizabeths, Walter Reed, and Poplar Point. The significant Tax-Increment-Financing (TIF) and Payment-InLieu-of-Taxes (PILOT) funding dedicated to the parks and infrastructure within these projects further demonstrates the Districts commitment to creating new world class parks throughout the District (Office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development, 2012). Other major long term projects, such as the redevelopment of a portion of the Armed Forces Retirement Home will offer additional opportunities for new parks and open space infrastructure to be developed that is owned and maintained by the local government or local interests to meet the local needs and objectives.
16

According to the historical timeline on the Canal Park website (www.canalparkdc.org) the federal to local transfers that ultimately permitted the construction of the park happened in the late 1940s and late 1960s. Regardless of the lag between time of transfer and implementation, Canal Park would not have been possible were it not for the federal government giving the District control of its available open space resources.

38

Similar to the Yards and Canal Park examples, several of these major development opportunities that have significant park and open space components, such as Poplar Point, Saint Elizabeths, Walter Reed, and the Armed Forces Retirement Home will be made possible by the federal transfer of lands to the District of Columbia. In the case of Poplar Point, the inclusion of 70 acres of parks and open space and two sites for potential commemorative works was stipulated in the law which approved the transfer from federal jurisdiction to local jurisdiction (109th Congress, 2006). These examples illustrate how federal land can be transferred to the District government, which allows for increased use of the land for economic development, while ensuring that federal interests in maintaining open space and opportunities for commemorative works are maintained.

Due to the fact that many of the major long term development projects are still in their formative stages it is not possible to project how many acres of parks or open spaces will be transferred from Federal jurisdiction to local jurisdiction as part of the many redevelopment projects in the pipeline. Nonetheless, it is clear that continued opportunities should be explored to transfer available, well-located Federal land to the District so that it can be better utilized, not only to create significant economic development opportunities, but so that the wealth of high quality urban parkland typified by the Yards Park and Canal Park can be expanded and distributed throughout the District. These unique urban amenities will serve to make the economic development initiatives that they are paired with more valuable and more desirable to the future residents, workers, and visitors to the District of Columbia.

In the case of Millennium Park in Chicago, it is estimated that the $475 million invested in the park ($270 million invested by the city through TIF funding, the remainder, plus a $30 million dollar maintenance endowment, coming from private individuals, foundations, and corporations) will generate an impact of $1.4 billion dollars over ten years on the adjacent real estate, between $1.6 and $2.1 billion dollars of impact over ten years though increase

39

tax revenue related to reduced vacancy, increase employment, new business enhancement, and patronage of cultural institutions, and finally between $1.9 and $2.6 billion dollars in total visitor spending over ten years (Uhlir, 2006). While these findings from the 2005 Millennium Park Economic Impact Study are likely very aggressive, the impact that the park has had on its surrounding area is evident and it is clear that strong investments in public amenities lead to increased value of the surrounding real estate. This illustrates that the District should continue to provide innovative funding opportunities by using tools such as Tax Increment Financing and Payment in lieu of Taxes to help ensure that the new urban parks being developed will truly be world-class and will maximize their potential for value creation.

These increases in value can be paired with privately funded park maintenance and operation to further enhance the value of surrounding assets which not only increases the available tax base created by these assets but also reduces the financial burden of operation, maintenance, and programing that must be borne by the local governments. This is the model being utilized by the new District parks, the Yards Park and Canal Park, whereby the maintenance, operations, and programing responsibility lies with the Capitol Riverfront Business Improvement District that is funded by surrounding land holders, business owners, and residents, but the value of the model is perhaps best epitomized by the management of Bryant Park in New York City (Capitol Riverfront Business Improvement District, 2012).

Under the management of the Bryant Park Corporation, a private, not-for-profit management company and business improvement district, Bryant Park has seen regeneration that was entirely privately funded and now operates with a staff of up to 80 people and a budget that in its very first year was more than six times higher than previous city management (Bryant Park Management Corporation, 2010). Bryant Park is a renowned success case that shows how private assets and investments can be leveraged to increase the quality and level of maintenance of publicly owned spaces while increasing the public tax base and reducing the parks financial burden on the public sector. As the District moves forward with the creation of new public parks, particularly on land that is

40

transferred from Federal holders, public-private management agreements similar to those illustrated by Bryant Park and already being implemented at Yards Park and Canal Park should continue to be utilized.

41

C. Policy Implications and Recommendations

As illustrated, existing supply projections are easily overwhelmed by potential growth in the District, see Figure 8: Summary of Researcher's 2040 Supply and Demand Projections.

Summary Supply and Demand Projections Year: 2040 Projected Supply Projected Demand Residential Units 373,000 518,000 Office Squarefeet 57,844,000 63,666,000 Hotel Units 9,000 25,000 Retail Squarefeet 9,254,000 16,694,000 Museum/Entertainment Squarefeet 2,714,000 3,714,000
Source : Researcher's Projections
Figure 9: Summary of Researcher's 2040 Supply and Demand Projections

Delta (146,000) (5,822,000) (16,000) (7,441,000) (1,000,000)

Clearly, a number of significant measures could be taken to help ensure that the future built environment and building stock of the District of Columbia sufficiently capitalizes on the demand generated by the growth projections. These policies would require comprehensive coordination between many branches of federal and local government as well as with other interest groups, community organizations, and citizens groups. Some of the policy recommendations considered below may be more politically or fiscally feasible in the short term, while others would need to be evaluated on a longer term in order to understand the role that they could play in addressing the supply and demand imbalances in a sensitive and sustainable manner. Policy recommendations to help ensure that the Sustainable DC growth targets can be achieved include: Opening of additional underutilized federally and locally controlled land to redevelopment opportunities (Hains Point/East Potomac Park, Langston Golf Course, Ft. Totten Park and Transfer Station, Rockcreek Park Golf Course, RFK, PEPCO Benning Rd, Fort McNair, Boiling AFB, PEPCO Buzzards Point, etc.) Inclusion of dense, mixed-use components on all public projects including library, school, gym, public housing, etc. to ensure that the greatest public benefit is achieved through public investment

42

Acceleration of current planned development projects through permit and approval expediting or increasing the availability potential city backed funding sources

Provide opportunities to increase density above what is currently planned for existing long term development projects to ensure that the maximum value is created in the redevelopment of the asset

Modifications to regulations surrounding accessory dwelling units and alley dwellings to increase densification within existing neighborhood fabric without drastically changing the character of DCs many great neighborhoods

Policy modifications to encourage reduced unit size and increased unit density, including the elimination of parking minimums, to better meet the housing and transportation needs of future District residents

Finding new land for development though expanded freeway burying/decking Encouraging the inclusion of a mix of uses in college campus redevelopment opportunities Up-zoning existing established residential neighborhoods that are well-located relative to premium transit, while including necessary provisions to offer adequate protection of the neighborhoods character or historic building stock

Significantly increasing development opportunities around transit nodes and the expansion of premium public transit through completion of the streetcar system, creation of infill metro stations, and implementation of bus rapid transit lines to help stimulate further transit-oriented development opportunities

Modifying the 1910 Height Act and increasing maximum allowable density above 10.0 FAR in select neighborhoods or building sites

Increasing efforts to create a business friendly environment that attracts corporate headquarters and similar development

Removing regulatory barriers that prevent wider dispersion of retail opportunities in existing neighborhoods

43

Encouraging mixed-use museum developments that expand the Districts cultural offerings while helping to meet other needs such as increased office space, housing, or retail

Identifying cultural or museum sites that can increase tourist trade in areas outside of the monumental core and help to support new hotel growth

Encouraging the development of a new world-class open air music and performing arts venue as a component of future major redevelopment opportunities

Supporting the creation of marquee architectural expressions in new cultural and entertainment venues

Continuing to expand creative financing opportunities to support the creation of world-class local park and infrastructure

Increasing the use of innovative public private partnerships to manage, maintain, and program public spaces.

As the District continues to grow and evolve many of these policies should be considered. In fact, many of the recommendations already are being considered though the Sustainable DC initiative, the Five-Year Economic Development Strategy, and the Zoning Re-write process. District leadership must continue to look forward to what the needs of residents will be in the future as the composition of the Districts population continues to evolve, mature, and expand. There is great potential in the Nations Capital but it will take decisive and steady actions to ensure that this potential is reached and the ambitious visions for the city are realized.

-MLS

44

Works Cited
109th Congress. (2006). Public Law 109-396, the Federal and District of Columbia Government Real Property Act of 2006. Washington: US Government Printing Office. AECOM. (2012). Maryland Avenue Southwest Plan: Washington DC. Washington: AECOM. Bryant Park Management Corporation. (2010). 2010 Annual Report. New York: Bryant Park Management Corporation. Canal Park Development Association, Inc. (2012). History. Retrieved November 25, 2012, from canalparkdc.org: http://www.canalparkdc.org/about/history Capitol Riverfront Business Improvement District. (2012). About the Park. Retrieved November 26, 2012, from yardspark.org: http://www.yardspark.org/about Cassidy Turley. (2012). U.S. Office Trends Report, 3rd Quarter 2012. Washington: Cassidy Turley. Clark Construction. (2012). Monumental/Unique Projects. Retrieved November 25, 2012, from clarkconstruction.com: http://www.clarkconstruction.com/index.php/projects/project_list/C28 DC Appleseed; Our Nation's Capital. (2008). Building the Best Capital City in the World. Washington: DC Appleseed. DC BID Council. (2012). DC BID Profiles 2012. Washington: DC BID Council. Department of Housing and Community Development. (2012). Inclusionary Zoning Affordable Housing Program. Retrieved December 2, 2012, from dhcd.dc.gov: http://dhcd.dc.gov/service/inclusionary-zoning-affordable-housing-program Destination DC. (2011). Washington DC's 2011 Visitor Statistics. Washington: Destination DC. Destination DC. (2012). DC City Fact Sheet. Retrieved November 18, 2012, from planning.washington.org: http://planning.washington.org/planning/meeting-planners/dc-in-abox/dc-city-fact-sheet District of Columbia Department of Employment Services. (2011). District of Columbia Industry and Occupational Projections 2008-2018. Washington: District of Columbia. Farmer, L. (2010, December 21). D.C.'s population grows for first time in 60 years. Retrieved September 23, 2012, from Local: Virginia: http://washingtonexaminer.com/article/108645#.UF9kio0iZ2C Farmer, L. (2012, August 26). D.C.'s downtown drives city's population growth. Retrieved September 23, 2012, from Local: DC: http://washingtonexaminer.com/d.c.s-downtown-drives-citys-populationgrowth/article/2505946#.UF9i940iZ2D

45

Farmer, L. (2012, March 19). More urban housing at center of region's development future. Retrieved September 23, 2012, from Local: Virginia: http://washingtonexaminer.com/article/112814#.UF9k2Y0iZ2C Forbes. (2012). 2. Washington DC. Retrieved November 28, 2012, from America's Coolest Cities: http://www.forbes.com/pictures/mhj45jded/2-washington-d-c-tie/ Gandhi, N. M. (2008). Fiscal Impact Statement: "Tax Increment Revenue Bonds Waterfront Arts Project Refundable TIF Approval Resolution of 2008". Washington: Government of the District of Columbia. GSA Office of Governtwide Policy. (2011). Workspace Utilization and Allocation Bench Mark. Washington: General Services Administration. Kasperowicz, P. (2012, May 4). House on verge of approving Kennedy Center expansion project. Retrieved November 25, 2012, from The Hill: http://thehill.com/blogs/flooraction/house/225501-house-on-verge-of-approving-kennedy-center-expansion-project Merriweather Post Pavilion. (2012). Seating Chart. Retrieved November 20, 2012, from Merriweather Post Pavilion: http://www.merriweatherpostpavilion.net/merriweather-post-pavilion-seatingchart/ Mix, T., & Jiang, X. (2009, June). Demographic Multipliers in Delaware. Retrieved December 6, 2012, from http://dspace.udel.edu:8080/dspace/bitstream/handle/19716/4279/DelMultipliers.pdf?sequen ce=1 National Capital Planning Commission. (2001). Memorials and Museums Master Plan . Washington: National Capital Planning Commission. National Capital Planning Commission. (2010). About Washington's Parks and Open Space. Washington: National Capital Planning Commission. National Capital Planning Commission. (2012). Southwest Ecodistrct Master Plan: Public Review Draft. Washington: National Capital Planning Commission. NGA Center for Best Practices. (2007). Arts and the Economy, Using Arts and Culture to Stimulate State Economic Development. Washington: National Governers Associate. Nissan Pavilion. (2010). Jiffy Lube Live (formerly Nissan Pavilion). Retrieved November 20, 2012, from Jiffy Lube Live (formerly Nissan Pavilion): http://www.nissanpaviliononline.com/ Office of Mayor. (2012). The Five-Year Economic Develment Strategy for the District of Columbia. Washington: Government of the District of Columbia.

46

Office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development. (2010). The Yards. Retrieved November 24, 2012, from dmped.dc.gov: http://dmped.dc.gov/DC/DMPED/Projects/Anacostia+Waterfront+Initiative/Anacostia+Waterfr ont+Neighborhood+Projects/ci.The+Yards.print Office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development. (2012). Development Projects. Retrieved November 25, 2012, from Office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development: http://dmped.dc.gov/DC/DMPED/Projects/Development+Projects Office of the Mayor. (2012). A Vision for a Sustainable DC. Washington: District of Columbia. Plumb, T. (2010, February 17). Corcoran Gallery finds development partner for Randall School. Retrieved Novemeber 25, 2012, from Washington Business Journal: http://www.bizjournals.com/washington/stories/2010/02/15/daily45.html Social Compact, Inc. (2008). Washington, DC Neighborhood Market DrillDown: Catalyzing Business Investment in Inner City Neighborhoods. Washington: Social Compact, Inc. Straus, J. R. (2011). Commemorative Works in the District of Columbia: Background and Practicw. Washington: Congressional Research Service. Strurtevant, L., & Fuller, S. (2011). Housing the Region's Workforce: Policy Challenges for Local Jurisdictions. Arlington, VA: George Mason University. The Newseum Residences. (2010). Newseum Residences. Retrieved November 25, 2012, from Home: http://www.newseumapts.com/ The Shakespeare Theatre. (2007, April 20). SHAKESPEARE THEATRE COMPANY PRESENTS THE FREE FOR ALL PRODUCTION OF LOVES LABORS LOST. Retrieved November 20, 2012, from Newsroom: Press Release: http://www.shakespearetheatre.org/news/detail.aspx?id=46 The Trust for Public Land. (2010). 2010 City Park Facts. Washington: The Trust for Public Land. U.S. Census Bureau. (2011, December 21). Population Estimates. Retrieved February 5, 2012, from Cumulative Estimates of Resident Population Change for the United States, States, and Puerto Rico: April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2011: http://www.census.gov/popest/data/maps/11maps.html Uhlir, E. K. (2006). The Millennium Park Effect: Creating a Cultural Venue with Economic Impact. New York: Americans For the Arts. United States General Accounting Office. (2003). Kennedy Center: Improvement Needed to Strengthen the Management and Oversight of the Construction Process. Washington: United States General Accounting Office.

47

US Bureau of the Census, Population Division. (1995, March 27). District of Columbia: Population of Counties by Decennial Census: 1900 to 1990. Retrieved February 5, 2012, from Census.gov: http://www.census.gov/population/cencounts/dc190090.txt Washington Business Journal. (2012, August 27). D.C.'s downtown drives city's population growth. Retrieved September 23, 2012, from WBJ Morning Call: http://www.bizjournals.com/washington/morning_call/2012/08/dcs-downtown-drivescitys.html Washington DC Economic Partnership. (2012). Development Tracker Database. Washington: Washington DC Economic Partnership. Wolf Trap. (2012). About the Filene Center. Retrieved November 20, 2012, from Learn About Wolf Trap: http://www.wolftrap.org/Learn_About_Wolf_Trap/History/Filene_History.aspx Zipper, D. (2012). Retail Development Strategies, Washington DC. Retrieved November 24, 2012, from http://www.mayorsinnovation.org: http://www.mayorsinnovation.org/pdf/DavidZipper.pdf

48

Appendix

49

Appendix A: Sustainable DC Population and Household Growth Projections

Sustainable DC Population Growth Projections

DC Aspirational Population Projections Our Goal for 2032: We will attract and retain 250,000 new residents and improve qualit y of life for existing residents in transit -oriented , walkable , and affordable communities . All new buildings will produce as much or more energy they consume ; existing buildings will be retrofitted to use half as much energy and water - A Vision for A Sustainable DC (P15) DC Population Projected Projected Projected Projection Growth Population Household Avg Population Avg Population Avg DC Total Rounded Rate Change Growth Rate of Change Population Households Change 601,723 2010 602,000 11.6% 70,000 267,000 56,000 2011 16,273 2.7% 617,996 618,000 2012 17,004 2.8% 635,000 635,000 2013 12,175 1.9% 647,175 648,000 2014 12,274 1.9% 659,449 660,000 2015 12,374 1.9% 671,823 672,000 9.5% 64,000 323,000 34,000 2016 12,476 1.9% 684,299 685,000 2017 12,580 1.8% 696,879 697,000 2018 12,686 1.8% 709,565 710,000 2019 12,793 1.8% 722,358 723,000 2020 12,903 1.8% 735,261 736,000 9.0% 66,000 357,000 37,000 2021 13,014 1.8% 748,276 749,000 2022 13,128 1.8% 761,403 762,000 2023 13,243 1.7% 774,647 775,000 2024 13,361 1.7% 788,008 789,000 2025 13,480 1.7% 801,488 802,000 8.6% 69,000 394,000 39,000 2026 13,602 1.7% 815,090 816,000 2027 13,726 1.7% 828,816 829,000 2028 13,852 1.7% 842,667 843,000 2029 13,980 1.7% 856,647 857,000 2030 14,110 1.6% 870,757 871,000 8.4% 73,000 433,000 41,000 2031 14,243 1.6% 885,000 885,000 2032 Total 250,000 1.8% 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 14,378 14,516 14,656 14,798 14,943 15,090 15,240 15,393 15,548 1.6% 1.6% 1.6% 1.6% 1.6% 1.6% 1.6% 1.6% 1.5% 899,379 913,894 928,550 943,348 958,290 973,380 988,621 1,004,013 1,019,562 900,000 914,000 929,000 944,000 959,000 974,000 989,000 1,005,000 1,020,000

8.1%

76,000

474,000

44,000

69%

418,000

518,000

251,000

50

Appendix B: GMU Based Household Projections

GMU Based Household Projections Linear Linear Average Source Pop Growth # Pop Growth % # and % 30,653 26,451 28,552 2.273 2.273 2.273 MWCOG 69,688 60,135 64,911 30,653 26,451 28,552 297,360 293,158 295,259 11.5% 9.9% 10.7% 69,688 60,135 64,911 671,411 661,858 666,634 11.6% 10.0% 10.8% 30,653 29,075 29,864 2.269 2.269 2.269 MWCOG 69,542 65,961 67,752 61,307 55,526 58,416 328,014 322,233 325,123 10.3% 9.9% 10.1% 139,230 135,649 137,440 740,953 737,372 739,163 10.4% 22.5% 16.5% 30,653 31,958 31,306 2.263 2.263 2.263 MWCOG 69,377 72,331 70,854 91,960 87,485 89,722 358,667 354,192 356,429 9.3% 9.9% 9.6% 208,607 211,561 210,084 810,330 813,284 811,807 9.4% 35.2% 22.3% 30,653 35,128 32,891 2.271 2.271 2.271 MWCOG 69,615 79,777 74,696 122,613 122,613 122,613 GMU 389,320 389,320 389,320 8.5% 9.9% 9.2% 278,222 288,384 283,303 879,945 890,107 885,026 8.6% 47.9% 28.3% 30,653 38,612 34,633 2.271 2.271 2.271 MWCOG 69,605 87,676 78,640 153,266 161,225 157,246 419,973 427,932 423,953 7.9% 9.9% 8.9% 347,826 365,898 356,862 949,549 967,621 958,585 7.9% 60.8% 34.4% 30,653 42,441 36,547 2.269 2.269 2.269 MWCOG 69,548 96,294 82,921 183,920 203,666 193,793 450,627 470,373 460,500 7.3% 9.9% 8.6% 417,374 444,120 430,747 1,019,097 1,045,843 1,032,470 7.3% 73.8% 40.6%

2015

2020

2025

2030

2035

2040

Household Linear Projection NEW Household Size Population Linear Projection NEW TOTAL New Household (from 2010) TOTAL Household Projection Household Rate of Change TOTAL New Population (from 2010) TOTAL Population Projection Population Rate of Change Household Linear Projection NEW Household Size Population Linear Projection NEW TOTAL New Household (from 2010) TOTAL Household Projection Household Rate of Change TOTAL New Population (from 2010) TOTAL Population Projection Population Rate of Change Household Linear Projection NEW Household Size Population Linear Projection NEW TOTAL New Household (from 2010) TOTAL Household Projection Household Rate of Change TOTAL New Population (from 2010) TOTAL Population Projection Population Rate of Change GMU Projection Household Size Population Linear Projection TOTAL New Household (from 2010) TOTAL Household Projection Household Rate of Change TOTAL New Population (from 2010) TOTAL Population Projection Population Rate of Change Household Linear Projection NEW Household Size Population Linear Projection NEW TOTAL New Household (from 2010) TOTAL Household Projection Household Rate of Change TOTAL New Population (from 2010) TOTAL Population Projection Population Rate of Change Household Linear Projection NEW Household Size Population Linear Projection NEW TOTAL New Household (from 2010) TOTAL Household Projection Household Rate of Change TOTAL New Population (from 2010) TOTAL Population Projection Population Rate of Change

Sources: Researcher's Analysis of GMU Housing the Region's Workforce and MWCOG 8.1 Projections

51

Sustainable DC Age and Household Projections

Appendix C: Sustainable DC Based Age and Household Projections

District of Columbia Census Percent Estimate 2010 0f 2010 601,723 284,222 47.2% 317,501 52.8% 672,000 318,230 47.4% 353,770 52.6% 736,000 349,427 47.5% 386,573 52.5% Research Projections 2015 Research Projections 2020

AGE Total population Male Female 2010 Under 5 years 32,613 5 to 9 years 26,147 10 to 14 years 25,041 15 to 19 years 39,919 20 to 24 years 64,110 25 to 29 years 69,649 30 to 34 years 55,096 35 to 39 years 42,925 40 to 44 years 37,734 45 to 49 years 38,539 50 to 54 years 37,164 55 to 59 years 34,274 60 to 64 years 29,703 65 to 69 years 21,488 70 to 74 years 15,481 75 to 79 years 11,820 80 to 84 years 9,705 85 years and over 10,315 Total Population 601,723 2010 Youth (0 - 17) 107,752 Workforce 433,757 Retirement 60,214 Projected Full 67 Households 267,000 Household Size 2.11 Sources: Researcher's Projections

Research Projections 2025 802,000 381,731 47.6% 420,269 52.4%

Research Projections 2030 871,000 415,627 47.7% 455,373 52.3% % 3.3% 3.2% 3.1% 4.3% 7.3% 6.9% 7.5% 8.2% 8.6% 8.8% 6.8% 5.5% 5.2% 5.3% 5.1% 4.5% 3.6% 2.7% 100% 2030 12.2% 70.9% 16.9%

Research Projections 2035

Research Projections 2040

944,000 451,602 47.8% 492,398 52.2% 2035 28,051 27,169 24,177 41,389 65,995 71,790 66,094 65,110 72,426 77,567 78,798 61,031 52,694 48,274 47,762 42,662 39,181 33,830 944,000 2035 104,230 666,679 173,091 69 474,000 1.99

1,020,000 489,193 48.0% 530,807 52.0%

2015 % 2020 % 2025 % 2030 5.4% 29,401 4.4% 31,571 4.3% 29,213 3.6% 28,417 4.3% 31,680 4.7% 28,601 3.9% 30,654 3.8% 28,177 4.2% 23,156 3.4% 29,117 4.0% 25,661 3.2% 27,335 6.6% 35,548 5.3% 32,160 4.4% 39,448 4.9% 37,320 10.7% 61,354 9.1% 53,917 7.3% 53,237 6.6% 63,236 11.6% 70,504 10.5% 66,834 9.1% 60,204 7.5% 60,333 9.2% 73,955 11.0% 74,194 10.1% 71,068 8.9% 64,983 7.1% 55,191 8.2% 74,037 10.1% 74,288 9.3% 71,174 6.3% 43,862 6.5% 55,994 7.6% 74,958 9.3% 75,327 6.4% 39,408 5.9% 45,296 6.2% 57,640 7.2% 76,816 6.2% 40,021 6.0% 40,678 5.5% 46,753 5.8% 59,284 5.7% 38,470 5.7% 41,140 5.6% 41,962 5.2% 48,203 4.9% 37,632 5.6% 41,347 5.6% 44,441 5.5% 45,688 3.6% 31,636 4.7% 39,288 5.3% 43,248 5.4% 46,586 2.6% 22,367 3.3% 32,389 4.4% 40,152 5.0% 44,223 2.0% 14,314 2.1% 21,367 2.9% 31,242 3.9% 38,857 1.6% 12,062 1.8% 14,521 2.0% 21,605 2.7% 31,510 1.7% 11,439 1.7% 13,548 1.8% 16,227 2.0% 23,530 672,000 100.0% 736,000 100% 802,000 100% 871,000 2010 2015 2015 2020 2020 2025 2025 2030 17.9% 105,566 15.7% 108,586 14.8% 109,196 13.6% 106,321 72.1% 487,270 72.5% 529,873 72.0% 566,279 70.6% 617,241 10.0% 79,164 11.8% 97,541 13.3% 126,525 15.8% 147,438 67 68 68 69 323,000 357,000 394,000 433,000 2.09 2.06 2.04 2.02 using data from 2000 Census, 2005 American community Survey, 2010 Census

% 3.0% 2.9% 2.6% 4.4% 7.0% 7.6% 7.0% 6.9% 7.7% 8.2% 8.3% 6.5% 5.6% 5.1% 5.1% 4.5% 4.2% 3.6% 100% 2035 11.0% 70.6% 18.3%

2040 30,170 26,599 22,515 40,526 74,746 75,945 78,491 66,242 66,567 75,032 79,873 80,830 66,256 55,702 49,642 45,946 43,039 41,880 1,020,000 2040 103,600 735,893 180,507 70 518,000 1.97

% 3.0% 2.6% 2.2% 4.0% 7.3% 7.4% 7.7% 6.5% 6.5% 7.4% 7.8% 7.9% 6.5% 5.5% 4.9% 4.5% 4.2% 4.1% 100% 2040 10.2% 72.1% 17.7%

52

WDCEP Based Pipeline

Appendix D: WDCEP Pipeline Summary

Project COMPLETED COMPLETED

4,861,429

TotalSF

Entertai Residen Home Community Education Hotel Industrial Medical Museum Residentia nment Office SF tial Apts Owne Retail SF Parking SF SF Rooms SF SF SF lSF SF Units rship
75,000 998,594 34,000 0 123,000 28,000 30,000 934,281 2,533 2,216 317

2,531,524

112,975

2,888

UNDER CONSTRUCTION UNDER CONSTRUCTION

21,560,536

205,985 1,491,400

1,667

267,000

405,000

6,218,727

10,473

9,797

676

9,717,981 1,157,092

13,993

NEAR TERM NEAR TERM MEDIUM TERM MEDIUM TERM LONG TERM
LONG TERM

11,923,974

184,400

538,000

1,295

23,000

31,470

2,878,334

6,694

4,508

826

6,364,428 1,846,771

10,389

16,963,958

130,082

155,000

24,000

1,227

495,000

41,480

4,447,121

8,522

4,685

1,754

9,231,110 1,005,375

9,035

103,076,246

627,159 1,062,171

353,514

4,469 8,658

614,000 2,043,000 637,000 2,805,000

1,858,000 44,299,110 2,335,950 57,843,292

37,221

9,239 62,910 28,229

3,685 39,023,172 5,243,850

43,785

TOTAL (Excluding Completed) 153,524,714 1,147,626 3,246,571 377,514 Source: Washington DC Economic Partnership and Researcher's Analysis

6,941 64,336,691 9,253,088

77,202

53

Appendix E: WDCEP Major (1M+) Long Term Development

WDCEP Based Pipeline - Major Long Term Community Educational Entertainment Hotel Industrial Medical Museum Office GSF Residential Retail GSF TOTAL GSF GSF GSF GSF GSF GSF* GSF GSF Anacostia Metrorail Station Development 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 550,000 550,000 55,000 1,155,000 RiverFront on the Anacostia (Phase II+) 0 0 0 246,187 0 0 0 464,937 352,836 65,840 1,129,800 650,000 0 22,000 1,147,000 L'Enfant Plaza Redevelopment (Phase III) 0 0 0 475,000 0 0 0 Arthur Capper/Carrollsburg Redevelopment 28,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,325,834 19,400 1,373,734 0 256,000 1,317,200 30,000 1,624,200 Northwest One 0 0 0 0 0 21,000 50,000 1,750,000 Capitol Square (Phase II+) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,300,000 400,000 ART Place at Fort Totten 253,000 0 0 0 0 0 47,000 0 1,145,480 333,550 1,779,030 McMillan Sand Filtration Site 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 950,000 900,000 75,000 1,925,000 Riverside at Poplar Point Place 0 0 0 114,000 0 0 0 1,200,000 750,000 220,000 2,284,000 0 0 0 750,000 1,265,525 50,000 2,295,525 Parkside Mixed-Use Development 0 230,000 0 0 0 570,000 0 0 260,000 1,450,000 448,890 2,823,490 New Town at the Capital City Market 94,600 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 770,000 2,000,000 200,000 2,995,000 Walter Reed 25,000 0 Burnham Place at Union Station 0 0 0 300,000 0 0 0 1,500,000 1,200,000 100,000 3,100,000 0 0 922,807 1,206,699 346,545 3,165,000 Wharf, The* 47,370 0 142,514 499,065 0 0 1,380,909 1,579,000 346,310 3,919,754 Saint Elizabeths East 61,689 551,846 0 0 0 0 44,000 4,000 6,000 1,482,000 2,146,000 274,000 4,317,000 Armed Forces Retirement Home Zone A* 52,000 55,000 11,000 243,000 Yards, The 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,409,500 3,005,714 178,560 4,593,774 Hill East Waterfront 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,000,000 2,900,000 100,000 5,000,000 Poplar Point 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,530,000 3,800,000 405,000 5,735,000 TOTAL 562,159 836,846 153,514 1,877,252 614,000 25,000 53,000 17,376,153 27,294,288 3,320,095 52,112,307 Source: Researcher's analysis of WDCEP Database *: Data modified or projected by Researcher

54

Appendix F: DC DOES Based Employment Projections

Jobs Demand Calculations DC DOES Based Employment Employment Projection Net New PROJECTIONS Demand Net New Annual - 5 Net New (GSF) to 2018 Year Delta (GSF) Annual Jobs Yr Jobs Total Jobs 803,071 7,997 2010 8,078 8,078 811,149 2011 16,237 8,159 819,308 2012 24,478 827,549 8,241 3,109,364 3,109,364 2013 32,802 835,873 8,324 6,218,727 2014 3,109,364 41,209 41,209 8,408 9,328,975 (1,671,081) 7,657,894 844,280 7,657,894 1,439,167 2015 49,702 8,492 9,097,061 852,773 11,251,448 (2,154,387) 2016 1,439,167 58,279 8,578 861,350 13,193,257 (1,872,636) 11,320,622 2,223,561 2017 8,664 66,943 870,014 15,154,599 (1,610,417) 2,223,561 13,544,182 2018 8,751 75,694 878,765 17,135,668 (1,577,890) 2,013,596 15,557,778 2019 84,533 43,324 8,839 17,571,374 887,604 19,136,665 (1,565,291) 2,013,596 9,913,480 2020 8,928 93,461 2,013,596 19,584,970 896,532 21,157,788 (1,572,818) 2021 102,479 9,018 905,550 23,199,241 (1,600,675) 2,013,596 21,598,566 2022 111,588 9,109 23,612,162 914,659 25,261,228 (1,649,066) 2,013,596 2023 9,200 120,788 923,859 27,343,956 (1,718,198) 2,013,596 25,625,757 2024 130,081 9,293 45,547 27,639,353 933,151 29,447,633 (1,808,279) 10,067,980 2025 2,013,596 139,467 9,386 29,652,949 942,538 31,572,469 (1,919,520) 2,013,596 2026 148,947 9,481 31,666,545 952,018 33,718,679 (2,052,134) 2,013,596 2027 158,523 9,576 961,594 35,886,476 (2,206,335) 2,013,596 33,680,141 2028 168,195 9,672 971,266 38,076,079 (2,382,341) 2,013,596 35,693,737 2029 47,884 177,965 9,770 981,036 40,287,705 (2,580,372) 37,707,333 2030 2,013,596 10,067,980 187,833 9,868 990,904 42,521,577 (2,800,648) 2,013,596 39,720,929 2031 9,967 197,800 1,000,871 44,777,919 (3,043,394) 2032 2,013,596 41,734,525 10,067 207,867 43,748,121 1,010,938 47,056,956 (3,308,836) 2033 2,013,596 218,036 10,169 45,761,717 1,021,107 49,358,917 (3,597,201) 2034 2,013,596 228,307 10,271 50,342 10,067,980 47,775,313 1,031,377 51,684,033 (3,908,720) 2,013,596 2035 238,681 10,374 49,788,908 1,041,752 54,032,536 (4,243,627) 2036 2,013,596 249,159 10,479 51,802,504 1,052,230 56,404,661 (4,602,156) 2037 2,013,596 259,743 10,584 53,816,100 1,062,814 58,800,646 (4,984,546) 2038 2,013,596 10,690 270,433 1,073,504 61,220,732 (5,391,036) 55,829,696 2039 2,013,596 52,925 281,231 10,798 2,013,596 10,067,980 57,843,292 1,084,302 63,665,160 (5,821,868) 2040 1,084,302 281,231 281,231 TOTAL 57,843,292 57,843,292 Source: Reserchers projections using WDCEP Database and DC DOES Employment Projections WDCEP Office WDCEP WDCEP Office Pipeline - 5 Yr Cummulative (GSF) Total (GSF) Pipeline

55

Appendix G: Hotel Demand and Visitor Volume Projections

Hotel Demand Calculations

Year 2010 2011

5 year Total Visitor Supply Supply Volume 28,711 31,026 33,306 34,322 35,338 36,354 37,369 17,900,000 19,500,000 21,700,000 24,200,000 26,900,000 29,900,000 33,200,000

DC Room / Total Surplus / Visitor Demand Deficit 169 184 205 228 254 282 313 28,711 31,277 34,806 38,816 43,147 47,959 53,252 53,252

2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

TOTAL

2,315 2,281 1,016 1,016 1,016 1,016

(252) (1,500) (4,494) (7,809) (11,605) (15,882) (15,882)

8,658 37,369 33,200,000

Source: Researcher's analysis of Destination DC Data

56

Appendix H: Housing Demand Calculations

Housing Demand Calculations

WDCEP WDCEP Supply Supply Sustainable DC Sustainable DC Small Total Total (over $5M (over $5M Small Researchers Researchers Developments New Housing SUST DC project project Household Population SURPLUS / Developments Projections - 5 Supply - Units cost) - 5 Yr Projections cost) Projection Projection Yr 5 Yr Available DEFICIT 2010 602,000 267,000 296,719 29,719 2011 618,000 293,000 2,189 298,908 5,908 2012 635,000 301,000 2,533 269 301,710 710 2013 648,000 308,000 5,237 271 307,218 (782) 2014 660,000 313,000 5,237 273 312,727 (273) 2015 672,000 323,000 3,347 16,353 275 3,277 19,630 316,349 (6,651) 2016 685,000 329,000 3,347 277 319,973 (9,027) 2017 697,000 335,000 4,261 279 324,513 (10,487) 2018 710,000 341,000 4,261 281 329,055 (11,945) 2019 723,000 347,000 1,692 283 331,030 (15,970) 2020 736,000 357,000 1,692 15,253 285 1,405 16,657 333,007 (23,993) 2021 749,000 364,000 1,692 287 334,985 (29,015) 2022 762,000 370,000 1,692 289 336,966 (33,034) 2023 775,000 376,000 1,692 291 338,949 (37,051) 2024 789,000 383,000 1,692 293 340,935 (42,065) 2025 802,000 394,000 1,692 8,459 295 1,456 9,915 342,922 (51,078) 2026 816,000 401,000 1,692 298 344,911 (56,089) 2027 829,000 407,000 1,692 300 346,903 (60,097) 2028 843,000 414,000 1,692 302 348,897 (65,103) 2029 857,000 421,000 1,692 304 350,892 (70,108) 2030 871,000 433,000 1,692 8,459 306 1,509 9,969 352,891 (80,109) 2031 885,000 439,000 1,692 308 354,891 (84,109) 2032 900,000 447,000 1,692 311 356,893 (90,107) 2033 914,000 454,000 1,692 313 358,898 (95,102) 2034 929,000 461,000 1,692 315 360,905 (100,095) 2035 944,000 474,000 1,692 8,459 317 1,564 10,024 362,914 (111,086) 2036 959,000 482,000 1,692 320 364,926 (117,074) 2037 974,000 489,000 1,692 322 366,940 (122,060) 2038 989,000 497,000 1,692 324 368,956 (128,044) 2039 1,005,000 505,000 1,692 327 370,974 (134,026) 2040 1,020,000 518,000 1,692 8,459 329 1,621 10,081 372,995 (145,005) Total 1,020,000 518,000 65,443 65,443 10,833 10,833 76,276 34.5% (145,005) Sources: WDCEP Data, Census Building Permit Data, and Researcher's Projections

57