HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-23-2014 PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE AGENDA
Planning and Community Development
June 23, 2014 - 5:00 PM
Annex Conference Room 2
AGENDA
I.CALL TO ORDER
A.Roll Call
B.Announcements
C.Agenda Modifications
II.CONSENT AGENDA
A. Minutes - June 9, 2014* (Tate)
III.DISCUSSION ITEMS
A. 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments* (Dixon)
Review and discuss the 2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket.
B. Mill Creek Wetland 5K Restoration Project (Andersen)
Review and discuss the federal/non-federal partnership agreement for City Project
No. CP0746.
C. Plat/Subdivision Process Overview* (Tate)
Provide an overview for the Committee of the subdivision/platting process within
Auburn.
D. Connectivity Discussion* (Tate)
E. Director's Report (Tate)
F. PCDC Status Matrix* (Tate)
IV.ADJOURNMENT
Agendas and minutes are available to the public at the City Clerk's Office, on the City website
(http://www.auburnwa.gov), and via e-mail. Complete agenda packets are available for
review at the City Clerk's Office.
*Denotes attachments included in the agenda packet.
Page 1 of 97
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
Minutes - June 9, 2014
Date:
June 17, 2014
Department:
Community Development
and Public Works
Attachments:
June 9, 2014 Draft Minutes
Budget Impact:
$0
Administrative Recommendation:
Planning and Community Development Committee to approve the June 9, 2014
Planning and Development Committee minutes as written.
Background Summary:
Reviewed by Council Committees:
Councilmember:Holman Staff:Tate
Meeting Date:June 23, 2014 Item Number:CA.A
AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINEDCA.A Page 2 of 97
Planning and Community
Development
June 9, 2014 - 5:00 PM
Annex Conference Room 2
MINUTES
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chair John Holman called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. in Annex
Conference Room 2 located on the 2nd floor of One Main Professional
Plaza, One East Main Street, Auburn, Washington.
A. Roll Call
Chair John Holman, Vice-Chair Largo Wales and Member Yolanda
Trout were present. Also present were Mayor Nancy Backus, City
Attorney Dan Heid, Director of Community Development and Public
Works Kevin Snyder, Assistant Director of Community Development
Services Jeff Tate, Assistant Director of Engineering Services/City
Engineer Ingrid Gaub, Planning Services Manager Elizabeth
Chamberlain, Principal Planner Jeff Dixon, Transportation Manager
Pablo Para, Emergency Preparedness Manager Sarah Miller,
Engineering Aide Amber Mund, and Community Development
Secretary Tina Kriss.
Members of the Audience present: Russ Campbell, Planning
Commission Chair Judy Roland, Shao Xia Zhu, Gary Kiefer, Hank
Galmish, and Robert Whale of the Auburn Reporter.
B. Announcements
There were no announcements.
C. Agenda Modifications
There was one agenda modification to add Discussion Item IV.G.
Chapter 8.20,Vegetation -Auburn City Code (ACC) 8.20.010,
Vegetation as a Nuisance.
II. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Minutes - May 27, 2014 (Tate)
Vice-Chair Wales moved and Member Trout seconded to approve the
May 12, 2014 minutes as written.
Motion carried unanimously. 3-0
ACTION Page 1 of 6
CA.A Page 3 of 97
III.
A. Resolution No. 5075 (Webb)
Transportation Manager Pablo Para presented the staff report on
Resolution No. 5075, the 2015-2020 Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP) of the City of Auburn. Staff distributed a Projects &
Financing Plan Summary showing the most current changes. The
Committee and staff discussed non-motorized projects on the TIP.
The Committee was supportive of Resolution No. 5075 with the final
summary changes included.
Vice-Chair Wales moved and Member Trout seconded to recommend
City Council adopt Resolution No. 5075, the 2015-2020
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP).
Motion carried unanimously. 3-0
B. Ordinance No. 6508 (Dixon)
Principal Planner Jeff Dixon briefed the Committee on Ordinance No.
6508, amendment to zoning code section 18.23.30 Uses (of the
Commercial and Industrial zones)". The Committee commented that
there will be a future discussion to review further refinements in
the Environmental Park District. The Committee was supportive of
Ordinance No. 6508.
Vice-Chair Wales moved and Member Trout seconded to recommend
City Council adopt Ordinance No. 6508.
Motion carried unanimously. 3-0
IV. DISCUSSION ITEMS
A. Resolution No. 5073 (Mund)
Engineering Aide Amber Mund presented the staff report on
Resolution No. 5073, setting a public hearing to consider the vacation
of the alley between South Division Street and A Street SE, south of
1st Street SE, within the City of Auburn. The Committee reviewed the
right-of-way vacation site and was supportive of the vacation and
setting the public hearing.
B. Resolution No. 5077 (Miller)
Emergency Preparedness Manager Sarah Miller provided background
information on Resolution No. 5077, a Resolution authorizing the City
of Auburn to adopt the King County Regional Framework for Disasters
and Planned Events. The Resolution, if approved, would authorize
the Mayor to execute the necessary agreements to support the
Page 2 of 6
CA.A Page 4 of 97
framework. After discussion, the Committee expressed their support
of the framework and agreement regarding Resolution No. 5077.
C. Communal Housing Follow-Up Report (Tate)
Assistant Director Tate provided an update on Communal Housing
and Ordinance No. 6477. Staff discussed the Conditional Use Permits
(CUPs) that have been brought forward based on the implementation
of the Ordinance. Two CUPS were brought forward to the City’s
Hearing Examiner for a Public Hearing on May 28, 2014 and the
Hearing Examiner will render his decision shortly. Chair Holman
provided responses to an email from audience member Russ
Campbell regarding room sizes and the CUP process.
Chair Holman invited members of the audience forward for public
comment:
Russ Campbell, 31606 126th Ave. SE, Auburn
Mr. Campbell explained his involvement in the process of rental
housing and stated the outcome and expectation was for a certain
level of protection, not for the rental of more than four unrelated
individuals to be permitted as a conditional use. Since the cases are
being considered before the Hearing Examiner and it is out of the
scope of what can be done now Mr. Campbell provided options
moving forward. 1.) Include the maximum occupancy rates noted in
the property's assessor records (as designed by the architect for the
number of bedrooms) and other regulations within the lease
agreement. 2.) For the city to issue a moratorium to stop granting
further communal home business licenses that require a CUP or issue
an outright moratorium on student rentals.
Hank Galmish, 12443 SE 318th Way, Auburn
Mr. Galmish stated that he lives in the Rainier Ridge
neighborhood and has been teaching at GRCC for 25 years. Mr.
Galmish emphasized that area around GRCC is a single-family
residential neighborhood and he is upset that the neighborhood is
changing, he would like it to continue as a single-family neighborhood
with families. He stated as a teacher he loves his students, he has
watched the international program grow for the past 20 years and
really values the students. He describes the rentals as boarding
houses and because of the turnover of three months or less there is a
lack of community connection in his neighborhood. Mr. Galmish
expressed his passion for maintaining the single-family neighborhood
to support families.
He understands that GRCC does not allow students within the
Homestay Program to share bedrooms; he is unsure why the college
is not willing to support the same policy off campus for the
Page 3 of 6
CA.A Page 5 of 97
students. He stated that he agrees that a moratorium should be
enacted to protect the neighbors.
A discussion was held regarding the protocol and obligations required
by other colleges to maintain student/child housing and safety while
attending school in a foreign country.
Shao Zia Zhu, 12720 SE 318th Way, Auburn
Ms. Zhu stated she and her husband are the applicants of the CUPs
that went before the Hearing Examiner. She thanked the City for the
new regulations and explained that they live in the neighborhood near
their rentals and have a good relationship with their neighbors. They
love their neighbors and have received positive feedback from
them. They started their student rentals 8 years ago under the former
guidelines of the City. As required, and in order to honor the City’s
regulations they applied for the CUPs, they did not desire to cause
dissention over their applications.
Ms. Zhu stated they care about their neighborhood, the students and
rentals. Each Friday they take the students shopping, and to handle
issues she keeps her cell phone on 24 hours a day. If the students
violate their strict rules they are swiftly dealt with so that the
relationship with the neighbors is respectful. Some may encourage the
students to not talk with the neighbors, it is their practice to teach the
students to know the neighbors and they are eager to do so. As
owners, they desire to be a good example for communal housing
landlords and show them how to run a successful business. The rental
units are safe, clean, and well taken care of. They are closely
monitored and issues are taken care of quickly. Regardless of the
number of permitted tenants, some homes will fail because they are
not cared for.
Gary Kiefer, 12720 SE 318th Way, Auburn
Mr. Keifer stated that some rentals are not being maintained with the
same safety standards and quality we provide as landlords. It has
been their intent to comply with the City’s regulations; it would have
been much easier to have a rental with four or less tenants, requiring
less of the landlord. He stated that they have been “grilled heavily” at
the Hearing Examiner meeting yet still feels following the rules is the
right thing to do. Mr. Keifer stated that they have been renting for
years and love their students.
Mayor Backus explained, as the Chair of the Committee at the time
the regulations were developed, the goal of the regulations were to
provide an understanding and standard for maintaining the care of the
rental homes, while setting standard expectations for how
international and domestic students should behave as part of the
Page 4 of 6
CA.A Page 6 of 97
community. Mayor Backus stated that the City will be working to
schedule a monthly meeting for Auburn and GRCC teams to enhance
their partnership; the first thing will be to discuss student housing.
Chair Holman stated that the Committee will take this item into
consideration in the next days and weeks.
D. Urban Land Institute Report "Ten Principles for Building Healthy
Places", November, 2013 (Tate)
Discuss "Ten Principles for Building Healthy Places".
Assistant Director Tate reported that the Urban Land Institute (ULI)
report, "10 Principles for Building Healthy Places" builds on the
conclusions of the previous APA and AARP reports. The ULI
report reinforces that many of the same themes also create a public
health benefit because people are more likely to be active and
healthier.
The Committee and staff discussed one priority that would
emphasize "pedestrian friendly" areas and creating connectivity. They
would like to continue the discussion on providing those amenities.
E. Director's Report (Tate)
Assistant Director tate explained that City staff, Police, and Fire staff
met with the Auburn Adventist Academy representatives to discuss
campus addressing last week. The parties are close to formulating a
unified concept of readdressing the entire campus. Ultimately the
change of address request will go through the City’s process, being
reviewed by this Committee before going forward to City Council.
Last Tuesday concrete trucks were positioned on Main Street to begin
pouring part of the first floor platform of the Trek Apartments. They
will be returning to pour the eastern side of the building and shortly
after that the second floor will be constructed.
Staff will bring forward the Plat/Subdivision Review at the next
meeting to prepare for the Short Plat and Plat subdivision discussion.
F. PCDC Matrix (Tate)
The Committee discussed the theater lease discussion but had no
additions or changes for the PCDC Status Matrix.
G. Chapter 8.20 - Vegetation
Review and discuss Chapter 8.20, Vegetation, Auburn City Code
(ACC) 8.20.010, Vegetation as a Nuisance.
Assistant Director Tate presented the staff report on Chapter 8.20,
Vegetation, Auburn City Code (ACC) 8.20.010, Vegetation as a
Page 5 of 6
CA.A Page 7 of 97
Nuisance. The Committee was supportive of expanding the definition
of vacant lots to all types of land which includes tracts, parcels, lots or
other divisions.
Staff asked the Committee if they would be willing to move the
proposed amendment to action in order for staff take the item before
the Public Works Committee for discussion and City Council for action
on June 16, 2014. The Committee determined they would take action
on ACC 8.20.101, Vegetation as a Nuisance, Chapter 8.20.
Vice-Chair Wales moved and Member Trout seconded to move
amendments to ACC 8.20.010D to full Council in the form of an
ordinance.
Motion carried unanimously. 3-0
V. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Planning and
Community Development Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 7:03
p.m.
Approved this _______________ day of _______________________,
2014.
______________________________________
John Holman - Chair
______________________________________
Tina Kriss - Community Development Secretary
Page 6 of 6
CA.A Page 8 of 97
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
2014 Comprehensive Plan Amendments
Date:
June 17, 2014
Department:
Community Development
and Public Works
Attachments:
Memorandum
2014 Comp Plan Amendment Docket
Budget Impact:
$0
Administrative Recommendation:
For discussion only.
Background Summary:
See attached memorandum.
Reviewed by Council Committees:
Other: Planning
Councilmember:Holman Staff:Dixon
Meeting Date:June 23, 2014 Item Number:DI.A
AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINEDDI.A Page 9 of 97
MEMORANDUM
TO: Councilmember John Holman, Chair, Planning and Community Development
Committee
Councilmember Largo Wales, Vice Chair, Planning and Community
Development Committee
Councilmember Yolanda Trout, Planning and Community Development
Committee
CC: Nancy Backus, Mayor
Kevin Snyder, Director Community Development and Public Works
Jeff Tate, Assistant Director of Community Development Services
FROM: Elizabeth Chamberlain, AICP, Planning Services Manager
Jeff Dixon, Principal Planner
DATE: June 19, 2014
RE: Discussion of Docket of 2014 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments
Background
Annually the City amends its Comprehensive Plan. The City processes city–initiated
amendments in response to items that are “docketed” (text or map). The City also includes
private–initiated amendments. Private-initiated Comprehensive Plan amendment applications
(text or map) were accepted by the City of Auburn until Friday, June 6, 2014. In response to
the public notification of the time period for applications, the City received two privately–
initiated comprehensive plan map amendment and associated rezone applications; no private
text amendments were submitted. The two applications are by the same property owner.
The City is also working on its Major Comprehensive Plan update which must be completed by
June 30, 2015. The reason for processing a set of annual amendments in 2014 is to review the
4 school district capital facility plans which are directly related to school impact fees that the City
Council reviews annually as well as the City’s own six-year capital facilities plan.
DISCUSSION
At the June 23, 2014 Planning and Community Development Committee meeting, staff would
like to:
1. Review the proposed docket with the Committee (spreadsheet enclosed);
2. Provide PCDC with an introductory overview of the privately initiated Comprehensive
Plan map amendment submitted by the June 6, 2014 deadline; and
3. Review the draft proposed schedule (will be handed out at the meeting).
Enclosure: Spreadsheet
DI.A Page 10 of 97
It
e
m
P
a
g
e
(
s
)
A
r
e
a
t
o
b
e
c
h
a
n
g
e
d
C
h
a
n
g
e
R
e
a
s
o
n
P
r
o
s
C
o
n
s
C
o
mments
P/
T
#
1
Au
b
u
r
n
S
c
h
o
o
l
Di
s
t
r
i
c
t
C
a
p
i
t
a
l
Fa
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
P
l
a
n
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
5
,
C
a
p
i
t
a
l
F
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
(I
n
c
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
e
d
b
y
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
)
N/
A
I
n
c
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
e
u
p
d
a
t
e
d
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
Reflect new projects and remove projects that have been completed as well as updated information related to development activity and projection of student levels.None
P/
T
#
2
Di
e
r
i
n
g
e
r
S
c
h
o
o
l
Di
s
t
r
i
c
t
C
a
p
i
t
a
l
Fa
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
P
l
a
n
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
5
,
C
a
p
i
t
a
l
F
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
(I
n
c
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
e
d
b
y
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
)
N/
A
I
n
c
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
e
u
p
d
a
t
e
d
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
Reflect new projects and remove projects that have been completed as well as updated information related to development activity and projection of student levels.None
CI
T
Y
-
I
N
I
T
I
A
T
E
D
TE
X
T
A
M
E
N
D
M
E
N
T
S
20
1
4
C
O
M
P
R
E
H
E
N
S
I
V
E
P
L
A
N
A
M
E
N
D
M
E
N
T
D
O
C
K
E
T
projection of student levels.
P/
T
#
3
Fe
d
e
r
a
l
W
a
y
S
c
h
o
o
l
Di
s
t
r
i
c
t
C
a
p
i
t
a
l
Fa
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
P
l
a
n
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
5
,
C
a
p
i
t
a
l
F
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
(I
n
c
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
e
d
b
y
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
)
N/
A
I
n
c
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
e
u
p
d
a
t
e
d
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
Reflect new projects and remove projects that have been completed as well as updated information related to development and projection of student levels.None
P/
T
#
4
Ke
n
t
S
c
h
o
o
l
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
Ca
p
i
t
a
l
F
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
P
l
a
n
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
5
,
C
a
p
i
t
a
l
F
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
(I
n
c
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
e
d
b
y
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
)
N/
A
I
n
c
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
e
u
p
d
a
t
e
d
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
Reflect new projects and remove projects that have been completed as well as updated information related to development activity and projection of student levels.None
P/
T
#
5
CO
A
C
a
p
i
t
a
l
Fa
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
P
l
a
n
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
5
,
C
a
p
i
t
a
l
F
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
(I
n
c
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
e
d
b
y
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
)
Mi
s
c
e
l
l
a
n
e
o
u
s
a
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
s
I
n
c
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
e
u
p
d
a
t
e
d
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
ti
o
n
Add new projects to the CFP and remove projects that have been completed. Remain current. NoneFinance Dept originates with assistance for all other city Depts.
6/
1
9
/
2
0
1
4
1
DI
.
A
Pa
g
e
1
1
o
f
9
7
It
e
m
Pa
g
e
Ar
e
a
t
o
b
e
c
h
a
n
g
e
d
Ch
a
n
g
e
Re
a
s
o
n
ProsConsComments
CP
A
1
4
-
0
0
0
2
Ma
p
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
Ma
p
1
4
.
1
,
C
o
m
p
r
e
h
e
n
s
i
v
e
Pl
a
n
M
a
p
Ch
a
n
g
e
t
h
e
l
a
n
d
u
s
e
de
s
i
g
n
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
2
.
2
7
-
a
c
r
e
pa
r
c
e
l
f
r
o
m
"
S
i
n
g
l
e
F
a
m
i
l
y
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
"
t
o
"
L
i
g
h
t
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
"
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
i
s
r
e
q
u
e
s
t
i
n
g
t
h
e
m
a
p
am
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
t
o
r
e
f
l
e
c
t
t
h
a
t
a
co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
w
a
s
i
n
pr
o
c
e
s
s
u
n
d
e
r
a
v
e
s
t
e
d
co
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
u
s
e
p
e
r
m
i
t
w
h
e
n
t
h
e
pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
w
a
s
i
n
P
i
e
r
c
e
C
o
u
n
t
y
ju
r
i
s
d
i
c
t
i
o
n
(
p
r
i
o
r
t
o
A
u
b
u
r
n
an
n
e
x
i
n
g
)
.
T
h
a
t
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
u
s
e
pe
r
m
i
t
h
a
s
s
i
n
c
e
e
x
p
i
r
e
d
a
n
d
i
n
or
d
e
r
t
o
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
l
y
a
c
o
m
p
r
e
h
e
n
s
i
v
e
pl
a
n
a
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
i
s
n
e
e
d
e
d
.
To be determined To be determined
PR
I
V
A
T
E
L
Y
-
I
N
I
T
I
A
T
E
D
MA
P
A
M
E
N
D
M
E
N
T
S
pl
a
n
a
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
i
s
n
e
e
d
e
d
.
CP
A
1
4
-
0
0
0
3
Ma
p
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
Ma
p
1
4
.
1
,
C
o
m
p
r
e
h
e
n
s
i
v
e
Pl
a
n
M
a
p
Ch
a
n
g
e
t
h
e
l
a
n
d
u
s
e
de
s
i
g
n
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
n
8
-
a
c
r
e
pa
r
c
e
l
f
r
o
m
"
S
i
n
g
l
e
F
a
m
i
l
y
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
"
t
o
"
H
i
g
h
D
e
n
s
i
t
y
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
"
.
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
i
s
r
e
q
u
e
s
t
i
n
g
t
h
e
m
a
p
am
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
t
o
r
e
f
l
e
c
t
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
t
h
a
t
w
a
s
t
h
e
s
u
b
j
e
c
t
of
a
p
r
e
v
i
o
u
s
1
6
-
l
o
t
p
r
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y
pl
a
t
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
i
n
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
o
f
Au
b
u
r
n
.
To be determined To be determined
6/
1
9
/
2
0
1
4
2
DI
.
A
Pa
g
e
1
2
o
f
9
7
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
Mill Creek Wetland 5K Restoration Project
Date:
June 17, 2014
Department:
Community Development
and Public Works
Attachments:
No Attachments Available
Budget Impact:
$0
Administrative Recommendation:
For discussion only.
Background Summary:
Materials will be provided to the Committee at the meeting.
Reviewed by Council Committees:
Planning And Community Development
Councilmember:Holman Staff:Andersen
Meeting Date:June 23, 2014 Item Number:DI.B
AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINEDDI.B Page 13 of 97
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
Plat/Subdivision Process Overview
Date:
June 18, 2014
Department:
Community Development
and Public Works
Attachments:
Memorandum
Exhibit A
Budget Impact:
$0
Administrative Recommendation:
Discussion only.
Background Summary:
See attached memorandum.
Reviewed by Council Committees:
Planning And Community Development
Councilmember:Holman Staff:Tate
Meeting Date:June 23, 2014 Item Number:DI.C
AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINEDDI.C Page 14 of 97
MEMORANDUM
TO: Councilmember John Holman, Chair, Planning and Community Development
Committee
Councilmember Largo Wales, Vice-Chair, Planning and Community Development
Committee
Councilmember Yolanda Trout, Member, Planning and Community Development
Committee
CC: Mayor Nancy Backus
Kevin Snyder, Community Development and Public Works Director
FROM: Jeff Tate, Assistant Director of Community Development
Elizabeth Chamberlain, AICP, Planning Services Manager
DATE: June 18, 2014
RE: Subdivision Procedures
Overview
At the May 12, 2014 PCDC staff provided an overview of the difference between a subdivision
and short subdivision as well as the term “plat” and “subdivision”. The purpose of the
discussion was to brief PCDC on the state law that provides local municipalities with the option
of changing the threshold that distinguishes between a subdivision and short subdivision from 4
lots to 9 lots. As part of that discussion staff indicated that a draft code amendment would be
brought forward to PCDC during the second meeting in July. This would allow staff to search
through the City code and accompanying design and construction standards to ensure that
changing the threshold from 4 lots to 9 lots did not result in the weakening of any development
standards. Staff also indicated that it would move the subdivision briefing item originally
scheduled for October 27, 2014 to the June 23, 2014 PCDC meeting.
Exhibit A provides an overview of the process to subdivide land in the City of Auburn. Because
Chapter 58.17 of the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) sets forth many of the procedural
requirements associated with dividing land, the process described in Exhibit A is very similar to
that of other surrounding cities. As part of the June 23rd briefing staff will have a number of
visual aids displayed on the wall that help provide a visual representation of what is described in
Exhibit A. Staff will be bringing a collection of preliminary subdivision maps, associated civil
engineering drawings, final recorded plat maps, and a number of other accompanying
documents.
DI.C Page 15 of 97
Exhibit A
Pre-Application Conference (not mandatory but typical)
Timeframe: 3 week lead time
Purpose: To obtain preliminary information from the City regarding city
standards, process and costs.
Decision Maker: N/A
Staff Lead: Planner
· Pre-application materials submitted at the counter
· Meeting scheduled for 2 to 3 weeks from submittal
· Materials routed to Planning, Building, Fire, Development Engineering, Traffic
Engineer, Water Engineer, Sewer Engineer, Storm Engineer, and IT (GIS)
· GIS prepares maps of the property that show the various utilities, zoning,
environmental features, etc.
· All reviewers conduct a preliminary evaluation of the materials and prepare
general comments, code requirements, and potential challenges.
· All reviewers convene the week before the Pre-Application meeting to discuss
their comments and potential issues. This is done because one reviewer’s
comments may have an effect on other reviewer’s analysis.
· Staff and applicant convene to discuss the project and answer questions.
· Within 2 weeks of the Pre-Application meeting the Planner assembles all of the
comments and delivers a written summary to the applicant.
____________________________________________________________
Preliminary Subdivision Application Review
Timeframe: Typically 9 to 12 months
Purpose: To evaluate overall project feasibility. After an applicant has
obtained preliminary approval they will prepare detailed engineered
plans.
Decision Maker: Hearing Examiner (based on recommendation by staff)
Staff Lead: Planner
· Application taken in at the front counter
· Routed for review by Planning, Environmental, Building, Development
Engineering, Traffic Engineer, Water Engineer, Sewer Engineer, Storm Engineer,
Fire, and Addressing.
· Planning serves as lead project reviewer and evaluates for consistency with the
following:
o Overall density
o Minimum and maximum lot size and lot width
o Designation of open space tracts
o Overall lot layout
DI.C Page 16 of 97
· Environmental evaluates for consistency with the following:
o Federal, State and local floodplain requirements
o Federal, State and local wetland requirements
o State and local stream requirements
o State and local fish and wildlife requirements
· Building evaluates for consistency with the following:
o Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements (e.g. slopes associated
with ramps, sidewalks, crosswalks)
· Development Engineering evaluates for consistency with the following:
o Geologic hazards and requirements
o Size, slope, and functionality of water distribution system
o Size, slope, and functionality of sewer distribution system
o Size and method of collecting, transporting, storing, and releasing storm
water runoff
o Details of road system (slopes, width, surface)
o Curb cut locations for future driveways serving future lots
· Traffic Engineer evaluates for consistency with the following:
o Overall impact on surrounding transportation network
o Location of entrances to the subdivision
o General guidance to the Development Review Engineer regarding system
design and functionality
· Water Engineer evaluates for consistency with the following:
o How the subdivision system will connect with the overall city system
o General guidance to the Development Review Engineer regarding system
design and functionality
· Sewer Engineer evaluates for consistency with the following:
o How the subdivision system will connect with the overall city system
o General guidance to the Development Review Engineer regarding system
design and functionality
· Storm Engineer evaluates for consistency with the following:
o How the subdivision system will connect with the overall city system
o General guidance to the Development Review Engineer regarding system
design and functionality
· Fire evaluates for consistency with the following:
o Adequacy of street system to accommodate fire apparatus
o Spacing and location of fire hydrants
· Addressing assigns street names
· On average, there are 3 to 4 iterations of the above review as staff reviews
submittals and provides comments and corrections back to the applicant
· Staff report prepared and recommendation transmitted to the Hearing Examiner
· Public hearing before the Hearing Examiner
· Decision rendered by Hearing Examiner
DI.C Page 17 of 97
Public Facility Extension (civil review and approval)
Timeframe: Typically 6 to 9 months
Purpose: To evaluate detailed engineering plans for utilities, streets, and
grading.
Decision Maker: City Engineer
Staff Lead: Development Review Engineer
· Review street sign proofs to ensure consistency with street names assigned
during preliminary plat review
· Review the detailed engineered drawings for street layout and profiles
· Review the detailed engineered drawings for water system layout, connections,
and profiles
· Review the detailed engineered drawings for sewer system layout, connections,
and profiles
· Review the detailed engineered drawings for storm system layout, connections,
detention, and profiles
· Review the ability of the water system to support fire fighting needs
· Review the details of all environmental mitigation plans
· Construction inspectors review the plans for constructability
· Review the details and profiles for sidewalks, sidewalk ramps, curbs, and gutters
· Review the landscaping plans to ensure adequate spacing, proper tree species,
and root control
· The City Engineer signs the final approved mylar design plans
____________________________________________________________
Construction (grading, building roads, installing utilities, lighting & landscaping)
Timeframe: Typically 6 to 9 months (but dependent upon speed of applicant
and size of subdivision)
Purpose: Installation and inspection of all site work necessary to support
future single family residential development
Decision Maker: N/A
Staff Lead: Construction Inspector
· Arrange for a pre-construction meeting with the City (identifies key points of
contact, ensures construction bonds are in place, ensures that all contractors and
sub contractors are properly licensed, bonded and insured)
· Obtain “Notice to Proceed’ from the City
· Install erosion and sedimentation control measures
· Remove vegetation and grade site
· Install water lines
· Install sewer lines
· Install storm lines
DI.C Page 18 of 97
· Construct storm drainage pond
· Construct retaining walls
· Install other utility lines (power, cable, telephone)
· Build streets
· Install curb, gutter and sidewalks
· Install public landscaping
· Install public street lighting
· Build community playgrounds
· Complete any required environmental mitigation
· Pass all city inspections
· Effectuate warranty bonds to cover any defects in infrastructure
· Transfer all privately constructed infrastructure to the City as a public utility
· Submit as-built mylars which reflect actual constructed condition
· As-built mylars are reviewed, approved, and entered into the City’s records
· As-built record drawings are then transmitted to IT who adds all of the lots, utility
lines, street layout, address assignments, water meters, hydrants, etc. into the
City’s GIS.
____________________________________________________________
Final Subdivision Application
Timeframe: Typically 3 months
Purpose: To finalize the subdivision documents, obtain City Council approval
and record final legal documents
Decision Maker: City Council
Staff Lead: Planner
· Ensure that all legal descriptions are accurate
· Review title report
· Review community’s Codes, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&Rs)
· Incorporate any modifications to the preliminary plat due to issues that developed
during construction
· Review final plat documents, restrictions on the face of the plat, conditions
associated with the plat
· Review preliminary plat conditions to ensure that all plat development conditions
have been satisfied
· Assign addresses to each lot
· Ensure that all property taxes have been paid prior to recording of plat
· Schedule final plat for City Council approval
· City Council action
· Plat recording
DI.C Page 19 of 97
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
Connectivity Discussion
Date:
June 18, 2014
Department:
Community Development
and Public Works
Attachments:
Memorandum
Business Performance in Walkable
Shopping Areas Report
Prairie Line Trail Final Conceptual
Design
Budget Impact:
$0
Administrative Recommendation:
For Discussion only.
Background Summary:
See attached memorandum.
Reviewed by Council Committees:
Councilmember:Holman Staff:Tate
Meeting Date:June 23, 2014 Item Number:DI.D
AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINEDDI.D Page 20 of 97
MEMORANDUM
TO: Councilmember John Holman, Chair, Planning and Community Development
Committee
Councilmember Largo Wales, Vice-Chair, Planning and Community Development
Committee
Councilmember Yolanda Trout, Member, Planning and Community Development
Committee
CC: Mayor Nancy Backus
Kevin Snyder, Community Development and Public Works Director
FROM: Jeff Tate, Assistant Director of Community Development
Elizabeth Chamberlain, AICP, Planning Services Manager
DATE: June 17, 2014
RE: Active Living Research – Business Performance Walkable Shopping Areas
City of Tacoma – Prairie Line Trail Final Conceptual Design
Overview:
The Active Living Research Program prepared this report with the goal of identifying whether
walkable communities not only provide great health benefits but if there are also economic
benefits. The Executive Summary of the report is on page 3 and provides an overview of the
key findings derived from an analysis of 15 walkable shopping areas. The communities that
were analyzed were both urban and suburban, old and new, small and large. There is
overwhelming evidence that suggests that walkable communities are desired by as much as
half of the populations that were surveyed. Based on prior PCDC discussions there has been
concurrence that walkability is an important component to build into the City’s Comprehensive
Plan and future capital project programming. The purpose of providing this report is to start
facilitating a discussion about what walkability looks like in the City of Auburn and how to begin
developing policies and strategies for furthering this goal.
The Prairie Line Trail Conceptual Design is a planning document prepared for the City of
Tacoma that provides a blueprint for achieving the city’s objective of connecting the University
of Tacoma campus with neighborhoods to the north and south. Not only is this a nearby real
world example of improving connectivity and creating a more walkable non-motorized corridor it
is obvious from the pictures provided in the report that Tacoma faces many of the same types of
barriers and challenges that exist in Auburn – namely, an older well established built
environment with a mix of land uses and the presence of rail lines. Starting on page 12, note
the picture that is presented, the subsequent page displays design concepts, and the next page
which superimposes those concepts on the first page. In other words, pages 12, 13 and 14
should be looked at together – this pattern repeats through page 23.
DI.D Page 21 of 97
Discussion – the following questions will be facilitated with large format maps that will
be displayed during the PCDC discussion.
1. What does it mean to be a walkable commercial area?
2. Does the City of Auburn have any existing walkable commercial areas? If yes, where
are they? How would we define them on a map?
3. Are there other areas of the City where there is an opportunity or need for a walkable
commercial area?
4. Does the Prairie Line Trail Conceptual Design have applicability in Auburn? If yes, what
communities should be connected?
Attachments:
Active Living Research – Business Performance Walkable Shopping Areas Technical Report
City of Tacoma – Prairie Line Trail Final Conceptual Design
DI.D Page 22 of 97
TECHNICAL REPORT
November 2013
Active Living Research
Using Evidence to Prevent Childhood Obesity
and Create Active Communities
Business Performance in
Walkable Shopping Areas
Photo by Gary Hack
DI.D Page 23 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
2 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
Business Performance in
Walkable Shopping Areas
This technical report was prepared by Gary Hack, PhD, Professor of Urban Design
at the University of Pennsylvania.
For updates and a Web-based version of this report, visit
www.activelivingresearch.org.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary ..................................................................................................... 3
Introduction …… ........................................................................................................ 4
Defining Walkable Commercial Areas ........................................................................ 4
What Research Tells Us About Walkable Shopping Areas ......................................... 8
What Retail Experts Say About Walkable Shopping Areas ...................................... 13
A Look at Examples of Walkable Shopping Areas ................................................... 16
Traditional Shopping Streets ................................................................................. 16
Case Study: Little Village, Chicago ................................................................. 20
Transit-oriented Shopping Areas .......................................................................... 22
Case Study: Clarendon, Virginia ...................................................................... 25
Case Study: Columbia Heights, Washington, DC ............................................ 27
Case Study: Orenco Station, Hillsboro, Oregon ............................................... 29
Larger Suburban Town Centers ............................................................................ 31
Case Study: Kentlands Downtown, Gaithersburg, Virginia ............................. 33
Summary: What We Know About Walkable Shopping Areas .................................. 36
Learning More about Retail Performance ................................................................. 37
Additional Resources ................................................................................................. 39
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This report was supported by the
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
through its Active Living Research
program. The author was greatly
assisted in the preparation of this
report by Lynne B. Sagalyn and
John Robinson. Anastasia
Loukaitou-Sideris, Anne Vernez
Moudon, William Ascher, James
Sallis and Christopher Leinberger
also contributed wise comments,
suggestions and information.
DI.D Page 24 of 97
3 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
Active Living Research
Using Evidence to Prevent Childhood Obesity
and Create Active Communities
TECHNICAL REPORT
November 2013
Business Performance in Walkable
Shopping Areas
Executive Summary
Walkable commercial districts are a key component of communities that promote
active living. Walking has great health benefits, including helping people maintain a
healthy weight. This report examines whether there are also economic benefits to
businesses in walkable communities. The study consisted of a meta-analysis of 70
studies and articles. However, there have been few studies that address economic
performance directly and the author conducted an exploratory study of 15 walkable
shopping areas judged as successful to examine the sources of success.
KEY FINDINGS
• There is great enthusiasm for walkable shopping areas among retail experts,
developers and many residents of urban and suburban areas;
• Walking shopping areas have a potential to prosper as a result of
demographics, increased gas prices, public policies encouraging higher
densities and changing life style preferences;
• Businesses can be successful if such areas reach a critical mass, cater to
diverse needs, are located in higher density areas or have good mass transit
service, and have a supermarket as an anchor;
• With success, enterprises in walkable shopping areas are able to pay higher
rents for their space, and housing near walkable commercial areas
commonly sells for higher prices than in more distant areas.
IMPLICATIONS
While the economic performance of walkable shopping areas is worthy of continued
empirical research, including interviewing merchants, all the evidence seems to
suggest that walkable retail is on the upswing, and likely to grow over the next
several decades. Since 45% of daily trips, on average, are made for shopping and
running errands, encouraging walking is an important strategy in reducing obesity
and improving health. It is also important to reducing energy usage and carbon
emissions.
DI.D Page 25 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
4 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
Introduction
A growing body of research has established that walkable communities promote
healthy living patterns.1,2,3 Researchers also argue that compact walkable settlement
patterns are important as a strategy for reducing automobile travel and lowering
greenhouse gas emissions.4,5 An essential aspect of walkability is having local
shopping areas near the places people work and live. It seems self-evident that walk-
in patronage would improve the prospects of local shopping areas. It should follow
that walkability improvements made in commercial areas should improve the
performance of businesses. Anecdotes abound about successes and failures of
commercial districts that serve walk-in populations, yet this issue has been little
studied in any systematic way.
This report assembles existing data, published studies, and consultant reports, to the
extent we are able to identify them, on the subject of walkable shopping areas. The
author also visited a number of walkable commercial areas and shares his
impressions and conversations with merchants and owners in these areas.
Defining Walkable Commercial Areas
Ultimately every person who shops arrives at a store on foot – except, of course,
Internet shoppers and those who drive up to the windows of banks or fast food
outlets. The shopper may have walked 50 feet from a car or half a mile from a home
or office. The trip may involve one or multiple stops, combining shopping with a
visit to a restaurant or an appointment with a dentist. Defining a commercial area as
“walkable” requires distinctions to be made beyond how shoppers arrived at their
destination and what they do once they arrive.
Those advocating the creation of walkable commercial areas can have in mind
several quite different things. The prototypical image of a walkable commercial area
is of a lively neighborhood-serving a cluster of shops, restaurants, bars and offices,
lining a street and serving the needs of a nearby residential population. This is also
the historical image of Main Street U.S.A., but a closer look at the reality on the
ground reveals that these areas can be quite varied. Broadway, which extends for
several miles as the spine of the Upper West Side of Manhattan, draws almost all of
its patronage from pedestrians on foot, including many who live directly over the
shops. In suburban shopping strips, such as Germantown Avenue in the Chestnut Hill
section of Philadelphia, half or fewer of the shoppers may come on foot, with the
balance driving and parking in lots behind the shops. The street may be bisected by
heavy traffic (although with generous sidewalks, as on Broadway) or may be along a
street where traffic has been “calmed,” and it is possible to park in front of a shop
and cross from side to side with abandon, as on Water Street, the main street of
Celebration, Florida. Or it may be a street closed to traffic entirely.
With all this variation, when do we call a commercial street a walkable area? The
accessibility of the street, its friendliness to pedestrians, and the mix of uses along it
qualify it as a walkable commercial area, rather than any particular physical
characteristics. A “walkable commercial area” usually means that it is possible for a
DI.D Page 26 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
5 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
significant fraction of patrons to arrive by some other mode than driving, and that
they are in a welcome environment for strolling, meeting others and resting for a few
moments. In short, they do not have to get in their car to visit store after store. In
commercial terms, retail districts serving mainly nearby residents are usually referred
to as “neighborhood shopping areas” or “community shopping areas,” depending
upon their size and components.6,7 They typically contain grocery and drug stores,
hardware, dry cleaners, clothing and shoe stores, wine and beverage shops, and other
stores catering to regular needs, as well as widely used services such as banks,
hairdressers, and insurance agents. They may contain a sprinkling of restaurants and
bars, and on occasion a movie theater or entertainment venue. Community retail
centers typically cater to 10,000-30,000 residents or more. Unless they are in an area
with high densities (such as Manhattan or the North Loop in Chicago) or have
excellent transit access that creates an extended trade area, they have to rely upon
people arriving in their cars as well as walk-in patronage.
Many neighborhood and community shopping areas have their origins in the web of
historical streetcar lines that extended out from the centers of North American cities.
Where these have been retained, as in Toronto, and parts of San Francisco,
Philadelphia and New Orleans, or replaced by electrified trolleys as in Vancouver
and Seattle, streets continue to play a vital role in serving the adjacent communities.
Underground mass transit often reinforces the role of street-oriented shopping by
creating a destination for commuters who shop before or after using transit.
Neighborhood and community shopping areas are distinguished from more local
“convenience centers” that may consist simply of a 7/11 store and possibly a dry
cleaners and one or two more shops, and from “regional centers” usually anchored by
one or more department, discount, or home improvement stores and a large cluster of
shops. Many regional centers (and all “super-regional centers”) have large areas
devoted to pedestrians, but are usually oriented inwards, off the street, and only a
handful of their patrons will come on foot. Despite the amenities they provide for
pedestrians, they are not considered walkable commercial centers.
The term “walkable commercial area” is also typically applied to downtown
pedestrian zones, where traffic has been removed or restricted, as on Third Street in
Santa Monica California, Pearl Street Mall in Boulder Colorado, or Church Street
Marketplace in Burlington Vermont. Frequently the mix of uses in these areas is
shaded towards restaurants, entertainment and boutiques, rather than shopping for
necessities. The majority of the patronage for such areas usually comes by transit or
car, but many such areas have made concerted efforts to attract offices and residential
uses nearby so that that they have a 24/7 life. However, the distinction between
walkable centers and regional urban entertainment districts, such as Kansas City
Light and Power or LA Live, is not easily settled by judging their walkability; unless
they have a significant residential or work population (beyond those working in the
commercial outlets) they probably should be considered in the same category as
regional malls.
Germantown Avenue, Chestnut Hill, Philadelphia
Broadway, Upper West Side, New York
Photosby Gary Hack
DI.D Page 27 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
6 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
TABLE 1
URBAN LAND INSTITUTE’S COMPARISON OF RETAIL CENTER TYPES8
Convenience Shopping Center
Anchors Convenience grocery, drug store
Number of Stores 3 – 20 stores
Total Retail Space 10,000 – 30,000 square feet
Site Area 1 – 3 acres
Market Area Population Under 20,000 people
Market Area Radius Under 2 miles
Neighborhood Shopping Center
Anchors Supermarket and Drug Store
Number of Stores 10 – 40 stores
Total Retail Space 30,000 – 100,000 square feet
Site Area 1 – 3 acres
Market Area Population 10,000 – 30,000 people
Market Area Radius 1 – 3 miles
Community Shopping Center
Anchors Junior department or Discount Store
Number of Stores 25 – 80 stores
Total Retail Space 100,000 – 450,000 square feet
Site Area 10 – 30 acres
Market Area Population 30,000 – 75,000 people
Market Area Radius 3 – 8 miles
Regional Shopping Center
Anchors 1 or 2 full-time department stores
Number of Stores 50 – 100 stores
Total Retail Space 300,000 – 750,000 square feet
Site Area 30 – 50 acres
Market Area Population 100,000 – 250,000 people
Market Area Radius 8 – 15 miles
Super-Regional Shopping Center
Anchors 3 or more full-time department stores
Number of Stores 100 – 300 stores
Total Retail Space 600,000 – 2,000,000 square feet
Site Area 40 – 100 acres
Market Area Population 250,000 – 600,000 people
Market Area Radius 12 – 50 miles
DI.D Page 28 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
7 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
A third type of walkable commercial center is the town center. Downtown areas
served this purpose traditionally, and the revival of Main Streets in many smaller
communities has been promoted by emphasizing their walkability. In most cities they
do not compete directly with shopping centers or big-box malls, but serve a niche
market of providing boutiques, entertainment, dining and drinking.
The contemporary counterparts of Main Street are the planned town centers in large
suburban developments, such as Reston Town Center in suburban Washington and
Valencia Center in California. These centers, which have substantial and growing
residential populations and large office employment, offer shopping, dining and
entertainment opportunities to residents and workers without getting into their car.
They emphasize the public realm, and often have programmed activities to encourage
shopping in the evenings and on weekends. At a smaller scale, many new urbanist
developments have created centrally located clusters of shops that are surrounded by
higher density housing, and are easily reached on sidewalks. The town center at
Laguna West near Sacramento, and downtown Kentlands, in Gaithersburg Maryland
are two examples.
Finally, transit-oriented centers are a fourth type of walkable commercial area. There
is a long tradition of such centers, dating from the development of commercial
centers around suburban rail stations in the late nineteenth Century. Wayne
Pennsylvania and Lake Forest Illinois are good examples. In recent years, the
development of new light rail or metro transit lines has stimulated the growth of
walkable commercial centers around stops. Washington D.C. has many such transit-
oriented centers including Friendship Heights, Bethesda and Clarendon in suburban
areas and Columbia Heights in the District. Large numbers of high-density housing
units and offices provide much of the support for retail and entertainment uses
adjacent to the transit station. Fruitvale Village in Oakland California, the
Mockingbird Station area in Dallas Texas, the North York station area in Toronto,
and Orenco Station in Portland Oregon are other examples of the growing number of
transit oriented developments. They become walkable shopping areas when they
draw a substantial fraction of their patronage from offices and housing located near
the station, and from commuters who live in the surrounding neighborhoods.
There are of course, many other types of walkable shopping areas, including tourist-
oriented areas (German Village in Columbus Ohio, the Gaslamp Quarter District in
San Diego California, Granville Island in Vancouver, Washington Harbor outside of
D.C.), waterfront-living areas with retail space (Harbourfront in Toronto, False Creek
in Vancouver, Bayside in San Francisco), historic districts with local shopping
(Society Hill in Philadelphia, the North End in Boston, Pike Place and Pioneer
Square areas in Seattle), resort towns (Edgartown on Martha’s Vineyard, the Village
at Haile Plantation in Gainesville Florida) and college- town collections of stores
(Harvard Square in Cambridge, Walnut Street adjacent to Penn in Philadelphia,
Telegraph Street in Berkeley California). And, of course, there are many hybrid
examples. For our purposes here, we use the term “walkable commercial area” to
describe places with a diverse range of local-serving shops and services, where a
substantial fraction of patrons arrive by walking, cycling or taking mass transit,
DI.D Page 29 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
8 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
where there are good pedestrian links to adjacent neighborhoods, and where
pedestrians are treated well once they arrive.
What Research Tells Us About Walkable Shopping Areas
There is a surprising paucity of studies of how well walkable retail areas actually
perform, in economic, social or functional terms. Most of the studies focus on
collectively managed neighborhood and community shopping centers, employing
readily available data. For diverse street-oriented commercial areas, much of the
evidence is anecdotal, and fails to distinguish the demographics or income potential
of the areas being served. The sheer diversity of locations and types of retail areas
makes it extraordinarily difficult to separate local circumstances from generic issues
and attribute results to walkability or other particular variables. The slippery
definition of what constitutes a walkable commercial area adds to the difficulty of
reaching conclusions. Retail outlets are also notoriously transient, making
comparisons over time extremely difficult. One study based on U.S. Census data
estimates that more than 50% of the retailers operating in any given year will cease
operations within five years.9
It seems clear from research that a significant fraction of urbanites in the US would
prefer to locate in an area where there are shops, restaurants and services within a
walkable distance. A two-city consumer preference study found that 29% of Atlanta
residents surveyed and 40% of their counterparts in Boston would prefer living
nearby such opportunities.10 While the fractions vary from city to city, between one
third and half of US households appear to prefer walkable neighborhoods.11 A recent
national consumer preference study put the figure much higher: fully 66% of
respondents expressed a preference for “living within walking distance of stores,
restaurants and other places in a community.”12
Studies in Atlanta have shown that many individuals now living in areas where
businesses and services are not within walking distance would also prefer to be in
more walkable neighborhoods, but cannot find housing that suits them in such
areas.13 When new housing is available and attractive in walkable neighborhoods, it
can command a premium of $20,000 for similar amounts of living space, trading off
smaller yards.14
Premiums for downtown housing over suburban housing range from 40% in Detroit
to 150% in Denver to 200% in New York. Where there are walkable suburban
opportunities, as in Kirkland, Washington, the premium is 51% in favor of walkable
locations.15 A careful study in 15 cities, controlling for a variety of contextual
factors, found that shifting from average to above-average Walk Score® ratings
raised the housing values by $4,000 to $34,000, depending upon the metropolitan
area. The amounts tended to be greater in dense urban areas such as Chicago and San
Francisco and lower in low-density cities such as Tucson and Fresno.16
Perhaps not surprising, in walkable neighborhoods the best predictors of whether
people actually walk is the presence of nearby attractions. For home-based trips,
DI.D Page 30 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
9 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
nearby grocery stores, eating places (not fast food), retail stores and banks are
strongly correlated with pedestrian activity.17,18 This means having such
opportunities within one-third of a mile of residential units,19 or having effective
transit links that support home to shop travel in 20 minutes or less. Very few
suburban neighborhoods provide such access to commercial opportunities and
services, although areas adjacent to commercial strips and older neighborhoods along
old streetcar corridors meet these criteria in many cities.
Does this demand for walkable locations also translate into better business
opportunities for merchants and organizations providing services? All the evidence
about this is indirect, mainly based on differences in rent charged for commercial
spaces. Higher rent is taken as a surrogate for better business opportunities, on the
presumption that if businesses are willing or able to pay more for rent their revenues
must be correspondingly higher.
Studies in the Washington D.C. metropolitan area by RCLCo show that rent for
office space in downtown Washington, with high walkability, commands a 27%
premium over comparable space in car-dependent suburban locations.15 An important
large-scale national study of retail, office and residential properties confirmed these
findings. Comparing 10,000 properties for which NAREIT data was available, and
accounting for other variables, the study found that retail properties with a Walk
Score® ranking of 80 were valued 54% higher than properties with a Walk Score®
ranking of 20. This was accompanied by an increase in net operating income (NOI)
of 42% for the more walkable properties. Office properties showed identical higher
premium values, although rental apartments showed only a 6% premium if they were
in walkable locations.20
These findings seem to confirm the assumption that services and shops in walkable
environments are financially more attractive to their tenants, resulting in higher rents
to the owners of the properties. However, the results are far from conclusive, partly
because of how researchers have estimated walkability. The Walk Score® tool
measures walkability by assessing the distance to the nearest educational (schools),
retail (groceries, books, clothes, hardware, drugs, music), food (coffee shops,
restaurants, bars), recreational (parks, libraries, fitness centers), and entertainment
(movie theaters) destinations. The Walk Score® tool was designed mainly to score
residential properties in terms of the proximity of nearby shopping and facilities,
although it has also been applied to neighborhoods and whole cities to provide a
comparative measure of walkability. For office space – which could be occupied by
local services or by national corporations that have little to do with their
surroundings – high walkability locations are places where employees can easily
walk to lunch spots, take in a movie or exercise or go to a bar after work, and do their
shopping nearby. The employees may well have driven to work since the Walk
Score® rating does not correlate workplaces, shopping and residential locations. For
retail properties, high Walk Score® ratings are a measure of the clustering of retail
outlets and other services, an index of agglomeration, not an indicator of whether
patrons walked to the store from their homes. About all that can be said is that retail
areas with high walkability scores offer the potential for shoppers to make multiple
DI.D Page 31 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
10 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
stops in stores without getting back in their cars, and can walk from the shopping
area to public and recreational facilities nearby.
There is also an issue of whether rent levels and appraisals of properties are good
indicators of the health of commercial areas that provide services to local
populations. Commercial areas with high rents are more likely to be occupied by
national chains rather than startup or even established local stores. While many local
consumers may value and patronize these, the most interesting commercial areas
have a mix of unique and generic stores. This requires a mix of low rent properties as
well as those commanding high rents. The flowering of restaurants in Center City
Philadelphia and in many other walkable locations has a great deal to do with the
presence of inexpensive space. When national chains arrive with their standard retail
format, many urbanites see them as signaling the demise for neighborhood
commercial areas. From a real estate perspective, however, obtaining high retail rents
and attracting “credit tenants” may be the critical factor in encouraging developers to
undertake mixed-use projects that add to local shopping opportunities.
Researchers, nonetheless, favor rent levels as an index of viability of commercial
areas because large data sets are generally available, and they provide a relatively
consistent basis for comparison. Identifying the determinants of rents in retail areas
has been a long-term preoccupation of land economists. A study of shopping centers
in Quebec City concluded that the household income levels of the area where the
center is located and the mix of tenants in a center (particularly the presence of
anchor stores) trumps proximity in producing high rents – and by extension, high
business revenues.21 Other authors, focusing on rents in community shopping
centers, conclude “purchasing power matters greatly,” as does the distance between
consumers’ homes and the center. However the value of proximity quickly dissipates
beyond four tenths of a mile.22
The image of the shopping area also contributes to the rent levels in neighborhood
and community centers, according to one study of shopping centers in the Atlanta
area. Having a recognized supermarket chain as the anchor for a neighborhood
shopping area increases the rent potential of adjacent spaces, as does the diversity of
shopping opportunities that are present. L-shaped centers tended to perform better
than strip centers, although the differences are slight.23 The importance of having a
dominant (by market share) supermarket chain confirms the findings of an earlier
Denver study.24
Density has been shown as explaining much of the variation in performance of retail
areas, although other factors also make a difference. A study of transportation
choices found that “three D’s” – density, diversity and design – generally result in
fewer driving trips and encourage non-auto travel.25 A survey of walking behavior,
conducted among a sample of residents in six US cities, found that residential
densities and the presence of significant retail opportunities were positively
correlated with the probability of residents walking.26 We know from neighborhood
studies that residents of areas with net densities of 21.7 units per acre or more are
more likely to walk to destinations in their neighborhood.19 This correlates with
DI.D Page 32 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
11 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
residential areas that have a mix of apartments, townhouses and small-lot single-
family houses.
Neighborhoods that are friendly to pedestrians often attract a disproportionate
amount of commercial activity. A study of transportation diaries of shoppers in the
South Bay area of Los Angeles compared four typical linear shopping strips in auto-
oriented corridors to more compact shopping areas considered to be examples of
“smart growth.” Trips to the more compact centers were more likely to be shorter
and more likely to be on foot. It also found that business concentrations in walkable
neighborhoods are “from three to four times as large as can be supported by the local
resident base, suggesting that the pedestrian-oriented neighborhoods necessarily
import shopping trips and hence driving trips from surrounding catchment areas.”27
In short, there appears to be an unfilled demand for walkable retail uses, even in
suburban areas.
Studies of the results of improving the pedestrian environment in shopping areas
have generally shown that lowering the speed of traffic passing through an area and
providing amenities for pedestrians (wider sidewalks, landscaping, streetscape
improvements) pays dividends in terms of retail patronage and sales. Improvements
to School Street in Lodi California, coupled with economic incentives, have helped
attract 60 new stores, lowering the vacancy rate to 6 percent from 18 percent and
resulting in a 30% increase in sales tax revenues (mirroring increased sales) since the
improvements were completed in 1997.28 In 1995, the City of West Palm Beach
Florida made major investments in traffic calming and pedestrian realm
improvements along Clematis Street, its traditional main street, including restoring
the street to two-way movements. Improvements extended into the adjacent
neighborhoods, making them more pedestrian-friendly, encouraging residents to
walk to Clematis Street. Property values have doubled along the street, with retail
rents rising from an average of $6.00 to $30.00 per sq ft.27 Of course, many factors
may have contributed to these increases. The changes occurred contemporaneous
with the development of City Place, a large mixed-use center, itself a model of a
walkable urban development that has attracted many new residents and visitors to the
city.
In some cities, a significant fraction of shoppers arrive on bicycles rather than by
walking, driving or taking transit, and there has been a rapid growth in efforts to
encourage cycling in most cities. Bicycle lanes were added to Valencia Street in the
Mission District of San Francisco by reducing driving lanes from two to one in each
direction, while retaining on-street parking. Merchants were surveyed about its
impacts. The results were encouraging: 63% felt that the number of customers
arriving by bicycle increased, 56% felt that the number of local residents shopping
there had increased and 37% reported sales increases – although 30% felt that there
had been no real increase in business.29 Interestingly, this occurred even as merchants
reported a reduction of automobile traffic on the street. The results of adding bicycle
lanes will undoubtedly vary depending upon the population of local neighborhoods
and the nature of shops along the street, and in many cities merchants have strongly
opposed allocating scarce street space to cyclists.
DI.D Page 33 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
12 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
Improving the quality of the pedestrian environment is a favored strategy for
promoting walk-in patronage in neighborhood and community shopping areas.
Beginning in the 1960s about 200 American cities turned shopping streets into
pedestrian malls, seeking to emulate the car-free environment of shopping centers.30
Many of these efforts were aimed at reversing the decline of shoppers, as suburban
shopping malls captured an increasing share of disposable income. Entertainment
and programming was organized in the newly expansive pedestrian spaces. Some
cities created transit malls, allowing only busses to travel along them, with expanded
pedestrian sidewalks – Nicollet Mall in Minneapolis, Chestnut Street in Philadelphia,
and 16th Street in Denver, are examples.31
Dozens of studies have been done on the impacts of these pedestrian malls, and the
results are decidedly mixed.30 The improvements have had a variety of impacts on
businesses. Some businesses failed during the lengthy period of reconstructing the
street, in part because it was difficult for shoppers to reach their stores. Many of
these were businesses that were at the edge of failure before the improvements. Most
studies indicated a bump in walk-in trade shortly after the mall was opened, after
which sales in some areas stabilized, while others returned to their previous
downward trend.32 However, there were also success stories, particularly in college
towns where the zones of leisure proved an attractive diversion – Pearl Street in
Boulder Colorado, and East Main Street in Charlottesville, Virginia are good
examples. Merchants in some shopping areas, including Church Street Marketplace
in Burlington Vermont, reoriented their offerings to emphasize the new clientele and
successfully revived their businesses. Other areas the mix of businesses evolved,
emphasizing food, beverage and entertainment and have enjoyed success. Lincoln
Road Mall in Miami Beach, Fourth Street in Louisville, and Third Street in Santa
Monica are good examples. In the majority of cities, though, pedestrianization failed
to revive the prospects of the business district, and vehicular traffic was restored to
the streets, at the merchants’ and property owners’ insistence.33, 34
The favored approach to improving the pedestrian experience today is narrowing or
reducing the number of traffic lanes while retaining or restoring on-street parking,
widening sidewalks, adding bicycle lanes, improving the quality of materials on the
street surface, adding pedestrian scale lights, benches and street trees, and creating
zones for sidewalk cafes to add activity to the street. This balancing act is sometimes
called creating “complete streets.”
Of course, neither transportation nor streetscape improvements will guarantee the
success of a shopping area. Only strong merchants that attract customers can do that.
But they can create the conditions where local patronage is encouraged, improving
the base of support for stores. Ultimately, other factors will come into play as well,
including the size of the area being served, competing opportunities, the cost and
availability of sites for commercial uses, and the presence of businesses willing to
make a commitment to the area. Most successful shopping streets have created
business improvement districts (BIDs) to lead efforts in promoting, maintaining and
marketing the attractions in their area.
DI.D Page 34 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
13 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
What Retail Experts Say About Walkable Shopping Areas
Often formal research lags the knowledge gained in the field by professionals
involved directly in urban development. What the professionals know may be based
on anecdotes and single -case experiences, but through them they gain a detailed
understanding of how factors are weighed by firms and entrepreneurs looking for
locations to establish their businesses. And as businesses succeed or fail over time,
they reach conclusions about successful circumstances for retail development.
There is considerable enthusiasm for walkable shopping areas among economic
development officials, marketing consultants, and real estate research firms. One
source of optimism is the changing demographics and life-style preferences of
households. Currently, only one third of U.S. households have children, and over the
next two decades only 12% of new households being formed will have children.35
Childfree households are prime candidates for locating in denser areas of cities,
within walking range of commercial services and entertainment. Households with
two working parents are also increasingly seeking to live in urban areas to simplify
their lives, taking advantage of child-care services and after-school educational
opportunities available in urban areas. The major deterrent is the quality of public
education and the cost of private school alternatives, but charter schools and
improving public schools may make this more of an option for young households in
the future.
The large number of retiring baby boomers is a second demographic shift that could
add support to retail prospects in dense urban areas. A substantial fraction has voiced
a desire to be in urban settings, close to cultural and entertainment opportunities, and
near high-quality health-care facilities. Many of these retirees are looking forward to
a time when they can give up driving, hoping that it is sooner rather than later.36
Businesses are realizing the potential of locating in dense urban areas and are
changing their formats to fit urban sites. Led by Whole Foods, supermarkets were
among the first to adapt to the increased preferences for urban living, creating
smaller stores, offering fresh produce and more prepared foods, reducing the parking
they expect, and in some cases occupying multiple levels and offering home delivery
service.37 The success of urban pioneers has spawned a host of new entrants into the
urban grocery field, and forced longstanding chains to adapt their retailing
approach.38
Other businesses are also discovering the potential for sales in walkable locations.
Formerly big-box retailers including Target and Staples have created scaled-down
and multi-story stores in community retail locations, and chains such as Tesco and
Safeway have been experimenting with urban prototypes. Reportedly, Wal-Mart has
opened a mini-store of only 3,500 sq ft on the University of Arkansas campus –
smaller than Sam Walton’s original five and dime store.39 In Vancouver, Home
Depot has located in a mixed-use complex (The Rise) in the midst of a residential
neighborhood, sharing the footprint of the site with a supermarket and other shops,
with office space and housing located above them. Most large-format stores are
DI.D Page 35 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
14 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
exploring how to adapt their retailing strategies to allow them to locate in vertical
complexes, particularly where they can serve customers who arrive on foot, by transit
as well as by automobile.40 At the retail complex D.C. USA, located at Washington’s
Columbia Heights metro stop in the center of a diverse neighborhood, the large-
format stores discovered that they had greatly overestimated the number of parking
spaces they needed to make their sales targets. Their shoppers are largely people who
walk to the complex or arrive by transit.
While supermarkets and chain stores are actively seeking locations in downtown
areas and gentrifying neighborhoods, many low-income areas of cities remain
underserved by such retail opportunities. Initiatives by The Retail Initiative of the
Local Initiative Support Corporation (LISC) and The Reinvestment Fund’s (TRF)
retail program in Philadelphia, among other financial intermediaries, has resulted in
dozens of supermarkets being built in underserved areas providing the anchors for
neighborhood shopping areas.41 And new retail chains that target neighborhood-
shopping areas have emerged, including Villa (urban inspired apparel and shoes),
Fresh Grocer and Harris Teeter (groceries and prepared foods), Mugshots Coffee
House and Gothic Cabinet Craft (furniture.)42
Every business has its own decision rules about where to locate. For some
organizations the rules are formalized: they seek areas with a threshold of a specific
number of residents and amount of purchasing power, and look for areas with high
rates of growth in income. For others, it is largely an art of finding areas that “feel
right.” Nonetheless, retail experts offer guidelines for the average number of
residents needed to support specific types of neighborhood or community businesses
(see Table 2). By one estimate, an average household can support 72 sq ft of retail
development. Of this, approximately 40 sq ft are in categories typically present in
neighborhood retail areas, such as grocers, drug stores, cleaners, florists,
video/entertainment, and eating/drinking establishments.43 Of course, not all of a
household’s purchases in these categories will be made in the nearest neighborhood
retail area, and an estimate of 15 to 20 sq ft per household is probably a safe estimate
of what can be supported locally. Thus, if a neighborhood shopping area has 50,000
sq ft (of which 30,000 is a supermarket), it will require approximately 2,500 to 3,300
households or a population of 5,000 to 6,500 to support such a center.
Many of the new walkable urban shopping areas are being built as mixed-use
projects with housing or offices above ground-floor retail outlets. In the past it was
difficult to finance mixed-use projects because of lender restrictions such as the
Federal National Mortgage Association’s (Fannie Mae) limit of no more than 5%
retail space in residential projects it financed. However, today there is a growing
receptivity in the investment community to support such projects.14, 44 Lenders
believe that these projects generally cost about 10% more to develop, but this is not a
deterrent to attracting financing.45 Developers see mixed-use projects as providing
marketing advantages and diversification of the products they are offering.14
The retail landscape is also continuing to churn, as a result of the continued growth
of on-line purchasing, the demise of several large national chains, the consolidation
DI.D Page 36 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
15 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
of department stores, and the great recession that has changed consumer buying
habits. Retail space in many US cities is over-built, resulting in high vacancies in
many shopping centers, particularly in older malls and community shopping centers.
Even before these changes, several large national chains, including The Gap began to
diversify their retail locations, adding street-oriented retail outlets in communities
with growing purchasing power.46
The ongoing restructuring of retail areas as a result of the entry of large chains such
as Target and Wal-Mart into local areas – particularly as they penetrate urban areas –
has resulted in the loss of general merchandise, groceries, apparel, electronics, home
furnishings and building supplies from downtown and community shopping areas,
and their replacement by new businesses such as restaurants, coffee shops, art
galleries, antique stores and professional service firms.
TABLE 2
SUPPORTABLE SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL PER HOUSEHOLD47
Store Type Supportable Sq. Ft.
Per Household
%
Neighborhood
Neighborhood Sq. Ft.
Per Household
Building Material 2.6 0.0% ---
Hardware 0.5 5.0% 0.0
Department/Variety 13.4 0.0% ---
Food/Grocery 11.6 45.0% 5.2
Auto supply 2.6 5.0% 0.1
Gas Stations 5.5 0.0% ---
Apparel 4.5 17.5% 0.8
Shoe 1.3 17.5% 0.2
Furniture 3.5 5.0% 0.2
Home furnishings 1.6 5.0% 0.1
Appliance 0.5 5.0% 0.0
Radio/TV/Computer/Music 2.3 5.0% 0.1
Eating Places 12.4 45.0% 5.6
Drinking Places 1.5 45.0% 0.7
Drug 3.1 45.0% 1.4
Sporting Goods 1.4 5.0% 0.1
Book 1.0 17.5% 0.2
Hobby/Toy 1.0 17.5% 0.2
Gift 1.0 17.5% 0.2
Flower 0.5 17.5% 0.1
Total 71.8 15.1
DI.D Page 37 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
16 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
Perhaps the greatest uncertainty on the retail horizon today is the long-term
implications of rapidly increasing Internet sales. While such sales make up only a
small part of the retail pie – about 4.6% in 2011 – sales have been growing by 17%
annually.48 Internet sales are eating into the volumes of many retail outlets, but at the
same time firms that have a good web presence have seen their sales explode.
Among the casualties in the shift is Borders Books, which was too late in recognizing
the implications of Internet book sales and downloads. Their demise has left
vacancies in many community shopping areas. In some urban locations Internet sales
of groceries is having an effect on supermarket revenues. Many merchants are
pursuing a “bricks and clicks” strategy of leveraging their supply chains and local
presence to provide rapid Internet service. Businesses selling commodities are likely
to be affected more than those with unique products or providing entertainment along
with consumption.
These changes are the latest examples of creative destruction Schumpeter spoke
about.49 Many of the functions that lost are being reinvented, with boutique grocery
outlets, high-touch services, seasonal pop-up shops and increasingly specialized
retailing showing their face in community shopping areas. Retail experts continue to
be bullish about the development of “street-based retail” in areas with the potential
for a large walk-in population.14
A Look at Examples of Walkable Shopping Areas
Much can be learned about the current status of walkable shopping districts by
visiting examples of where they appear to be functioning well. Most cities have a few
areas which benefit from walk-in patronage, many cities are promoting the revival of
walkable shopping districts, and there are a growing number of new centers being
created that aim for a balance of neighborhood serving outlets as well as shops that
cater to a wider market area. The following vignettes capture some of the successful
types of walkable shopping areas. Recognizing the limitations of Walk Score®
ratings, they have been calculated for a central location in each area mentioned.
Traditional Shopping Streets
Germantown Avenue in the Chestnut Hill and Mount Airy neighborhoods (Walk
Score® rating = 89) in Philadelphia is every person’s archetype of a neighborhood
shopping street. Following an historic streetcar route (the tracks remain, but trains
have been replaced by buses), the cobblestone street slows traffic, and pedestrians
cross from side to side easily. Many of the shops have been there for years, including
a jeweler in Chestnut Hill that dates from 1912 and is now run by the third
generation, but each year enough new shops open to add interest to the street. The
street’s allure is the rich diversity of outlets, catering to everyday needs (hardware,
food shops, a wine and spirits stores, bakeries, drug stores, dry cleaners, banks,
barber and hairdressers), but also offering fashion items for men and women,
gourmet foods, gifts, antiques, galleries, home furnishings, kitchen supplies, hobby
and craft shops, electronic stores, music stores and academies, cafes, coffee shops,
restaurants, and spas. More than 140 shops line the mile-long shopping strip along
Germantown Avenue in Chestnut Hill, and at least 50 business and professional
Germantown Avenue Streetcar Line
Germantown Avenue Shops, Chestnut Hill
Photo by Mike Szilagyi
Photo by Gary Hack
DI.D Page 38 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
17 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
services, associations and institutions. Dozens more may be found along the avenue
in Mount Airy, a mile away.
Residents of Chestnut Hill and Mount Airy have great loyalty towards their local
shopping districts. They value the mix of local and national outlets, and have debated
at great length whether to allow large national chains to locate there. The most recent
entry of a large new outlet was Borders Books, which for a decade became an anchor
at the western end of Germantown Avenue, but now stands vacant looking for a new
life. Many local residents walk ten or fifteen minutes to the shopping area, but many
more drive there, park and shop several blocks of the street. The Chestnut Hill transit
station located on the avenue provides a steady flow of commuters who pass by
shops on their way to and from home.
Germantown Avenue is the kind of local shopping street many communities would
like to have. However, it is the product of a long, slow evolution that cannot be
duplicated overnight. Those who run the shops own many of the structures, and the
inventories and fixtures have long since been paid for. The problem for many is
succession, not startup costs. Community activism serves as a barrier to large new
outlets locating nearby. And the incomes of Chestnut Hill residents are among the
highest of any neighborhood in Philadelphia, providing the potential to support many
retail functions.
At the opposite end of the spectrum is Broadway on the Upper West Side of
Manhattan (Walk Score® rating = 100), a four-mile continuous shopping street that
serves as the main street for a community of 200,000 residents. At 60,000 persons
per sq mile and household purchasing power that is roughly 200% of the national
average, the area is able to support virtually every shopping need of its residents. No
one is more than 10 minutes from Broadway, and virtually everyone walks to shops
from their home. There is good bus service along the street and mass transit operates
below it, with stations spaced six to ten blocks apart (1,500-2,500 feet). This makes it
possible to shop by transit along the length of Broadway.
Along Broadway there is a drug store every four blocks, grocery store every six, and
florists, convenience stores, hardware and dry cleaners every two to three blocks.
Most blocks have at least one restaurant or bar. Every banking chain has distributed
its branches regularly along the street. Some areas along Broadway have developed
special identities, often centered on New-York-centric shops such as Zabar’s,
Citarella, and Fairway. The area near Lincoln Center is the zone of cinemas and other
entertainment venues. National chains are well represented along Broadway, but
there are thousands of local one-of-a-kind stores that local residents swear by. Many
of the grocery stores provide home delivery, and virtually every small restaurant
delivers take-out orders to nearby resident’s doors.
Because of the high cost of space, stores have to make concessions on their layout to
locate on Broadway. Fresh Fields operates its highest grossing store entirely on the
basement level. A scaled-down Trader Joe’s is split between two levels below
ground, with a small shop front on the street, as are Staples and many of the drug
Germantown Avenue Shops, Chestnut Hill
Photos by Gary Hack
Germantown Avenue, Mount Air
DI.D Page 39 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
18 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
stores along the street. It is also interesting to note what cannot be found along
Broadway: no department stores or large general merchandise discount stores, no
branded hotels (north of 66th St.), few furniture stores, only one white goods
appliance store, and no automobile dealerships or gas stations. All of these are
accessible by subway (or car) within a few minutes from the Upper West Side.
Few cities have either the high densities or long traditions of street oriented shopping
just cited, but there are thousands of local shopping districts, which command loyalty
and provide services within walking distance of where people live. Loyalty is what
sustains ethnic shopping areas, attracting customers from many miles who add to the
walk-in trade from the neighborhood. A study of three Los Angeles ethnic shopping
strips found that half or more of the customers drove one to five miles to obtain foods
and goods popular in their culture and to socialize with others with their heritage.50
Pacific Boulevard in Huntington Park (Walk Score® rating = 86) reconstituted itself
after the Watts Riots as a Latino shopping district and has become the cultural center
for groups from Mexico and Central America. The streetscape has been improved
and benches added to allow patrons to linger and socialize. The majority of the stores
are small, although some larger Mexican chains have located along the one-mile
strip. About 40% of the 127 stores were oriented to the fashion preferences of
Latinos (including fiesta dresses and tuxedos); 20% offered shoes, and the balance
included general merchandise and food stores, jewelry shops, music and electronic
stores, restaurants, and fast-food outlets. Six shops specialized in bridal gowns and
wedding goods. Much of the street is devoted to discount and value-oriented
merchandise. Shoppers come for the special atmosphere of the street, but also to find
goods at an affordable price.50
Little Village (Walk Score® rating = 78) is Chicago’s version of Pacific Boulevard,
and represents the center of Latino commerce in the city. With over 1,000 businesses
along West 26th Street and a large Mexican-American population nearby, it serves an
important role in supporting Latino culture. Most Little Village residents spend some
time on the street each week. Part of its attraction is the wide array of services
available in Spanish, many of them (such as immigration services) critical to Latino
residents. While other shopping areas in the city may offer better value priced goods,
none of them is able to serve the regular needs of an immigrant population whose
first language is Spanish.
Commercial streets catering to Chinese and other Asian groups also garner wide
loyalty and illustrate the special retailing dynamics of ethnic shopping districts.
Shops in the commercial strip along Valley Boulevard in San Gabriel, a “suburban
Chinatown,” are almost equally divided between outlets owned by businessmen, and
family owned and run enterprises. The family-operated shops are small, generally
with one to five employees (often all family members) running mainly bakeries, dry
cleaners, hair salons, and pharmacies. The larger supermarkets, electronics stores,
furniture stores and large restaurants, which require greater amounts of capital to
establish and run, are owned by a wide array of businessmen from Asian and other
countries, and employ a more diverse group of employees, including Mexican
Broadway, Upper West Side, New York
Broadway, Upper West Side, New York
Photos by Gary Hack
DI.D Page 40 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
19 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
Americans.50 Extending business opportunities to their family is as important to
many Asian business owners as making a large profit. They use surplus funds to buy
similar stores in other areas, often tapping loan funds from others in their
community. As areas become established, Asian-oriented commercial areas have
evolved with the construction of small enclosed or L-shaped malls with crowded off-
street parking areas to accommodate the growing proportion of shoppers who drive
to the centers.
Street oriented retail areas usually reflect and, on occasions, foreshadow ethnic and
demographic shifts in the area they serve. The Wicker Park-Bucktown neighborhood
in Chicago (Walk Score® rating = 88) has seen a procession of immigrant groups:
Germans through 19th Century, replaced by Poles who predominated through the
1960s (the area takes its name from the large number of goats or ‘bucks” kept by the
Poles), succeeded by Puerto Ricans and other Latinos until the end of the century,
and most recently replaced by a growing artists community and young professionals.
The prime location of the neighborhood, near the Loop and well served by subways,
has made it a desirable location for new urban households. Houses with good bones
in the neighborhood have been renovated, vacant lots filled with modernist houses,
and smaller homes replaced by new one and two family structures. This is a classic
pattern of gentrification.
With each new ethnic group, the commercial strips along North Milwaukee, West
North and Damen Avenues have changed their character. In their most recent
incarnation, they have become among the trendiest streets in Chicago, with over 150
restaurants, many coffee houses (16 at last count), unique bars, music spots, theaters,
and other entertainment venues. The shopping streets have been transformed,
building-by-building, into galleries, boutiques, and shops specializing in everything
from apparel and jewelry to crafts and home furnishings. In the process, many older
neighborhood-oriented shops have been priced out – many catered to the Latino
population that has also been displaced or sold out to capture their gains. But there
remain at least 13 food stores, and a new conventional shopping center has been
constructed the southern end of the neighborhood, anchored by a large grocery/drug
store. Matching street-oriented shopping with a well-sited center containing large-
format stores, all within easy walk of residents, has become the preferred strategy in
urban shopping locations. Keeping two miles of retail frontages alive in an urban
area requires a combination of citywide patronage (particularly supporting the
restaurants, entertainment and boutiques), with people arriving by transit or car, and
local residents walking to the shopping streets.
North Milwaukee Avenue, Bucktown, Chicago
Photos by Gary Hack
North Milwaukee Avenue, Bucktown, Chicago
DI.D Page 41 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
20 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
CASE STUDY:
Little Village, Chicago
Walk Score® rating = 78
Little Village is reputed to be the largest shopping area, judged by retail sales,
outside Central Chicago. It is also the cultural center of Latino groups, hosting the
Mexican Independence Day parade and celebrations annually. The shopping street
along 26th Street centers a well-maintained neighborhood of single, duplex and small
apartment houses between Western Ogden, Costner and I-55. About 91,000 residents
live in the Little Village area, and over 80% have Mexican origins. The shopping
street is 2-4 blocks from the nearest mass transit stations.
Over 1000 businesses make their home in La Villita, as it is called locally, most
along 26th Street. Most merchants are Mexican immigrants or their children, although
a significant minority of Korean merchants is also present. The most common
businesses are Mexican restaurants and dance clubs, taquerias, hellados,
laundromats, supermarkets, banks actively soliciting the “unbanked,” bakeries,
clothing stores, shoe stores, travel agencies, thrift stores and furniture stores. At least
four bridal shops are located along the street, and other shops cater to Mexican fiesta
ware. The shopping street may be one of the few places left in Chicago to find fresh
killed poultry. Street vendors complement the stores, offering crafts, trinkets, bargain
items, ice cream and flowers. Side streets intersecting with 26th Street include auto
repair shops, auto body outfits and a variety of services that do not require street
frontage.
One of the features of La Villita is the heavy presence of specialized services
catering to the immigrant community. Upper floors of shops (and some shop fronts)
accommodate lawyers, immigration experts, insurance agents, check cashing
services, accounting and income tax services, medical clinics, veterinarians, social
Photos by Gary Hack
W. 26th Street, Little Village W. 26th Street, Little Village
DI.D Page 42 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
21 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
service organizations and employment agencies. Accessing services in Spanish is an
important draw for many shoppers.
Like all such districts Little Village is undergoing changes, some the result of
success, others a normal process of succession. Restaurants continue to open, and
shops are seldom vacant for long. Many of the small family operated retail
businesses are giving way to fast food outlets or dollar stores. The longstanding plans
for redeveloping a 40-acre vacant former industrial site at the western end of 26th
Street have floundered for a variety of reasons, including disputes over the kinds of
uses that would reinforce the existing commercial uses. Many residents would like to
attract a Wal-Mart store to the neighborhood, while many merchants see such a move
as the demise of value oriented commerce on the street.
DI.D Page 43 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
22 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
Transit-oriented Shopping Areas
Transit-oriented shopping areas date from the extension of railroads out of major
cities. Philadelphia’s Main Line towns, many of the suburbs of Westchester County,
and the communities along Chicago’s North Shore all owe their origins to passenger
railroad service begun in the 19th Century. Many of these suburban town centers have
remained important to their communities and some have seen a retail revival in
recent years.
Lake Forest Village, north of Chicago, is an important model of a shopping district
adjacent to a suburban railway station. Opened in 1916, Market Square was designed
to house a mixture of shops, offices for local services and apartments across the road
from the Union Pacific station. Modeled on Forest Hills Village in Queens New
York, it has a green square at its center, surrounded by handsome commercial
buildings. Side streets and courtyards beyond the square provide less expensive (and
less visible) spaces for other shops that cannot afford premium rents. The complex
has had its ups and downs over the years, although until 2006 was anchored by a
Marshall Field’s junior department store. Perhaps a sign of the times, it has been
replaced by a spa. Market Square now has a wide mix of national outlets (Talbots,
William Sonoma, J. Crew, Einstein Bros Bagels) and unique local shops, including
several exclusive women’s boutiques, shoe stores, gourmet foods, a wine shop and a
fine independent bookstore. Most of the national chain shops are a scaled down
version of their shopping center prototypes.
The shops of Market Square (Walk Score® rating = 85) appear well supported by its
community, which is one of the wealthiest in the US. Perhaps a third of the shoppers
arrive there en route to or from the rail station, a smaller fraction arrive on foot,
mainly students from the nearby Lake Forest College, and the balance drive to the
shopping area, parking on the street or in a small parking area behind the complex.
Lake Forest is blessed with having stations on two METRA lines, and over the years
the Milwaukee District line on the west side of the town has grown in volume at the
expense of the historic station. Along with it, shops and services have been built
adjacent to the West Lake Forest station. Nonetheless Market Square remains a fine
example of a longstanding walkable shopping area that towns would do well to
emulate.
Over the last several decades, the construction of mass transit lines has created the
opportunity for new transit-oriented developments. In some metropolitan areas,
including the Bay Area and Boston, residents near transit stations have resisted new
development that might change the character of their neighborhoods, down-zoning
sites surrounding stations, and forcing stations to be located far from any
concentration of population (as at the Alewife Massachusetts Bay Transportation
Authority (MBTA) station in Cambridge). An exception to this trend has been the
development of the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA)
system in Washington D.C., which has been accompanied by a concerted effort to
stimulate station area development. WMATA has aggressively purchased excess land
Market Square, Lake Forest, Illinois
Market Square from Lake Forest Station
Photos by Gary Hack
DI.D Page 44 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
23 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
around stations (harvesting the gains in land value after the station opens to cover
portion of the capital costs of the line) and worked with local cities and counties to
plan and promote transit oriented development. Projects within walking distance of
the transit station lock in patronage for the system, while allowing residents to live
and work in the area without the necessity of driving.
There are at least a dozen excellent examples of station-area developments in the
Washington area. Each responds to local circumstances and opportunities. The
Friendship Heights station at the District boundary has helped create one of the most
exclusive shopping districts in the region; the Alexandria Station (Walk Score®
rating = 98) has brought tourism to its charming historic district; the Bethesda Station
(Walk Score® rating = 97) has stimulated the growth of a major office district and
made possible the creation of a large entertainment, retail and restaurant district
beside it, and the recently opened inner-city New York Station (Walk Score® rating
= 78) has stimulated the development of a new office and residential sector of the
city dubbed NOMA (North of Massachusetts Avenue). Perhaps the two most
interesting transit oriented developments from a walkability perspective are adjacent
to the Clarendon and Columbia Heights stations.
Clarendon (Walk Score® rating = 94) and Columbia Heights (Walk Score® rating =
94) could hardly be more different. Clarendon caters to an upscale, generally young
population that works in the suburbs or commutes to downtown Washington using
the Metro. Many have young children, are in the process of acquiring furnishings for
their homes, and shop in the neighborhood after work or on the weekends. During the
day and evening hours the substantial number of people who work in the area or go
there for dining and entertainment joins residents on the streets. Since most residents
have an automobile, they retain the option of driving to regional malls and other
shopping areas a few minutes away for clothing and other purchases. Columbia
Heights, on the other hand, has a more captive population of residents, who shop for
a broader array of goods at Target and other stores. They have fewer nearby
entertainment and dining choices and depend upon the area for their medical and
other service needs. Each center is successful in its own terms and demonstrates the
virtue of local shopping areas near public transportation, which can multiply the
trade area beyond the walk-in population.
Columbia Heights and Clarendon each had a long retailing tradition, albeit one that
had been in decline for many decades. However, creating a transit-oriented
neighborhood shopping area de novo is a vastly more difficult task. Such
opportunities exist in cities with aggressive programs of extending light-rail lines to
the suburbs.
An excellent example of a new suburban transit-oriented development is Orenco
Station in Hillsboro Oregon (Walk Score® rating = 62). Its mixed-use center is two
blocks from a new light rail station, and is beginning to attract shoppers from the
growing community. A comparative study of Orenco Station and three areas of the
city that are demographically comparable (one in the urban grid, and two suburban
residential areas one near and the other distant from light rail transit) revealed that
DI.D Page 45 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
24 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
Orenco Station residents walked more and used transit for more commuting trips. In
a typical week, 50% of Orenco residents walked to a local store five or more times,
compared with only 5% of residents in the Beaverton area, with similar
demographics. The number walking regularly to shops in Orenco increased
substantially from 2002 to 2007. In 2007, being “close to shops,” topped local
residents lists of things most liked about the Orenco community.51
New suburban walkable centers need to build habits of use and loyalty in a
competitive retail environment, where the majority of shoppers are already in their
cars. Until there is a critical mass of residents within walking distance, shops struggle
to stay afloat. When shops are not directly adjacent to the transit station, they need to
persuade commuters to divert from their most direct path to patronize the stores.
Developers and merchants need to have patience in nurturing new transit-oriented
developments until the area becomes established.
DI.D Page 46 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
25 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
CASE STUDY:
Clarendon, Virginia
Walk Score® rating = 94
Clarendon is possibly the most successful transit-oriented development area in the
country. It has its origins in the decision by Arlington County to put the Metro line
destined to Ballston underground through the center of this historic village and to
promote the area as a mixed-use 24/7 living/working/shopping/entertainment area.
Over 1.1 million sq ft of office space, 2,300 housing units and nearly 600,000 sq ft of
retail space have been constructed in the area in recent years. Its streets are filled
with urbanites young and old who live or work nearby. Its easy access to downtown
Washington and other areas via the Metro makes it a destination for visitors meeting
friends in restaurants and entertainment venues.
Clarendon was one of Northern Virginia’s most important retail centers through the
1960s, boasting several department stores and a range of downtown retail uses. These
stores gradually faded as regional malls were built, and the area became an ethnic
Vietnamese area. The large sites in the area (Sears store, auto dealership and other
historic uses) provided readily assembled parcels for mixed-use developments.
Two events changed character of Clarendon: the arrival of the Metro station in the
1980s and the location of a Whole Foods store on a former car dealership three
blocks from the station. The past two decades have seen an explosion of mixed-use
projects with ground floor retail spaces (and second floor, in some projects), with 4-
10 story housing and office spaces above. Shopping opportunities now include large
national chains (Crate and Barrel, the Container Store, Barnes and Noble, Williams
Sonoma, Pottery Barn, an Apple Store) and a variety of local and home-grown
establishments. There are very few vacancies on the commercial frontages. On side
streets, in less expensive space, barber shops, hair salons, and a variety of local
services remain in older and renovated spaces. Clarendon has become known for its
Photos by Gary Hack
Clarendon Metro Station New Development Adjacent to Clarendon Metro
DI.D Page 47 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
26 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
dozens of restaurants and entertainment places, which are filled with office workers
at noon and attract people from the region after working hours throughout the week
and weekend.
The majority of local shoppers live in new high-rise housing near the station,
although a significant stock of older housing within walking distance of the shopping
is being upgraded for new owners. While many shoppers are walk-in customers, two
large parking garages have been constructed (with shops lining the street levels) to
accommodate those who drive to Clarendon. The range of shops requires a much
larger base of support than living nearby.
Approximately 7,600 people live within one-half mile of the Clarendon Metro
Station, and over 10,000 work within this radius. Transit enjoys a 44% modal split
among these residents and employees. Transit ridership has grown by 119% since the
station opened.
The Clarendon Metro Station occupies the space created by four major arterial streets
– Clarendon and Wilson Boulevards (both designed Great Streets by APA),
Washington Boulevard and Highland Street. While each can be congested during
peak hours, it does not deter pedestrians from shopping along the sidewalks and in
the courtyards and plazas created in the Market Common complex. Streets have been
landscaped, crossings improved for pedestrians, and the central park adjacent to the
Metro station is in the process of being upgraded.
The lessons from Clarendon include the importance of transit access in stimulating
mixed-use development, the critical mass needed to attract flagship stores, and the
synergy gained by mixing nighttime with daytime uses.
Whole Foods Supermarket at Clarendon Clarendon Commons Mixed-Use Development
Photos by Gary Hack
DI.D Page 48 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
27 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
CASE STUDY:
Columbia Heights, Washington, DC
Walk Score® rating = 94
Columbia Heights is located along the 14th Street Corridor, an area badly scarred by
the riots of 1968. Many shops and houses remained vacant for years, and there have
been countless efforts to revive the historic shopping district. Beginning in the 1990s,
the population of the area became more diverse, with Hispanics moving in, and the
wave of gentrification moving northward into Columbia Heights. In 2010, the area
was arguably D.C.’s most ethnically diverse neighborhood with a 44% African
American, 28% Hispanic, 23% white, and 3% Asian population.
The transition of the area to a shopping magnet began in 1996, a major initiative of
the D.C. government anticipating the opening of the Columbia Heights Metro station,
which opened in 1999. The Tivoli Theater, once a high spot of the neighborhood
culture, was restored, and its street facing shops were re-tenanted. A Giant food store
located on an adjacent site and several new housing projects were developed for
market rate and assisted tenants. The key to the area’s revival was the construction of
D.C. USA, a 546,000 sq ft retail complex across from the Metro Station, which
opened in 2008. Anchored by Target, Best Buy, Bed Bath & Beyond, and
Washington Sports Club, it also includes 390,000 sq ft of underground parking –
demanded by the major retailers as a condition of locating there – which has never
been fully used. In recent years the Dance Institute of Washington opened a new
facility next door on 14th Street, and the area remains a home for several embassies
and the Mexican Cultural Institute.
Columbia Heights attracts shoppers across a broad spectrum of households and
income levels. Approximately 29,000 people live within one-half mile of the Metro
Photos by Gary Hack
Metro Station with D.C. USA Development Tivoli Theater, Supermarket, New Housing
DI.D Page 49 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
28 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
station, the largest number for any station on system, 17% travel by transit to their
destinations. The area’s sidewalks (with newly installed streetscape) are crowded
through much of the day and on weekends. While there is turnover among the
smaller merchants, the vacancy rate is much lower than in the past. A number of new
bars and restaurants have opened on side streets, and some of the nearby housing is
being converted for small businesses. New types of shops, addressing the preferences
of each group in the neighborhood – the “hip” younger set, working professionals,
Hispanic families, middle class households, elderly, students) – continue to open, and
the upper floors of buildings are occupied by a broad range of health and professional
services.
DI.D Page 50 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
29 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
CASE STUDY:
Orenco Station, Hillsboro, Oregon
Walk Score® rating = 62
Orenco Station draws its name from the Oregon Nursery Company which had
created the rudiments of a company town on the site prior to going bust in the Great
Depression. When Portland’s TriMet Westside light-rail line was extended out to
Hillsboro, the 209-acre site became the logical location for a “town center” in the
2040 metropolitan plan. Located close by is an employment center with 15,000
workers, the “silicon forest,” and the Orenco MAX station is the nexus of a web of
bus routes funneling commuters to the transit line.
The core of the site is a 49-acre walkable mixed-use center, with housing over shops
along Cornell Street, the area’s new main street. The first stage of the center opened
in 1997, and it continues to develop. Retail uses build on the well-known Hillsboro
Sunday farmers market, which has been a local destination for many years. A home
grown supermarket, New Seasons, continues the fresh food tradition. Other early
shops include two restaurants, cleaners, a kitchen supply store, women’s clothier,
coffee shops, gift shops, video shop, print shop, bank, and pet market. The Orenco
hotel adds a spa and restaurants to the town center. Many of the merchants live in the
town, several in live-work townhomes designed for this purpose. Nearby, also within
walking distance, is Crossroads at Orenco Station, a more conventional community
shopping center anchored by a large grocery store, discount store, and drug store.
A comparative study of Orenco Station and other areas revealed that Orenco Station
residents walked more and used transit for more commuting trips. In a typical week,
half of Orenco residents walked to a local store five or more times, compared with
only 5% of residents in comparable areas.
Photo by Steve Szigethy
Town Center, Orenco Station Town Center, Orenco Station
Photo by Costa Pacific Realty
DI.D Page 51 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
30 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
Nonetheless, shops in the town center have continued to struggle to build their sales
volumes. As more housing units are added nearby and the area becomes better
known as a destination, sales will grow. One of the difficulties is that the shopping
area is two blocks from the station itself, although most pedestrians and buses pass
the town center en route to the station. It demonstrates the importance of having
shops visible from the transit station.
DI.D Page 52 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
31 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
Larger Suburban Town Centers
Two privately developed new towns were begun in the Washington metropolitan
area in the 1960’s: Columbia Maryland and Reston Virginia. Neither is served by
transit to Washington or Baltimore, forcing their designs to be largely auto-oriented.
Both created systems of neighborhood retail centers distributed throughout the
community, some of them quite innovative. Columbia’s neighborhood centers cluster
schools, religious facilities, and other institutions around retail uses, allowing
residents to avoid multiple trips. For their town centers, each developed a mix of
office, retail and residential uses, but their designs are poles apart. Columbia,
developed by the Rouse Company that was best known for its regional malls,
developed a multi-level mall at its center, surrounded by parking. While it was
possible to walk from to mall to nearby offices, the library and the waterfront, few
people actually did – they behaved as if they were going to a suburban mall. Reston
viewed its town center as an organic development built on the principles of older
downtown areas, with a grid of streets and development sites. Today, forty years
later, Columbia is contemplating the demolition of its original mall, while Reston is
celebrating the success of its town center, which continues to add businesses and
residents.
Reston Town Center (Walk Score® rating = 83) is a walkable environment that
serves as a mecca for surrounding suburban areas, drawing as many people on
weekends as during the week. People actually drive to the area in order to enjoy an
urban environment with brick sidewalks, shops, parks, squares, and entertainment
places. Its office space commands premium rents, housing sells or rents briskly, and
the town center now boasts of more than 50 retail outlets, 30 restaurants, a multiplex
cinema, and a Hyatt Regency hotel. The Pavilion at the center of downtown hosts
special events, concerts and ice-skating in the winter. Through the summer months
there are festivals that draw thousands to the area, and a procession of meetings and
conferences at the hotel brings visitors to Reston each day.
Retail uses at Reston Town Center are dominated by restaurants and bars,
entertainment venues, upscale clothing, gourmet foods, and boutiques of various
kinds, including the best-known national chains, serving the needs of employees and
visitors. The growing resident population in and around the center is not well served
by the offerings in the town center. But hedging their bets, the developers also
created the Spectrum Center next door to the town center with a full-scale
supermarket and other large-format shops. If you live in or near the town center, it is
possible to walk to the Spectrum Center, but few people actually do; many more stop
by on their way home from work or make a weekend excursion for their weekly
needs. Health care facilities, the regional library and a large building-supply outlet
are also located a short distance from the town center.
The dream of Reston Town Center has always been to connect to the mass transit
system and become part of the system of Washington-Baltimore’s linked
metropolitan sub centers. Currently a bus transit station at the edge of the town center
provides service to the District and other nearby locations. With the extension of the
Reston Town Center
Reston Town Center
Photo by Gary Hack
DI.D Page 53 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
32 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
Silver Line of the Metro system, Reston Town Center is scheduled to become fully
accessible by rail transit in a few years.
Reston has taken 45 years to build and currently has close to 60,000 residents. In few
places is there land available in single ownership to build a full-scale new town. The
more usual situation is developing parcels of 500 acres or less, in an environment
where there are competing claims on the shopping dollars of residents. The ambition
to create community shopping area needs to be scaled down to what can be supported
by the population on the site and its immediate environs.
Kentlands (Walk Score® rating = 86) in Gaithersburg Maryland is an ambitious
attempt to build a diverse shopping place for an innovative walkable community and
bears a careful look. It is successful in encouraging residents of Kentlands and the
adjacent higher-density suburban areas to walk to local services, entertainment, and
some shopping outlets. It struggles to attain a critical mass, however, and, ultimately,
its success may, like Reston’s, hinge on construction of a light-rail link to the
regional metro system. Rent levels, particularly in Main Street shops, have been
lower than hoped and there is more turnover than desired. But studies of housing
prices in Kentlands have shown a significant premium on residential values that can
be attributed, in part, to the walkable environment. The shopping area is planned so
that over time, it has the opportunity to add new shopping opportunities, becoming
denser, and adapting and changing with the needs of the population of community.
DI.D Page 54 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
33 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
CASE STUDY:
Kentlands Downtown, Gaithersburg, Virginia
Walk Score® rating = 86
Kentlands is one of the earliest examples of a New Urbanist Community in the U.S.
Planned in 1988, it includes housing at a variety of densities from small-lot detached
houses to townhouses to garden apartments, institutions, recreation facilities, and a
large commercial area. Creating a successful commercial area was essential to the
finances of the project, since it was expected to carry a large fraction of the site
acquisition costs. However, after the development of the residential area began, the
project became a casualty of the 1990 recession and the developer of the commercial
area withdrew. The entire project was taken over by the lenders.
Revived in 1991 under new ownership, Kentlands has become a successful walkable
residential development, with 1800 homes. An adjacent site, Lakelands, has been
planned and developed in a similar manner, adding 1410 more homes. A study of
housing prices in Kentlands found that buyers were willing to pay a 15% premium
for their houses to live in the community, evidence of the value of walkable new
urbanism.52 Over the years, cultural institutions have been added to the community as
well as schools, churches and a community recreation center. Adjacent to Kentlands,
development includes a large pharmaceutical facility with several thousand
employees, an R&D park, and a variety of more conventional subdivisions.
Developing the shopping area, however, proved problematic for many years.53 After
several false starts, it was ultimately developed as three linked areas:
• Kentlands Square, a large-format store area, developed with national chains
including K Mart, Lowe’s, Giant Supermarket, Panera Bread, Chipotle
Photosby Gary Hack
Market Square, Downtown Kentlands Main Street, Downtown Kentlands
DI.D Page 55 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
34 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
Mexican Grill, and banks (complete with drive up windows). The area was
planned with a grid of streets and blocks, so that residents of Kentlands can
walk to the stores, and allowing it to change and become denser over time.
• Market Square, a largely one-story street-oriented shopping area with a
mixture of national chains and local outlets, that include boutique clothing,
bakeries, household furnishings, wines, gourmet foods and candies, pet
supplies, and art supplies. The area also includes a professional office
building, health care facilities, a cinema, several restaurants and a square
where farmers markets are held during the summer months.
• Main Street, a three-story street-oriented mixed-use development, lined with
shops on one side and portions of the other side, depending upon the
preferences of the owners of properties.
Together the three areas provide a wide array of goods and services for residents of
Kentlands, Lakelands, and adjacent communities. A few residents walk to Kentlands
Square, but the majority of the patronage comes by car. Merchants would like greater
visibility for their center, which turns inward, away from the nearby arterial streets.
Market Square appears to attract a mix of walkers and drivers, including employees
of the office space on the square. On-street parking makes it an attractive place to
reach by car. The cinema is a magnet attracting people to dine in the area’s
restaurants, and sidewalks are busy with shoppers on weekends, less so during the
week. A larger fraction of Main Street’s patronage arrives by foot, and merchants in
the area speak of loyal customers who visit their establishments regularly. Because of
the diverse ownership of the area, the tenants are skewed to those who can deliver
Kentlands Square, Downtown Kentlands Offices in Market Square, Downtown Kentlands
This is a unique attempt to create an “organic” shopping street, where individual property owners decide upon the ground floor uses. The majority of uses are
professional services including dentists, hair and nail salons, judo and yoga studios, music academies, realtors, and the like. Retail stores include beer and wine,
coffee shops, restaurants, jewelry and crafts, gallery and framing, and children’s clothing. In some instances, owners of shops live in the upper stories above them; in
other cases, the upper floors are condominiums, rental housing units, or small office spaces.
Photosby Gary Hack
DI.D Page 56 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
35 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
dependable results drawing on the local market. As a result, the street has multiple
dentists, hairdressers, and nail salons and has become a local service street rather
than a traditional shopping area.
Seeking to develop the commercial area, businesses have joined together to form the
Kentlands Downtown Partnership. They are advocating for the a light-rail connector
from the downtown area to the major mass transit stop in downtown Gaithersburg,
improved crossings on Great Seneca Highway (Route 119) to encourage
pharmaceutical workers to walk to the downtown and increased festivals and other
cultural events to attract more patrons to the area.
DI.D Page 57 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
36 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
Summary: What We Know About Walkable Shopping Areas
What does this collection of research, opinions and case examples tell us about the
performance of walkable urban areas? There are at least nine conclusions that can be
drawn:
1. There is great enthusiasm for walkable shopping areas among retail experts,
developers, and many residents of urban and suburban areas. Demographics,
increased gas prices, public policies that encourage higher densities, and changing
life style preferences all point in the direction of greater support for walkable
retail areas.
2. Walkable retail areas have the potential to attract many people beyond the
immediate walking radius. An important finding is that walkable retail areas often
attract more patronage and more retail stores than their immediate trade area
would suggest. They realize a “place dividend” by developing a unique local
identify.
3. Businesses appear to do better in walkable commercial areas than in areas
attracting mainly drive-to patronage. Evidence suggests that rents in walkable
shopping areas can be 27-54% higher than in non-walkable areas. Many of the
most successful recent shopping developments have been located and designed to
attract a substantial walk-in population.
4. To be successful, walkable retail areas need to cater to diverse needs and reach a
critical mass. Successful retail areas need to encourage multi-purpose trips, which
means offering not only unique local shops but also more generic larger-format
outlets and services. One successful strategy is to couple specialized street-
oriented retail with areas capable of accommodating large grocery, pharmacy,
discount, and category killer stores.
5. Supermarkets that have created attractive brands are important anchors for
walkable neighborhood shopping areas. Many successful local shopping areas
were built around the arrival of a highly attractive supermarket. In underserved
communities, developing supermarkets has been the most successful strategy to
create walkable shopping areas.
6. Mass transit is an important component of the best walkable retail areas. The
surest way to assemble a critical mass of shoppers is to locate a shopping area at a
mass transit station. Coupling transit with high-density housing and workplaces
can lock in patronage for a shopping area.
7. While there is a great deal of turnover in neighborhood shops, over time the
accumulated loyalty and equity in businesses help breed success. Retail
establishments generally have high turnover rates, and maintaining a stable core of
shops and services is critical for developing loyalty towards an area. Turnover can
also be an asset, allowing new shops to reflect changing demographics and
creating new reasons for shopping in an area.
DI.D Page 58 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
37 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
8. Ethnic shopping areas and urban life-style areas have the built-in patronage to
make local shopping a success. Some of the most successful walkable shopping
areas in the US are ethnic areas that have become the social as well as retail
centers of their communities. Close behind are shopping areas catering to new
urban lifestyles that tap the purchasing power of young households and families
with an upward trajectory of income growth.
9. The presence of nearby walkable shopping areas can yield dividends for home
prices in surrounding areas. A compelling conclusion of research is that walkable
shopping areas increase nearby housing values. They are a reflection of the desires
of a broad cross-section of urban residents to live in a more walkable
environment.
Learning More about Retail Performance
The very diversity of local shopping areas makes them difficult to study and creates
difficulties in generalizing about the results. While a few standing public and
proprietary data sources on retail sales can be mined, they it is not easy to correlate
this with data on the size and number of shops in local shopping districts. In many
cases an accounting of occupied commercial space is not available, and there is no
historical record on the history and turnover of establishments. It is also hazardous to
infer from sales data the trade area served by local shopping areas, since we know
little about household consumption patterns in urban areas. As a result, field studies
that focus on a local shopping area over time are required to get at the actual
performance of businesses in walkable commercial areas. Surveys of merchants and
establishments will be required to collect the fine grained data necessary to really
understand retail dynamics, and an analysis of the demographics of the areas served
is essential to dimension the demand for retail outlets.
It would be very useful to know:
– The types of businesses (by merchandise or service categories, and by types of
ownership) that do well in local walkable shopping areas, and others that only
survive under special circumstances.
– The average business revenues per sq ft of space of shops of various types and
how these vary between local one-outlet shops and national chains.
– The level of patronage required to support these shops, and the densities within
a 10-minute walking range that are required to deliver this patronage,
accounting for income differences.
– Successful strategies for promotion and development of local shopping
districts.
– The modal split of patrons of successful local shopping areas.
– Actual parking requirements for local shopping areas that depend upon a mix
of patrons who walk, cycle and drive.
DI.D Page 59 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
38 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
– The level of rent required to support new development as part of mixed-use
projects on local shopping streets.
These issues cut across disciplinary lines, and will require the collaboration of real
estate economists, business development professionals and planning professionals.
The urgency of further research is clear, however: creating viable local commercial
areas is one of the keys to making cities truly walkable.
DI.D Page 60 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
39 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
Additional Resources
1. Basker, E. (2007). The Causes and Consequences of Wal-Mart’s Growth. The
Journal of Economic Perspectives, 21(3), 177-198.
2. Ewing, R & Cervero, R. (2010). Travel and the Built Environment. Journal of
the American Planning Association, 76(3), 265–294.
3. Gibbs, RJ. (2007). A Primer on Retail Types and Urban Centers. New Urban
News, September 2007. Available at: http://bettercities.net/article/primer-retail-
types-and-urban-centers
4. Goss, J. (2004). Geography of Consumption I. Progress in Human Geography,
28(3), 369-380.
5. Hankins, K. (2002). The Restructuring of Retail Capital and the Street.
Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 93(1), 34-46.
6. Hardin, III, WG, Wolverton, ML, & Carr, J. (2002). An Empirical Analysis of
Community Center Rents. Journal of Real Estate Research, 23(1/2), 163-178.
7. Kumar, V & Karande, K. (2000). The Effect of Retail Store Environment on
Retailer Performance. Journal of Business Research, 49(2), 167-181.
8. Lagerfeld, S. (1995). What Main Street Can Learn From the Mall. Atlantic
Monthly, November 1995. Available at:
http://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/issues/95nov/malls/malls.htm
9. Lee, Y, Washington, S, & Frank, LD. (2009). Examination of Relationships
between Urban Form, Household Activities, and Time Allocation in the Atlanta
Metropolitan Region. Transportation Research Part A, 43(4), 360–373.
10. Littman, TA. (2010). Economic Value of Walkability. Victoria, BC: Victoria
Transport Policy Institute. Available at: http://www.vtpi.org/walkability.pdf
11. Ryan, B. (2003). Economic Benefits of a Walkable Community. Let’s Talk
Business, no. 83. Madison, WI: Center for Community Economic Development,
University of Wisconsin-Extension. Available at:
http://www.gpred.org/siteadmin/images/files/file_59.pdf
12. Saelens, BE, Sallis, JF, Black, JB, & Chen, D. (2003). Neighborhood-based
Differences in Physical Activity: An Environment Scale Evaluation. American
Journal of Public Health, 93(9), 1552-1558.
13. Southworth, M. (1997). Walkable Suburbs? An Evaluation of Neotraditional
Communities at the Urban Edge. Journal of the American Planning Association,
63(1), 28-44.
14. Taylor, SL & Cosenza, RM. (2000). The Impact of E-Commerce on the
Merchandising of Women’s Clothing in Traditional Shopping Centers/Malls.
Journal of Shopping Center Research, 7(2), 45-66.
DI.D Page 61 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
40 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
15. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority & Cambridge Systematics,
Inc. (2009). Transit Ridership Trends and Markets. Washington, D.C.:
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority. Available at:
http://www.wmata.com/pdfs/planning/FINAL%20Transit%20Ridership%20and
%20Market%20Trends%20Report.pdf
ABOUT THE PROGRAM
Active Living Research, a national program of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation,
stimulates and supports research to identify environmental factors and policies that
influence physical activity for children and families to inform effective childhood obesity
prevention strategies, particularly in low-income and racial/ethnic communities at
highest risk. Active Living Research wants solid research to be part of the public debate
about active living.
Active Living Research
University of California, San Diego
3900 Fifth Avenue, Suite 310
San Diego, CA 92103-3138
www.activelivingresearch.org
DI.D Page 62 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
41 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
Endnotes
1 Handy, SL, Boarnet, MG, Ewing, R, & Killingsworth, RE. (2002). How the Built Environment affects Physical
Activity: Views from Urban Planning. American Journal of Preventative Medicine, 23(2), 64-73.
2 Saelens, BE, Sallis, JF, & Frank, LD. (2003). Environmental Correlates of Walking and Cycling: Findings
from the Transportation, Urban Design, and Planning Literature. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 25, 80–91.
3 McCann, BA & Ewing, R. (2003). Measuring the Health Effects of Sprawl: A National Analysis of Physical
Activity, Obesity and Chronic Disease. Washington, D.C.: Surface Transportation Project, Smart Growth
America.
4 Transportation Research Board. (2009). Driving and the Built Environment: The Effects of Compact
Development on Motorized Travel, Energy Use and CO2 Emissions. Transportation Research Board Special
Report 298. Washington D.C.: National Research Council.
5 Urban Land Institute. (2010), Land Use and Driving: The Role Compact Development Can Play in Reducing
Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Washington, D.C.: Urban Land Institute.
6 Urban Land Institute & International Council of Shopping Centers. (2008). Dollars & Cents of Shopping
Centers/The Score 2008. Washington D.C.: Urban Land Institute.
7 Gibbs, RJ. (2010). Retail Markets, Smart Code Module, Version 9.2. Chicago, IL: Congress for New
Urbanism.
8 Urban Land Institute & International Council of Shopping Centers. (2008). Dollars and Cents of Shopping
Centers / The SCORE 2008. Washington, D.C.: Urban Land Institute. 9 Jarmin, RS, Klimek, SD, & Miranda J. (2004). Firm Entry and Exit in the U.S. Retail Sector: 1977-1997.
Unpublished Paper, Washington D.C.: U.S. Census Bureau.
10 Levine, J, Inam, A, & Torng, B-W. (2005). A Choice-Based Rationale for Land-Use and Transportation
Alternatives: Evidence from Boston and Atlanta. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 24(3), 317-330.
11 Belden Russonello & Stewart. (2004). 2004 National Community Preference Survey. Washington, D.C.:
Smart Growth America. Available at: http://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/documents/NAR-SGASurvey.pdf
12 Spivak, J. (2011). Walkable Communities Surveys. Washington, D.C.: Urban Land.
13 Levine, J & Frank, L. (2007). Transportation and Land-Use Preferences and Residents' Neighborhood
Choices: The Sufficiency of Compact Development in the Atlanta Region. Transportation: Planning, Policy,
Research, Practice, 34(2), 255-274.
14 Urban Land Institute. (2005). Creating Walkable Places: Compact, Mixed Use Solutions. Washington, D.C.:
Urban Land Institute.
15 Leinberger, CB. (2009). The Option of Urbanism: Investing in a New American Dream. Washington, D.C.:
Island Press.
16 Cortright, J. (2009). Walking the Walk: How Walkability Raises Housing Values in U.S. Cities. Washington,
D.C.: CEOs for Cities. Available at: www.ceosforcities.org/files/WalkingTheWalk_CEOsforCities1.pdf
17 Lee, C & Moudon, AV. (2006). The 3Ds + R: Quantifying Land Use and Urban Form Correlates of Walking.
Transportation Research Part D, 11, 204-215.
18 Hoehner, CM, Ramirez, LKB, Elliott, MB, Handy, SL, & Brownson, RC. (2005). Perceived and Objective
Environmental Measures and Physical Activity among Urban Adults. American Journal of Preventative
Medicine, 28(2S2), 105-116.
19 Moudon, AV, Lee, C, Cheadle, AD, Garvin, C, Johnson, D, Schmid, TL, et al. (2006). Operational
Definitions of Walkable Neighborhood: Theoretical and Empirical Insights. Journal of Physical Activity and
Health, 3(S1), S99-S117.\
20 Pivo, G & Fisher, JD. (2010). The Walkability Premium in Commercial Real Estate Investments. Working
Paper, Responsible Property Investing Center, University of Arizona and Benecki Center for Real Estate
Studies, Indiana University. Available at:
http://www.u.arizona.edu/~gpivo/Walkability%20Paper%208_4%20draft.pdf
21 Des Rosiers, F, Theriault, M, & Menetrier, L. (2006). Spatial Versus Non-Spatial Determinants of Shopping
Center Rents: Modeling Location and Neighborhood-related Factors. Journal of Real Estate Research, 27(3),
293-319.
DI.D Page 63 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
42 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
22 Hardin, III, WG & Wolverton, ML. (2003). Micro-Market Determinants of Neighborhood Center Rental
Rates. Journal of Real Estate Research, 20(3), 299-322.
23 Hardin, III, WG & Carr, J. (2006). Disaggregating Neighborhood and Community Center Property Types.
Journal of Real Estate Research, 28(2), 167-192.
24 Ownbey, KL, Davis, K, & Sundel, HH. (1994). The Effects of Location Variables on the Gross Rents of
Neighborhood Shopping Centers. The Journal of Real Estate Research, 9(1), 111-123.
25 Cervero, R & Kockelman, K. (1997). Travel Demand and the 3Ds: Density, Diversity, and Design.
Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 2(3), 199-219.
26 Rodriguez, DA, Evenson, KR, Diez Roux, AV, & Brines, SJ. (2009). Land Use, Residential Density and
Walking: The Multi-ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis. American Journal of Preventative Medicine, 37(5), 397-
404.
27 Boarnet, MG, Joh, K, Siembab, W, Fulton, W, & Nguyen, MT. (2011). “Retrofitting the Suburbs to Increase
Walking: Evidence from a Land-use-Travel Study. Urban Studies, 48(1), 129-159.
28 Local Government Commission. (2000). The Economic Benefits of Walkable Communities. Sacramento,
CA: Local Government Commission, Center for Livable Communities. Available at:
http://www.lgc.org/freepub/docs/community_design/focus/walk_to_money.pdf 29 Drennan, E. (2003), The Economic Effects of Traffic Calming on Urban Small Businesses. San Francisco,
CA: Department of Public Administration, San Francisco State University. Available at:
http://www.sfbike.org/download/bikeplan/bikelanes.pdf 30 Robertson, KA. (1990). The Status of the Pedestrian Mall in American Downtowns. Urban Affairs Review,
26(2), 250-273.
31 Rubenstein, HM. (1992). Pedestrian Malls, Streetscapes and Urban Spaces. New York, NY: Wiley.
32 Onibokun, A.. (1975). Comprehensive Evaluation of Pedestrian Malls in the United States. Appraisal
Journal, 43(2), 202-218. 33 Smith, KL. (2011). Pedestrian Malls. In David Goldfield (Ed.), Encyclopedia of American Urban History (Vol
2). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications. Available at:
http://www.cluegroup.com/Downloads/Pedestrian%20Malls%20(Kennedy%20Smith).pdf 34 Gibbs Planning Group, Inc. (2011). Fresno, California Fulton Mall Alternative Plans: Economic Impact
Analysis. Available at:
http://fresnodowntownplans.com/media/files/Fulton_Mall_Economic_Impact_Analysis.pdf
35 Leinberger, CB. (2009a). The Structural Shift in Building Metropolitan Atlanta. Washington, D.C.: Brookings
Institute, Metropolitan Policy Program.
36 Lynn, D. (2011). Renewed Urbanization Drives Change in Retailing Strategies. REDNews, National Real
Estate Investor, April 6, 2011.
37 Pierce, N. (2010). Supermarkets as Neighborhood Centers: Vision for a More Walkable America.
Washington Post, April 18, 2010. Available at: http://citiwire.net/columns/supermarkets-as-neighborhood-
centers-vision-for-a-more-walkable-america/
38 Steuteville, R. (2009). Urban Grocers Proliferate. New Urban Network. Available at:
http://newurbannetwork.com/article/urban-grocers-proliferate
39 Rangwala, K. (2011). Post-Great Recession Retail Trends. Practicing Planner, Washington, D.C.: American
Planning Association, Special Feature – Summer 2011. Available at:
http://www.rangwalaassoc.com/Firm/articles/articlespdfs/Post-Great%20Recession%20Retail%20Trends.pdf
40 Waters, W. (2007). All about Cities: Urban Retail Trends. Available at:
http://allaboutcities.ca/category/urban-retail-trends
41 Policy Link. (2007). Grocery Store Attraction Strategies: A Resource Guide for Community Activists and
Local Governments. San Francisco, CA: LISC Bay Area. Available at:
http://www.policylink.org/atf/cf/%7B97C6D565-BB43-406D-A6D5-
ECA3BBF35AF0%7D/groceryattraction_final.pdf
42 Ortiz, L. (2011). And the Winners of the Best Chain on Main Are… The Commercial District Advisor,
January 12, 2011. Available at: http://commercialdistrictadvisor.blogspot.com/2011/01/commercial-district-
advisor-cda-in.html
43 Easton, G. & Owen, J. (2009). Creating Walkable Neighborhood Business Districts: An Exploration of the
Demographic and Physical Characteristics Needed to Support Local Retail Services. Seattle, WA: MAKERS
Architecture and Urban Design. Available at: http://www.mrsc.org/artdocmisc/m58walkable.pdf
DI.D Page 64 of 97
www.activelivingresearch.org
43 | Business Performance in Walkable Shopping Areas
44 Leinberger, CB. (2007). Financing Walkable Urbane Projects. Urban Land, January 2007. Available at:
http://www.chrisleinberger.com/docs/By_CL/Financing_Walkability_0107.pdf
45 Gyourko, J. & Rybczynski, W. (2000). Financing New Urbanism. Zell/Lurie Center Working Papers 330,
Wharton School Samuel Zell and Robert Lurie Real Estate Center, University of Pennsylvania.
46 Marston, SA. & Modarres, A. (2002). Flexible Retailing: Gap Inc. and the Multiple Spaces of Shopping in
the United States. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 93(1), 83 -99.
47 Center for Economic Development, University of Wisconsin Extension and Property Counselors.
48 Behlman, E. (2011). E-Commerce Sales a Growing Chunk of the Retail Pie. Wichita Business Journal,
August 16, 2011. Available at: http://www.bizjournals.com/wichita/blog/2011/08/e-commerce-sales-a-growing-
chunk-of.html
49 Paruchuri, S. (2009). The Wal-Mart Effect: Wave of Destruction or Creative Destruction?” Economic
Geography, 85(2), 209-236.
50 Loukaitou-Sideris, A. (2002). Regeneration of Urban Commercial Strips: Ethnicity and Space in Three Los
Angeles Neighborhoods. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 19(4), 334-350.
51 Podobnik, B. (2002). The Social and Environmental Achievements of New Urbanism: Evidence from
Orenco Station. Portland, OR: Lewis and Clark College. Available at:
http://reconnectingamerica.org/assets/Uploads/bestpractice164.pdf 52 Tu, CC & Eppli, ME. (1999). Valuing New Urbanism: The Case of Kentlands. Real Estate Economics, 27(3),
425-451.
53 Arkin, RL. (n.d.). The Emergence of Modern Kentlands. http://www.kentlandsusa.com
DI.D Page 65 of 97
PRAIRIE LINE TRAIL | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN | CITY OF TACOMA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES + PUBLIC WORKS | PLACE STUDIO | ALTA PLANNING & DESIGN
PRAIRIE LINE TRAIL
CONCEPTUAL DESIGN
CITY OF TACOMA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
CITY OF TACOMA PUBLIC WORKS
ALTA PLANNING & DESIGN
PLACE STUDIO
DI.D Page 66 of 97
PRAIRIE LINE TRAIL | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN | CITY OF TACOMA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES + PUBLIC WORKS | PLACE STUDIO | ALTA PLANNING & DESIGN
LOCATION
LOCATION
DI.D Page 67 of 97
PRAIRIE LINE TRAIL | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN | CITY OF TACOMA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES + PUBLIC WORKS | PLACE STUDIO | ALTA PLANNING & DESIGN CHARACTER
DI.D Page 68 of 97
PRAIRIE LINE TRAIL | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN | CITY OF TACOMA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES + PUBLIC WORKS | PLACE STUDIO | ALTA PLANNING & DESIGN CHARACTER
DI.D Page 69 of 97
PRAIRIE LINE TRAIL | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN | CITY OF TACOMA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES + PUBLIC WORKS | PLACE STUDIO | ALTA PLANNING & DESIGN CHARACTER
DI.D Page 70 of 97
PRAIRIE LINE TRAIL | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN | CITY OF TACOMA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES + PUBLIC WORKS | PLACE STUDIO | ALTA PLANNING & DESIGN CHARACTER
DI.D Page 71 of 97
PRAIRIE LINE TRAIL | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN | CITY OF TACOMA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES + PUBLIC WORKS | PLACE STUDIO | ALTA PLANNING & DESIGN
TREES + STORMWATER
GREEN SPACES + PLAZA
VEHICLE ACCESS
RAIL LINE + TRAIL LOCATION
RIGHT OF WAY
APPROACH
CONTINUITY
+
IDENTITY
+
FUNCTIONALITY
+
FLEXIBILITY
+
MAGNET
OVERLOOK STREET WATER STREET URBAN FLEXIBLE UWT STATION ART PARK FOSS CONNECTOR
DI.D Page 72 of 97
PRAIRIE LINE TRAIL | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN | CITY OF TACOMA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES + PUBLIC WORKS | PLACE STUDIO | ALTA PLANNING & DESIGN PROJECT GOALS
DEVELOPMENT
Catalyze economic and neighborhood development by
creating a signature public space that connects down-
town districts, maintains access for adjacent properties,
attracts private economic development, and harmoni-
ously integrates with and enhances its surroundings.
MOVEMENT
Connect the Foss Waterway, downtown destinations
and regional bicycle and pedestrian networks via a
safe, comfortable and accessible multi‐use pathway.
GATHERING
Develop a series of attractive, safe, and meaningful
open spaces that provide opportunities for the com-
munity to interact, learn and play.
HISTORY
Respect the history of the Prairie Line, particularly the
curve and grade of the tracks, and the story of its land,
people and economy through preservation and inter-
pretation.
CULTURE
Integrate public art and design features that create
connections
to Tacoma’s place, culture, environment, and history.
NATURE
Integrate natural features and systems, including in-
novative stormwater strategies, and inspire interactions
with the natural environment.
DI.D Page 73 of 97
PRAIRIE LINE TRAIL | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN | CITY OF TACOMA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES + PUBLIC WORKS | PLACE STUDIO | ALTA PLANNING & DESIGN CONTEXT
1
1 2 2 3 4
2
34
DI.D Page 74 of 97
PRAIRIE LINE TRAIL | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN | CITY OF TACOMA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES + PUBLIC WORKS | PLACE STUDIO | ALTA PLANNING & DESIGN
existing conditions
26th - 25thOVERLOOK STREET
DI.D Page 75 of 97
PRAIRIE LINE TRAIL | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN | CITY OF TACOMA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES + PUBLIC WORKS | PLACE STUDIO | ALTA PLANNING & DESIGN 26th - 25thOVERLOOK STREET
10’ multi-use trail
Stormwater or landscape buffer planting
Parallel vehicle parking
Vehicle parking
Gravel vehicle turning zone
Plaza/ vehicle turnaround
Public Art
Picnic grove
Plaza connection to jefferson
Stormwater feature + landforms
Future mixed-use development
Pocket plaza
CONCEPT PLAN LEGEND
1
5
9
2
6
10
3
7
11
12
4
8
54
7
1
phase 1 concept plan
4
6
10
11
12
11
7 8
9
2 1
phase 2 concept plan potential future corridor
current project area
DI.D Page 76 of 97
PRAIRIE LINE TRAIL | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN | CITY OF TACOMA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES + PUBLIC WORKS | PLACE STUDIO | ALTA PLANNING & DESIGN 25th - 23rdWATER STREET
DI.D Page 77 of 97
PRAIRIE LINE TRAIL | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN | CITY OF TACOMA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES + PUBLIC WORKS | PLACE STUDIO | ALTA PLANNING & DESIGN 25th - 23rdWATER STREET
current project area
potential future corridor
10’ multi-use trail
Stormwater or landscape buffer planting
Parallel vehicle parking
Stormwater stream feature/ wetland
Bridge crossings
Potential pedestrian connection
Pocket plaza
Neighborhood park + water feature
Future mixed-use development
Sloped bank of native grasses
Exposed rail tracks
Food truck
Flexible rail zone
Native American cultural installation
CONCEPT PLAN LEGEND
1
5
1
2
6
10
10
3
7
11
4
8
9 4 14
12
13
14
12
phase 1 concept plan
10
phase 2 concept plan
1
12
11 2313
456
7
7
8 9
10
9
14
DI.D Page 78 of 97
PRAIRIE LINE TRAIL | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN | CITY OF TACOMA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES + PUBLIC WORKS | PLACE STUDIO | ALTA PLANNING & DESIGN 25th - 23rdWATER STREET
phase 2 perspective sketch
phase 1 perspective sketch
existing conditions
DI.D Page 79 of 97
PRAIRIE LINE TRAIL | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN | CITY OF TACOMA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES + PUBLIC WORKS | PLACE STUDIO | ALTA PLANNING & DESIGN
existing conditions
23rd - 21stURBAN FLEXIBLE
DI.D Page 80 of 97
PRAIRIE LINE TRAIL | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN | CITY OF TACOMA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES + PUBLIC WORKS | PLACE STUDIO | ALTA PLANNING & DESIGN 23rd - 21stURBAN FLEXIBLE
phase 1 concept plan
phase 2 concept plan
current project area
potential future corridor
10’ multi-use trail
Stormwater or landscape buffer planting
Parallel vehicle parking
Stormwater wetland
Bridge crossings
Potential pedestrian connection
Pocket plaza
Neighborhood bocce / seating
Future mixed-use development
Public art
Covered rail tracks (paving markings)
Food truck
Elevated docks
Picnic grove
CONCEPT PLAN LEGEND
1
5
9
2
6
10
3
7
11
4
4
8
12
13
1 92 44 8 13
14
1
12
11 2
3
13
4
5
6
7
7
8
9
10
14
DI.D Page 81 of 97
PRAIRIE LINE TRAIL | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN | CITY OF TACOMA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES + PUBLIC WORKS | PLACE STUDIO | ALTA PLANNING & DESIGN 23rd - 21stURBAN FLEXIBLE
phase 2 perspective sketch
phase 1 perspective sketch
existing conditions
DI.D Page 82 of 97
PRAIRIE LINE TRAIL | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN | CITY OF TACOMA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES + PUBLIC WORKS | PLACE STUDIO | ALTA PLANNING & DESIGN 17th - 15thART PARK
existing conditions
DI.D Page 83 of 97
PRAIRIE LINE TRAIL | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN | CITY OF TACOMA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES + PUBLIC WORKS | PLACE STUDIO | ALTA PLANNING & DESIGN 17th - 15thART PARK
phase 1 concept plan current project area
potential future corridor
10’ multi-use trail
Stormwater or landscape buffer planting
Parallel vehicle parking
Water feature between rail tracks
Bridge/ promenade path
Pedestrian connection to museum
Pocket plaza
Sculptural landform
Future development
Public Art
Exposed rail tracks
“Light Forest”
Elevated docks
Interactive childrens play/ rock garden
Planted slope
Cafe seating
CONCEPT PLAN LEGEND
1
5
9
2
6
10
10 10
3
7
11
4
8
12
12
13
14
15
15
16
1614
phase 2 concept plan
15
4
16
1
12
11
2 3
13
5
6
7
8
8
9
10 14
DI.D Page 84 of 97
PRAIRIE LINE TRAIL | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN | CITY OF TACOMA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES + PUBLIC WORKS | PLACE STUDIO | ALTA PLANNING & DESIGN 17th - 15thART PARK
phase 2 perspective sketch
phase 1 perspective sketch
existing conditions
DI.D Page 85 of 97
PRAIRIE LINE TRAIL | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN | CITY OF TACOMA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES + PUBLIC WORKS | PLACE STUDIO | ALTA PLANNING & DESIGN
FOSS CONNECTOR15th - Foss
existing conditions
DI.D Page 86 of 97
PRAIRIE LINE TRAIL | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN | CITY OF TACOMA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES + PUBLIC WORKS | PLACE STUDIO | ALTA PLANNING & DESIGN
FOSS CONNECTOR15th - Foss
existing section
proposed section
12’-16’ multi-use trail with seating
Trellis planter/ seating element
“Bridge of Light” art element
Existing pedestrian stair connection
Alternative ADA connection
Sculptural landforms
Pocket plaza/ gateway element
Future phase: waterfront connection study
Bus stop
1
5
2
6
3
7
8
9
4
1 1 2
phase 1 concept plan
1
2
3
4
7
9
phase 2 concept
19
8
2
3
4
6
7
5
CONCEPT PLAN LEGEND
DI.D Page 87 of 97
PRAIRIE LINE TRAIL | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN | CITY OF TACOMA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES + PUBLIC WORKS | PLACE STUDIO | ALTA PLANNING & DESIGN
FOSS CONNECTOR15th - Foss
phase 2 perspective sketch
existing conditions
DI.D Page 88 of 97
PRAIRIE LINE TRAIL | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN | CITY OF TACOMA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES + PUBLIC WORKS | PLACE STUDIO | ALTA PLANNING & DESIGN INTERSECTIONS
s 23rd s 25rd st
s 15th
25TH STREET INTERSECTION
Hood Street Corridor
City-Owned Right-O
f
-
W
a
y
T
y
p
.
25
t
h
S
t
Intersection Plazas, Typ.
Prairie Line Trail
Prairie Line Trail
City-Owned Right-Of-Way Typ.
Intersection Plazas, Typ.
Hood Street Corridor
Prairie Line Trail
Prairie Line Trail
23
r
d
S
t
23RD STREET INTERSECTION
aPraaPra
15
T
H
S
T
S
T
R
E
E
T
I
N
T
E
R
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
City-
O
w
n
e
d
R
i
g
h
t
-
o
f
-
W
a
y
T
y
p
.
Hood Street
Prairie
L
i
n
e
T
r
a
i
l
Pr
a
i
r
i
e
L
i
n
e
T
r
a
i
l
15
t
h
15
t
h
14
t
h
A St
A
C
t
15
T
H
S
T
S
T
R
E
E
T
I
N
T
E
R
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
City-
O
w
n
e
d
R
i
g
h
t
-
o
f
-
W
a
y
T
y
p
.
Hood Street
Prairie
L
i
n
e
T
r
a
i
l
Pr
a
i
r
i
e
L
i
n
e
T
r
a
i
l
15
t
h
15
t
h
14t
h
A St
A
C
t
15TH ST STREET INTERSECTIONCity
-
O
w
n
e
d
R
i
g
h
t
-
o
f
-
W
a
y
T
y
p
.
Ho
o
d
S
t
r
e
e
t
Pra
i
r
i
e
L
i
n
e
T
r
a
i
l
Prairie Line Trail
15th
15th
14th
A
S
t
A Ct
7
6
10’ multi-use trail
Tactile warning strips at all pedes-
trian and trail intersections
Intersection plazas
Paving through intersections to
delineate crossings for trail users
and motorists
Vehicle crossings at grade with trail
paving treatment through
Intersections where rails have
been removed
Preserve rails through intersections
CONCEPT PLAN LEGEND
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
1
1
3 3
5
5
3
3
3
1
1
1
2
2
4
4
4
City-Owned Right-of-Way, Typ.
21
s
t
S
t
21ST STREET INTERSECTION
Hood Street Corridor
Prairie Line Trail
Prairie Line Trail
University of Washington
Tacoma Campus
*Note: Concept developed by Fehr + Peers
as part of a separate study
City-Owned Right-of-Way, Typ.
Intersection Plazas, Typ.
s 21st
6
5
1
2
3
2 1
Tacoma Art Museum
17TH ST STREET INTERSECTION
Pacific Ave
Hoo
d
S
t
nnnnnnngtgtgtginininniinttottononUniversity of WashUiitfWhit
sspuuupupuupuppppTacoma Camp
Tollefson PlazaPrairie Line Trail
Prair
i
e
L
i
n
e
T
r
a
i
l
Pacific Right-of-Way Approx.
PaiPraairie Line Trailil
City-
O
w
n
e
d
R
i
g
h
t
-
o
f
-
W
a
y
T
y
p
.
17
t
h
S
t
s 17st
3
2
24
4
1
1
6
DI.D Page 89 of 97
PRAIRIE LINE TRAIL | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN | CITY OF TACOMA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES + PUBLIC WORKS | PLACE STUDIO | ALTA PLANNING & DESIGN ART PLAN
DI.D Page 90 of 97
PRAIRIE LINE TRAIL | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN | CITY OF TACOMA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES + PUBLIC WORKS | PLACE STUDIO | ALTA PLANNING & DESIGN
DI.D Page 91 of 97
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
PCDC Status Matrix
Date:
June 18, 2014
Department:
Community Development
and Public Works
Attachments:
PCDC Matrix
Budget Impact:
$0
Administrative Recommendation:
Discussion only.
Background Summary:
See attached matrix.
Reviewed by Council Committees:
Councilmember:Holman Staff:Tate
Meeting Date:June 23, 2014 Item Number:DI.F
AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINEDDI.F Page 92 of 97
PC
D
C
W
o
r
k
P
l
a
n
M
a
t
r
i
x
–
J
u
n
e
2
3
,
2
0
1
4
Pl
e
a
s
e
N
o
t
e
:
N
e
w
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
u
n
d
e
r
l
i
n
e
d
,
d
e
l
e
t
i
o
n
s
r
e
mo
v
e
d
.
Ju
n
e
2
3
,
2
0
1
4
LA
N
D
U
S
E
C
O
D
E
S
/
P
O
L
I
C
I
E
S
To
p
i
c
/
I
s
s
u
e
Ne
x
t
o
n
P
C
D
St
a
f
f
/
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
Le
a
d
Co
m
m
e
n
t
s
01
Co
d
e
A
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
s
·
M
a
r
i
j
u
a
n
a
/
C
a
n
n
a
b
i
s
Au
g
u
s
t
J
o
n
e
s
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
t
a
f
f
w
e
n
t
b
e
f
o
r
e
t
h
e
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
Commission on 1-22-14
an
d
3
-
4
-
1
4
.
T
h
e
c
o
d
e
a
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
p
r
o
c
e
s
s
i
s
o
n
-
g
o
i
n
g
. Once Planning
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
h
a
s
m
a
d
e
t
h
e
i
r
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
t
h
a
t
w
i
l
l
be presented to PCDC
an
d
s
t
a
f
f
a
n
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
e
s
t
h
a
t
t
a
k
i
n
g
p
l
a
c
e
J
u
l
y
2
0
1
4
,
most likely at the 2nd meeting.
·
H
e
a
l
t
h
c
a
r
e
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
O
v
e
r
l
a
y
20
1
4
Ch
a
m
b
e
r
l
a
i
n
S
t
a
f
f
t
o
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
a
w
o
r
k
p
l
a
n
a
s
p
a
r
t
o
f
t
h
e
o
v
e
r
a
l
l
c
o
m
p
r
e
h
e
n
s
i
v
e
p
l
a
n
u
p
d
a
t
e
s
.
·
S
h
o
r
t
P
l
a
t
T
h
r
e
s
h
o
l
d
Ju
l
y
2
0
1
4
Ta
t
e
St
a
f
f
w
i
l
l
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
a
p
l
a
t
a
n
d
s
h
o
r
t
p
l
a
t
t
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
s
ession during the June 23rd
PC
D
C
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
.
S
t
a
f
f
w
i
l
l
t
h
e
n
r
e
t
u
r
n
t
o
P
C
D
C
o
n
J
u
ly 28th with an overview of
po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
d
r
a
f
t
c
o
d
e
a
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
s
.
·
F
A
R
(
F
l
o
o
r
A
r
e
a
R
a
t
i
o
)
w
i
t
h
DU
C
z
o
n
e
Ju
l
y
2
0
1
4
C
h
a
m
b
e
r
l
a
i
n
St
a
f
f
w
i
l
l
b
e
m
o
v
i
n
g
f
o
r
w
a
r
d
w
i
t
h
a
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
c
o
d
e
a
mendment related to floor
ar
e
a
r
a
t
i
o
n
w
i
t
h
i
n
t
h
e
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
U
r
b
a
n
C
e
n
t
e
r
(
D
U
C
)
zone to the Planning
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
i
n
J
u
n
e
.
0
2
H
i
s
t
o
r
i
c
P
r
e
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
i
e
s
20
1
4
Ch
a
m
b
e
r
l
a
i
n
St
a
f
f
w
i
l
l
f
o
r
m
u
l
a
t
e
a
s
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
c
t
i
o
n
p
l
a
n
a
n
d
b
r
i
ng back to Committee as part of
th
e
o
v
e
r
a
l
l
c
o
m
p
r
e
h
e
n
s
i
v
e
p
l
a
n
u
p
d
a
t
e
.
0
3
St
r
a
t
e
g
y
A
r
e
a
s
f
o
r
Po
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
/
B
u
s
i
n
e
s
s
/
E
m
p
l
o
y
m
e
n
t
20
1
4
Ch
a
m
b
e
r
l
a
i
n
Co
d
e
c
o
n
c
e
p
t
s
a
n
d
i
d
e
a
s
t
o
b
e
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
e
d
b
a
s
e
d
o
n
C
o
uncil retreat direction
an
d
l
i
n
k
e
d
t
o
t
h
e
o
v
e
r
a
l
l
c
o
m
p
r
e
h
e
n
s
i
v
e
p
l
a
n
u
p
d
a
t
e
.
0
4
P
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
K
i
o
s
k
s
T
B
D
C
h
a
m
b
e
r
l
a
i
n
Fu
n
d
i
n
g
o
p
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
i
d
e
a
s
t
o
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
a
n
d
i
n
s
t
a
l
l
the remaining 6 pedestrian
ki
o
s
k
s
d
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
.
S
t
a
f
f
i
s
m
o
v
i
n
g
f
o
r
w
a
r
d
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
project ideas presented at
th
e
3
-
7
-
1
4
P
C
D
C
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
a
n
d
w
i
l
l
l
o
o
k
f
o
r
o
t
h
e
r
f
u
n
ding opportunities with the
Ci
t
y
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
f
o
r
t
h
e
u
p
c
o
m
i
n
g
2
0
1
5
-
2
0
1
6
t
w
o
y
e
a
r
b
u
dget cycle.
PA
R
K
S
,
A
R
T
S
&
R
E
C
R
E
A
T
I
O
N
05
Th
e
a
t
e
r
L
e
a
s
e
Ju
l
y
F
a
b
e
r
D
i
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
A
u
b
u
r
n
A
v
e
n
u
e
T
h
e
a
t
e
r
.
DI
.
F
Pa
g
e
9
3
o
f
9
7
Ju
n
e
2
3
,
2
0
1
4
Page 2
To
p
i
c
/
I
s
s
u
e
Ne
x
t
o
n
P
C
D
St
a
f
f
/
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
Le
a
d
Co
m
m
e
n
t
s
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
S
D
I
V
I
S
I
O
N
0
6
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
TB
D
Hu
r
s
h
PC
D
C
r
e
q
u
e
s
t
e
d
a
n
u
p
d
a
t
e
a
t
a
f
u
t
u
r
e
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
;
b
r
i
e
f
ing to be scheduled.
0
7
H
u
m
a
n
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
C
e
n
t
e
r
O
n
g
o
i
n
g
H
u
r
s
h
U
p
d
a
t
e
s
p
r
o
vi
d
e
d
a
s
n
e
e
d
e
d
o
r
r
e
q
u
e
s
t
e
d
.
0
8
Un
i
f
y
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
i
e
s
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
ce
n
t
r
a
l
i
z
e
d
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
ou
t
r
e
a
c
h
TB
D
H
u
r
s
h
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
t
o
g
i
v
e
a
n
n
u
a
l
u
p
d
a
t
e
s
.
BO
A
R
D
S
,
C
O
M
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
S
&
H
E
A
R
I
N
G
E
X
A
M
I
N
E
R
0
9
A
r
t
s
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
De
c
e
m
b
e
r
20
1
4
Fa
b
e
r
On
1
2
/
0
9
/
1
3
t
h
e
A
r
t
s
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
a
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
a
tion updating PCDC of
th
e
i
r
2
0
1
3
p
l
a
n
s
a
n
d
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
a
n
d
w
i
l
l
r
e
t
u
r
n
f
o
r
an update in 2014.
1
0
H
u
m
a
n
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
C
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
De
c
e
m
b
e
r
20
1
4
Hu
r
s
h
Th
e
H
u
m
a
n
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
C
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
a
2
0
1
3
u
p
d
a
t
e
before PCDC on
01
-
2
7
-
1
4
.
T
h
e
H
u
m
a
n
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
C
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
i
s
s
c
h
e
d
u
l
e
d
to present a 2014
up
d
a
t
e
i
n
1
2
-
2
0
1
4
.
1
1
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
E
x
a
m
i
n
e
r
F
a
l
l
2
0
1
4
D
i
x
o
n
Th
e
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
E
x
a
m
i
n
e
r
a
t
t
e
n
d
e
d
P
C
D
C
t
o
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
a
n
a
n
nual briefing on
11
/
1
2
/
1
3
.
T
h
e
n
e
x
t
b
r
i
e
f
i
n
g
i
s
s
c
h
e
d
u
l
e
d
f
o
r
f
a
l
l
o
f 2014.
1
2
P
a
r
k
s
&
R
e
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
B
o
a
r
d
J
u
l
y
2
0
1
4
F
a
b
e
r
An
n
u
a
l
u
p
d
a
t
e
o
c
c
u
r
r
e
d
7
-
2
2
-
1
3
w
i
t
h
P
C
D
C
;
t
h
e
n
e
x
t
update will take place
7/
2
0
1
4
.
1
3
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
Se
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
20
1
4
Ch
a
m
b
e
r
l
a
i
n
Th
e
C
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
h
e
l
d
a
J
o
i
n
t
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g Commission on 3/18/14.
Th
e
n
e
x
t
j
o
i
n
t
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
w
i
l
l
b
e
i
n
S
e
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
,
2
0
1
4
.
1
4
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
,
T
r
a
n
s
i
t
,
a
n
d
T
r
a
i
l
s
S
p
r
i
n
g
2
0
1
4
T
h
o
r
d
a
r
s
o
n
A
n
n
u
a
l
u
p
d
a
t
e
o
c
c
u
r
r
e
d
o
n
5
-
2
8
-
1
3
w
i
t
h
PC
D
C
.
1
5
U
r
b
a
n
T
r
e
e
B
o
a
r
d
F
a
l
l
2
0
1
4
F
a
b
e
r
A
n
n
u
a
l
u
p
d
a
t
e
oc
c
u
r
r
e
d
1
0
-
2
8
-
1
3
w
i
t
h
P
C
D
C
.
CO
M
P
R
E
H
E
N
S
I
V
E
P
L
A
N
/
C
A
P
I
T
A
L
F
A
C
I
L
I
T
I
E
S
P
L
A
N
N
I
N
G
(
L
o
n
g
R
a
n
g
e
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
)
1
6
Ma
j
o
r
C
o
m
p
r
e
h
e
n
s
i
v
e
P
l
a
n
Up
d
a
t
e
TB
D
C
h
a
m
b
e
r
l
a
i
n
M
a
j
o
r
u
p
d
a
t
e
o
f
t
h
e
c
o
m
p
r
e
h
e
n
s
i
v
e
p
la
n
f
o
r
t
h
e
n
e
x
t
2
0
y
e
a
r
s
+
;
DI
.
F
Pa
g
e
9
4
o
f
9
7
Ju
n
e
2
3
,
2
0
1
4
Page 3
To
p
i
c
/
I
s
s
u
e
Ne
x
t
o
n
P
C
D
St
a
f
f
/
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
Le
a
d
Co
m
m
e
n
t
s
·
V
i
s
i
o
n
i
n
g
f
o
r
t
h
e
m
a
j
o
r
u
p
d
a
t
e
On
-
g
o
i
n
g
C
h
a
m
b
e
r
l
a
i
n
Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
v
i
s
i
o
n
i
n
g
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
s
w
e
r
e
h
e
l
d
t
h
e
w
e
e
k
o
f
March 11-13 and March
18
-
2
0
w
i
t
h
g
r
o
c
e
r
y
s
t
o
r
e
i
n
t
e
r
c
e
p
t
e
v
e
n
t
s
h
e
l
d
A
p
r
i
l 7-9. Report back to the
co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
o
f
t
h
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
t
h
e
m
e
s
w
a
s
h
e
l
d
M
a
y
2
1
st. Next step a draft report to
be
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
e
d
a
t
t
h
e
J
u
n
e
3
0
th
C
O
W
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
.
·
W
a
t
e
r
,
S
e
w
e
r
,
S
t
o
r
m
Sc
o
p
e
:
U
p
d
a
t
e
t
o
t
h
e
W
a
t
e
r
,
Se
w
e
r
,
a
n
d
S
t
o
r
m
Co
m
p
r
e
h
e
n
s
i
v
e
P
l
a
n
s
i
n
c
o
n
c
e
r
t
wi
t
h
t
h
e
C
o
m
p
r
e
h
e
n
s
i
v
e
P
l
a
n
Up
d
a
t
e
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
.
On
-
g
o
i
n
g
P
u
b
l
i
c
W
o
r
k
s
Up
d
a
t
e
t
o
t
h
e
t
h
r
e
e
u
t
i
l
i
t
y
c
o
m
p
r
e
h
e
n
s
i
v
e
p
l
a
n
s
a
s
the City updates its
co
m
p
r
e
h
e
n
s
i
v
e
p
l
a
n
.
J
o
i
n
t
P
C
D
C
a
n
d
P
W
C
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
h
e
l
d on June 2nd to review
th
e
d
r
a
f
t
p
o
l
i
c
i
e
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
t
h
r
e
e
u
t
i
l
i
t
y
c
o
m
p
r
e
h
e
n
s
ive plans.
·
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
Sc
o
p
e
:
L
o
n
g
-
t
e
r
m
p
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
f
o
r
th
e
i
n
t
e
r
r
e
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
h
i
p
b
e
t
w
e
e
n
la
n
d
u
s
e
a
n
d
t
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
in
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
.
On
-
g
o
i
n
g
P
a
r
a
Co
m
p
r
e
h
e
n
s
i
v
e
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
i
n
c
o
n
c
e
r
t
with the comprehensive
pl
a
n
u
p
d
a
t
e
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
.
1
7
Tr
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
I
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
(
T
I
P
)
Sc
o
p
e
:
6
-
y
e
a
r
T
I
P
t
h
a
t
i
s
up
d
a
t
e
d
a
n
n
u
a
l
l
y
i
d
e
n
t
i
f
y
i
n
g
tr
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
r
e
l
a
t
e
d
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
TB
D
Pa
r
a
Re
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
N
o
.
5
0
7
5
,
t
h
e
2
0
1
5
-
2
0
2
0
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
I
mprovement Program
(T
I
P
)
w
a
s
a
p
p
r
o
v
e
d
o
n
6
-
1
6
-
1
4
b
y
C
i
t
y
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
.
1
8
Ca
p
i
t
a
l
F
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
P
l
a
n
Sc
o
p
e
:
6
-
y
e
a
r
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
f
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
pl
a
n
f
o
r
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
’
s
p
u
b
l
i
c
fa
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
/
u
t
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
On
-
g
o
i
n
g
F
i
n
a
n
c
e
Up
d
a
t
e
a
n
n
u
a
l
l
y
a
s
n
e
e
d
e
d
a
s
p
a
r
t
o
f
t
h
e
c
o
m
p
r
e
h
e
n
s
ive plan update process.
Ci
t
y
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
a
d
o
p
t
e
d
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
n
o
.
6
4
8
9
,
t
h
e
2
0
1
3
C
omprehensive Plan
Am
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
s
a
t
t
h
e
1
2
-
2
-
1
3
C
i
t
y
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
.
1
9
F
e
e
d
i
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
s
T
B
D
Ta
t
e
/
Ch
a
m
b
e
r
l
a
i
n
Co
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
d
i
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
o
n
i
m
p
a
c
t
f
e
e
s
a
n
d
c
a
l
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s.
UP
D
A
T
E
S
A
N
D
B
R
I
E
F
I
N
G
S
20
Ec
o
n
o
m
i
c
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
U
p
d
a
t
e
s
TB
D
M
a
y
o
r
An
E
c
o
n
o
m
i
c
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
u
p
d
a
t
e
w
a
s
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
t
o
t
h
e
Committee on 4-14-14,
fu
t
u
r
e
b
r
i
e
f
i
n
g
s
w
i
l
l
b
e
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
a
s
n
e
e
d
e
d
.
DI
.
F
Pa
g
e
9
5
o
f
9
7
Ju
n
e
2
3
,
2
0
1
4
Page 4
To
p
i
c
/
I
s
s
u
e
Ne
x
t
o
n
P
C
D
St
a
f
f
/
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
Le
a
d
Co
m
m
e
n
t
s
21
Mu
c
k
l
e
s
h
o
o
t
T
r
i
b
e
TB
D
T
a
t
e
St
a
f
f
t
o
s
t
a
y
i
n
t
o
u
c
h
w
i
t
h
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
t
.
a
n
d
k
e
e
p
coordination &
co
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
p
e
n
w
i
t
h
T
r
i
b
e
.
T
h
e
C
i
t
y
m
e
t
w
i
t
h
t
he Muckleshoot Tribe on
11
-
1
9
-
1
3
.
22
T
h
e
A
D
A
Sp
r
i
n
g
20
1
5
Ch
a
m
b
e
r
l
a
i
n
Th
e
A
u
b
u
r
n
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
i
o
n
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
a
n
u
p
d
a
t
e
at the 04-14-14 meeting
an
d
w
i
l
l
r
e
t
u
r
n
i
n
t
h
e
s
p
r
i
n
g
o
f
2
0
1
5
f
o
r
t
h
e
i
r
a
n
n
ual update.
23
A
m
t
r
a
k
T
B
D
M
a
y
o
r
B
a
c
k
u
s
Ci
t
y
t
r
a
c
k
i
n
g
p
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
s
t
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
o
p
s
e
x
p
a
n
s
i
o
n
s
t
u
dy by Amtrak. Public Works
st
a
f
f
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
a
n
u
p
d
a
t
e
a
t
t
h
e
C
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
’
s
3
-
2
5
-
1
3
meeting, the WSDOT
st
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
o
p
e
x
p
a
n
s
i
o
n
f
e
a
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
s
t
u
d
y
i
s
e
x
p
e
c
t
e
d to be complete in June,
20
1
3
.
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
p
a
s
s
e
d
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
N
o
.
4
9
4
9
s
u
p
p
o
r
t
i
n
g an Amtrak stop in
Au
b
u
r
n
.
24
L
e
s
G
o
v
e
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
C
a
m
p
u
s
T
B
D
W
a
g
n
e
r
L
G
C
C
t
o
p
r
o
vi
d
e
a
b
r
i
e
f
i
n
g
a
s
n
e
e
d
e
d
.
2
5
A
u
b
u
r
n
E
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
P
a
r
k
S
p
r
i
n
g
2
0
1
5
A
n
d
e
r
s
e
n
St
r
e
a
m
a
n
d
w
e
t
l
a
n
d
r
e
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
a
r
e
o
n
g
o
i
ng.
26
Fl
o
o
d
p
l
a
i
n
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s
–
N
F
I
P
a
n
d
CR
S
TB
D
A
n
d
e
r
s
e
n
CR
S
:
S
t
a
f
f
i
s
e
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
n
g
t
h
e
2
0
1
3
c
h
a
n
g
e
s
t
o
t
h
e
C
R
S
p
r
ogram requirements
an
d
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
i
n
g
p
o
l
i
c
y
o
p
t
i
o
n
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
C
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
t
o
consider for City’s future
ap
p
r
o
a
c
h
t
o
C
R
S
p
a
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
i
o
n
.
F
E
M
A
o
n
-
s
i
t
e
a
u
d
i
t
of the City’s CRS Program
is
s
c
h
e
d
u
l
e
d
f
o
r
N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r
6
,
2
0
1
4
.
NF
I
P
-
E
S
A
:
C
i
t
y
h
a
s
r
e
c
e
i
v
e
d
n
o
t
i
c
e
t
h
a
t
F
E
M
A
’
s
m
o
d
e
l
f
l
o
o
d
p
lain ordinance
ha
s
b
e
e
n
r
e
v
i
s
e
d
a
n
d
n
e
w
C
i
t
y
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
m
u
s
t
b
e
a
dopted and submitted to
FE
M
A
.
S
t
a
f
f
i
s
p
r
e
p
a
r
i
n
g
a
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
s
t
o
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
’
s
r
egulations to meet this
re
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
.
DI
.
F
Pa
g
e
9
6
o
f
9
7
Ju
n
e
2
3
,
2
0
1
4
Page 5
To
p
i
c
/
I
s
s
u
e
Ne
x
t
o
n
P
C
D
St
a
f
f
/
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
Le
a
d
Co
m
m
e
n
t
s
27
En
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
R
e
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
Sp
r
i
n
g
20
1
5
An
d
e
r
s
e
n
On
4
-
1
4
-
2
0
1
4
s
t
a
f
f
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
a
n
u
p
d
a
t
e
o
f
C
i
t
y
e
n
v
i
r
onmental restoration
pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
p
l
a
n
n
e
d
a
n
d
i
n
p
r
o
g
r
e
s
s
f
o
r
2
0
1
4
,
a
n
d
w
i
l
l
return in the Spring of 2015
fo
r
a
n
u
p
d
a
t
e
.
CP
1
0
1
6
:
F
e
n
s
t
e
r
P
h
a
s
e
2
L
e
v
e
e
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
-
R
e
v
i
s
e
d
p
r
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y design has
be
e
n
a
p
p
r
o
v
e
d
b
y
t
h
e
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
S
t
a
t
e
S
a
l
m
o
n
R
e
c
o
v
e
ry Funding Board
(S
R
F
B
)
.
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
p
r
o
c
e
e
d
i
n
g
t
o
f
i
n
a
l
d
e
s
i
g
n
a
n
d
c
o
n
s
truction.
CP
0
7
4
6
:
M
i
l
l
C
r
e
e
k
W
e
t
l
a
n
d
5
K
R
e
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
-
S
t
a
f
f
i
s
w
o
r
k
i
ng with Army Corps
to
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
9
5
%
-
d
e
s
i
g
n
a
n
d
p
r
e
p
a
r
e
d
r
a
f
t
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
P
a
rtnership Agreement
(P
P
A
)
f
o
r
C
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
r
e
v
i
e
w
.
O
n
A
p
r
i
l
7
,
2
0
1
4
,
t
h
e
City was notified that it has
be
e
n
s
e
l
e
c
t
e
d
t
o
r
e
c
e
i
v
e
a
n
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
$
5
3
2
,
0
0
0
i
n
state floodplain management
gr
a
n
t
f
u
n
d
s
f
o
r
t
h
i
s
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
.
CP
1
3
1
5
:
C
i
t
y
W
e
t
l
a
n
d
M
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
–
D
e
s
i
g
n
a
n
d
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
of compensatory
we
t
l
a
n
d
m
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
i
n
t
h
e
A
u
b
u
r
n
E
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
P
a
r
k
is ongoing.
28
Do
w
n
t
o
w
n
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
Ma
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
P
l
a
n
Se
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
Ch
a
m
b
e
r
l
a
i
n
/
Ya
o
Re
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
N
o
.
5
0
3
1
,
t
h
e
C
o
m
p
r
e
h
e
n
s
i
v
e
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
P
a
r
king Management Plan
wa
s
a
d
o
p
t
e
d
b
y
C
i
t
y
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
o
n
2
-
3
-
1
4
.
T
h
e
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
permit program will be
bl
e
n
d
e
d
i
n
t
o
t
h
e
C
D
P
M
P
.
S
t
a
f
f
w
i
l
l
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
m
o
n
t
h
l
y
briefings on the
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
n
d
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t strategies.
29
C
o
m
m
u
n
a
l
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
c
e
s
T
B
D
Ch
a
m
b
e
r
l
a
i
n
/
Ta
t
e
Or
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
N
o
.
6
4
7
7
w
a
s
a
d
o
p
t
e
d
b
y
C
i
t
y
c
o
u
n
c
i
l
o
n
9
-3-13. A website posting
th
e
r
e
n
t
a
l
h
o
u
s
i
n
g
c
o
d
e
s
w
e
n
t
l
i
v
e
o
n
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
w
e
b
s
ite 9-10-13 and notification
ma
i
l
i
n
g
s
w
e
r
e
s
e
n
t
t
o
L
e
a
H
i
l
l
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
s
.
C
i
t
y
d
o
c
uments continue to be
up
d
a
t
e
d
a
s
n
e
e
d
e
d
.
S
t
a
f
f
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
a
n
u
p
d
a
t
e
a
t
t
h
e
6
/
0
9
/
1
4
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
.
The City
Co
u
n
c
i
l
p
a
s
s
e
d
a
o
n
e
-
y
e
a
r
m
o
r
a
t
o
r
i
u
m
o
n
6
-
1
6
-
1
4
t
o
look at the regulations
th
a
t
w
e
r
e
a
d
o
p
t
e
d
b
a
c
k
i
n
S
e
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
.
N
o
w
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
new regulations have been
im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
s
f
o
r
a
b
o
u
t
n
i
n
e
m
o
n
t
h
s
,
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
i
s
e
v
a
l
u
ating whether additional
co
d
e
m
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
r
e
n
e
e
d
e
d
.
DI
.
F
Pa
g
e
9
7
o
f
9
7