district 2040: building towards a sustainable dc

7/29/2019 District 2040: Building Towards a Sustainable DC

1/61

District 2040Building 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


2/61

i

Table of ContentsTable of Contents ........................................................................................................................................... i

Table of Figures ............................................................................................................................................ iii

District 2040: Building Towards a Sustainable DC ........................................................................................ 1

FUTURE MARKET STUDY ............................................................................................................................... 3

A. District-wide Growth and Demand Projections ................................................................................ 3

I. Population Projections .................................................................................................................. 3

II. Household Projections .................................................................................................................. 6

III. Age Group Projections .............................................................................................................. 8

IV. Housing Demand Implications ................................................................................................ 10

V. Employment Demand Projections .............................................................................................. 12

VI. Future Office Development Demand ...................................................................................... 14

VII. Future Retail Development Demand ...................................................................................... 15

VIII. Hotel and Tourism Projections................................................................................................ 16

IX. Museum, Memorial, and Cultural Demand ............................................................................ 17

X. Performing Arts and Musical Venue Demand Analysis............................................................... 18

XI. Local Parks and Open Space Demand ..................................................................................... 20

B. District-wide Supply Projections ..................................................................................................... 22

I. Residential Supply Analysis ......................................................................................................... 26

II. Office Supply Analysis ................................................................................................................. 30

III. Retail Supply Analysis .............................................................................................................. 32

IV. Hotel Supply Analysis .............................................................................................................. 33

V. Museum, Monument, and Cultural Supply Analysis ................................................................... 35

VI. Performing Arts and Musical Venue Supply Analysis ............................................................. 37

VII. Local Park Supply Analysis ...................................................................................................... 38C. 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


3/61

ii

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


4/61

iii

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


5/61

1

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


6/61

2

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.


7/61

3

FUTURE MARKET STUDY

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

While the population growth targets set forth in Sustainable DCform 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


8/61

4

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


9/61

5

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.


10/61

6

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,


11/61

7

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

growth and composition directly impacts the demands placed on existing and new housing stock. These impacts

will be discussed further in the report.

Figure 2: Summary of DC Household Growth Projections


12/61

8

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 adeclining percentage of the overall population

a retirement age group that triples in real population numbers and increases from 10.0 percent to 17.7percent of the total population

a potential workforce age group that increases roughly 70 percent in real population numbers butmaintains 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.


13/61

9

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


14/61

10

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 residentialunits 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 residentialproduct 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 theworkforce 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 residentialhousing 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-in-

place 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 andcondominium residential options as well as increased demand for buildings that have amenities targeted


15/61

11

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 withthose 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 environmentsand 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 betteradapt 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.


16/61

12

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, seeAppendix 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


17/61

13

Federal Government and Contractors. These growth segments are largely supported by the DOES data, seeFigure

5: Researcher's Projected Employment Distributionfor 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).

Figure 5: Researcher's Projected Employment Distribution

Projected Employment Distribution 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Increase from 2010 % Share

Trade, Transportation, and Util it ies 34,637 36,415 38,283 40,248 42,313 44,485 46,767 12,130 4.31%

Information 23,379 24,579 25,840 27,166 28,560 30,025 31,566 8,187 2.91%

Financial Activities 32,883 34,570 36,344 38,209 40,170 42,231 44,398 11,515 4.09%

Professional and Business Services 189,389 199,107 209,324 220,066 231,358 243,230 255,712 66,323 23.58%

Educational and Health Services 129,280 135,914 142,888 150,220 157,929 166,033 174,553 45,273 16.10%

Leisure and Hospitality 63,937 67,218 70,667 74,293 78,105 82,113 86,327 22,390 7.96%

Other Services (Except Government) 77,686 81,672 85,863 90,269 94,901 99,771 104,891 27,205 9.67%Total Federal Government Employment 214,256 225,250 236,809 248,960 261,736 275,167 289,287 75,031 26.68%

State govt., excl. education & hospitals 21,564 22,671 23,834 25,057 26,343 27,695 29,116 7,552 2.69%

Service Subtotal 787,010 827,395 869,852 914,488 961,415 1,010,750 1,062,616 275,607 98.00%

Construction 2,533 2,663 2,800 2,944 3,095 3,254 3,421 887 0.32%

Manufacturing 288 302 318 334 351 369 388 101 0.04%

Total SE & UFW, 13,240 13,920 14,634 15,385 16,174 17,004 17,877 4,637 1.65%

Goods Producing Subtotal 16,061 16,886 17,752 18,663 19,621 20,628 21,686 5,625 2.00%

All Jobs Total 803,071 844,280 887,604 933,151 981,036 1,031,377 1,084,302 281,231 100.00%

Source: Researcher's projections using DC DOES Employment Projections


18/61

14

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

Benchmarkwhich 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.


19/61

15

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 ofthe 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).


20/61

16

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 pre-

September 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 year1. 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, seeAppendix 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.

1Actual year-to-year increases projected by Destination DC vary between 1.3% and 2.6% per year


21/61

17

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.


22/61

18

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


23/61

19

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.


24/61

20

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


25/61

21

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.


26/61

22

B. District-wide Supply ProjectionsThe 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 found2. 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.


27/61

23

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.


28/61

24

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. SeeAppendix E: WDCEP Major (1M+) Long Term Developmentand Figure 6, below, for

further information on the size and composition of these 19 major long term development projects.

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


29/61

25

Figure 7: Major Long Term Development Pipeline


30/61

26

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 smaller3. 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 rental4. 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.

3Census 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 figures4

Only 55 percent of the projected WDCEP supply of residential units are identified as either Apartment or Home Ownership


31/61

27

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. SeeAppendix H: Housing Demand Calculationsand 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


32/61

28

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 unit5.

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 alone6. 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-units7

sized at 315 net

5The DC Department of Housing and Community Development 2012 Inclusionary Zoning Affordable Housing Maximum Rentand 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.6Of 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.


33/61

29

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 District8, 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.

8Residential 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.


34/61

30

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.


35/61

31

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.


36/61

32

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.


37/61

33

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 non-

traditional 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


38/61

34

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.


39/61

35

V. Museum, Monument, and Cultural Supply Analysis

According to the WDCEP database9

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 Mall10

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 culture11

, the National

9With Researchers additions to account for SW Ecodistrict project

10The Commemorative Works Act actually prohibits new works from being built on the Reserve which is defines as "the greatcross-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-lesbian-museum-begins.html?page=all


40/61

36

Museum of the Jewish People12

, the National Museum of the American People13

, and the National Museum of the

American Latino14

.

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.

12See for more information: http://www.jweekly.com/article/full/63005/decision-coming-on-national-jewish-museum-in-d.c/

13See for more information: http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/housingcomplex/2011/05/03/best-unbuilt-museum-

gets-best-unbuilt-plan/14

See for more information: http://americanlatinomuseum.org/


41/61

37

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

constraints15

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).

15The 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


42/61

38

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 Service16

,

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-In-

Lieu-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.

16According 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.
http://www.canalparkdc.org/http://www.canalparkdc.org/http://www.canalparkdc.org/http://www.canalparkdc.org/


43/61

39

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


44/61

40

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


45/61

41

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.


46/61

42

C. Policy Implications and RecommendationsAs 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.

Figure 9: Summary of Researcher's 2040 Supply and Demand Projections

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 redevelopmentopportunities (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, publichousing, etc. to ensure that the greatest public benefit is achieved through public investment

Summary Supply and Demand Projections

Year: 2040 Projected Supply Projected Demand Delta

Residential Units 373,000 518,000 (146,000)

Office Squarefeet 57,844,000 63,666,000 (5,822,000)

Hotel Units 9,000 25,000 (16,000)

Retail Squarefeet 9,254,000 16,694,000 (7,441,000)

Museum/Entertainment Squarefeet 2,714,000 3,714,000 (1,000,000)

Source : Researcher's Projections


47/61

43

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

Provide opportunities to increase density above what is currently planned for existing long termdevelopment 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 increasedensification 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 theelimination 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 ofpremium 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 selectneighborhoods or building sites

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

Removing regulatory barriers that prevent wider dispersion of retail opportunities in existingneighborhoods


48/61

44

Encouraging mixed-use museum developments that expand the Districts cultural offerings whilehelping 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 themonumental core and help to support new hotel growth

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

Supporting the creation of marquee architectural expressions in new cultural and entertainmentvenues

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 publicspaces.

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


49/61

45

Works Cited109th 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-a-

box/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:

district 2040: building towards a sustainable dc

Documents