Title:داستان سه جفت شهر: رشد اقتصادی منطقه ای و سرمایه گذاری ترانزیت ریلی

۱۰-۱۹-۲۰۱۲ این وب‌کست فقط برای مشاهده در دسترس است، برای اعتبارات AICP CM قابل استفاده نیست. ارائه دهندگان: بیل لی آیا سرمایه گذاری های حمل و نقل، به ویژه سرمایه گذاری های حمل و نقل ریلی، رشد بلندمدت اقتصادی شهر و منطقه را تسهیل می کند؟ اگر بله، نقش ترانزیت ریلی در مقابل سایر عوامل در رشد اقتصادی منطقه چه اهمیتی دارد؟ در این وبینار، بیل لی، معاون اجرایی اقتصاد AECOM، یک بررسی مبتنی بر داده‌های گسترده از سه جفت شهر ارائه می‌کند که هر کدام دو شهری را نشان می‌دهند که زمانی مشخصات مشابهی داشتند، اما یکی از آن‌ها در ترانزیت ریلی منطقه‌ای سرمایه‌گذاری کرده بود و دیگری کار را نکرد. داده‌هایی که در این تحلیل مورد استفاده قرار گرفت شامل داده‌های ساخت دفتر تاریخی برای مناطق تجاری مرکزی قابل مقایسه بود. سه جفت شهری که مورد بحث قرار خواهند گرفت عبارتند از: سانفرانسیسکو، کالیفرنیا و لس آنجلس، کالیفرنیا (۱۹۷۰-۱۹۹۰)، پورتلند، اورگان و ممفیس، تنسی (۱۹۸۰ – ۲۰۰۰)، و سن دیگو، کالیفرنیا و سنت پترزبورگ، فلوریدا. (۱۹۸۰ – ۲۰۰۰).

قسمتي از متن فيلم: Hello my name is Benjamin Lee and I just want to welcome everyone it is now 1 p.m. so we’ll begin our presentation shortly today on October 19th we’ll have our presentation on a tale of three City pairs regionally economic growth and rain rail transit investment given by Billy for help during today’s webcast

Please feel free to type your questions in the chat box found in the webinar tool bar to the right of your screen or call one eight hundred to 63 63 174 content questions please feel free to type those in the questions box and we’ll be able to answer those at the end

Of the presentation here is a list of the sponsoring chapters divisions and universities I would like to thank all of the participating chapters divisions and universities for making these webcasts possible these are the list of the upcoming events to register for these upcoming webcasts please visit utah ap.org / webcast and register for

Your webcast of choice we are now offering distance education webcast to help you get your ethics or law credits before the end of the year these webcasts are available to view add you type it out org webcast archive to log your distance distance education cm credits go to planning that org slash cm

So like activities by provider select APA Ohio Chapter then select distance education and select your webcast of choice follow us on twitter like us on facebook and we also upload the recorded videos on youtube to log your same credits for attending today’s webcast please go to planning

The org slash cm select today’s date and then select today’s webcast this webcast is available for 1.5 same credit we’re recording today’s webcast and it will be available along with a sick slide per page PDF of the presentation at Utah AP org webcast archive at this time I would

Like to introduce Andy who will introduce our speaker bill for today good afternoon everybody thanks for joining us my name is Andy struck off with the Economic Development Division of the American Planning Association and we helped organize these webinars every year and we really like failure participation so thank you for joining

Us today our speaker today his name is Billy he’s been in land planning economics and economic development zone since 1970 and formally the managing principal of economics research associates San Francisco office prior to being bought by aecom where he was a employed until recently is now the principle of Billy land econ consultants

He is led a variety of assignments evaluating the economic impacts and benefits of rail projects and he has done so internationally he has worked on such assignments in California Australia Taiwan South Korea and New Zealand is here today to share with us some of this knowledge and experience so hand it over

To him and before I do so you see right now a link to the planning divisions websites and our economic development division blog encourage you to check those out as you can or follow us on Twitter and so bill I’ll hand it over to you thank you very much Andy good

Afternoon or good morning to those of you on the west coast this is me Bill Lee a long time consulting in the confluence area between land planning economics and transportation particularly urban rail transportation now I’m going to take you through an assignment i did in 2010 as part of a

Ecom where I was executive VP and in doing that assignment in developing the urban regeneration benefits we had to compare and contrast three sets of City pairs and that’s part of the show and you also get a sense of the Oakland project to sort of round out how these

Pairs were used in that context the assignment was for the city of Auckland which is the capital of New Zealand often current population the metro area is probably about 1.4 million it’s a country of only 4.2 noon the city of Auckland is on the water in many ways is

Like the city i work in San Francisco it has a ferry bill de down here it has a main central spine called Queen Street I believe and that’s like our market street however unlike our market street which has trolleys on the surface light rail one level below and heavy rail or

Part two levels below Oakland doesn’t have much transit on this central spine other than buses our assignment was preparing a business case for what till today is the most expensive infrastructure project in the history of New Zealand our client was a two-fold client it was auckland transport which

Is equivalent to our city department of transportation and TV rail which is the national rail operating agencies we had a big team for this major assignment there were engineering and other aspects to it which I’m not going to get into but the firm I work for at the time

Aecom with lead consultant out of australia and new zealand parsons brinckerhoff was a team member and a new zealand urban design firm a very good urban design firm called becca was also on the team they got into the business case and the traditional way of looking at transportation benefits that the UK

Countries do weren’t high enough they weren’t getting the project over the threshold needed to get central government funding so they called me up and did a video interview with me and wanted me to bring a North American perspective which is more of a land use perspective into the analysis to give

You a sense of downtown Auckland this is basically this is downtown Oakland the Auckland CBD the red is the freeway network in some ways it forms a barrier that contains the downtown all of this is it’s fairly walkable it’s fairly steep uphill this way this is the

Existing rail line it took advantage of some previous rail infrastructure and to get into downtown you basically come around the outside and you go to the Ferry Building vicinity at a station called freedom art so the CBD is constrained by the freeway or to get in here and if you try to

Widen the surface transport infrastructure to get more cars in your chewing up land and taking up part of the downtown this is the catchment area sort of a half mile or seven to eight hundred meter catchment area for the for the rail stations as you can see the

Sense much of the central business district is not well served and you can see the growth to see deterioration inner poor here the new office going along the waterfront near fordham are you see new development near the rail transit out here a future station out here but clearly beginning cdk and you

Know concerns by the city over the core the downtown this is the project we were to evaluate it’s like a three kilometer rail tunnel has three stations that make the system up this is the central downtown station called altea this is the upper downtown station this is on

High ground k road because nobody can pronounce the name of the road and this is Newton they’re all on the ground and by making this a circle you you don’t for streisand come in and back out so you make the whole system a whole rail network much more efficient this is a

Compressed horizontal scale compressed cross section of the rail tunnel as you can see that this is the rail rail line here the green light this is the ground plane this is the Britomart station this is the lto station the central downtown station you know there’s quite a

Distance here this is the K Road station and it’s like a 30 meter reach from the rail to the surface and this is the Newton station because it’s so deep underground it’s an expensive project emergency evacuation ventilation fire prevention etc required a lot of excavation the city in the region had

Some overarching objectives to the project it wasn’t just about transportation it was about supporting the growth and development of the CBD of Oakland which is by far their largest city optimize patronage and accessibility to and from the CBD and within the CBD itself and then optimize efficiency and the potential of the rail

Investment they already made in the network and to make this an integrated part of the national rail network so in order to develop some additional sort of benefits we needed a series of building blocks first I you know our audience wasn’t just the city of Auckland it was the central government’s department of

Ministry of Transportation and their finance people because the central government is going to be asked to pay for all or a good part of the project traditionally a new zealand projects of this magnitude the central government has paid for so these people engineers and financial analysts they will not

Accept opinions they want qualitative proof to the extent can provided so my quantitative background was helpful in this analysis so the way we developed the building blocks are one we just did a brief summary of the literature search of the literature covering this topic in mostly in North America these are done

By universities a lot of you know Robert severo dr. Roberts Meryl Berkeley others we selected the studies that had hedonic analysis regression analysis basically you know comparing similar property transactions with the only variable being distance the transit station and over time there was this statistical statistical case for higher

Rents and higher property values as you you know approached the station then we want to develop some case studies and this is one of the central points of this presentation comparing cities and metropolitan areas that of similar size and scale or prestige comparing pairs were one dip CBD were serving rail and

One did not to see what the implications work and then we want to get into the local scene of why a strong CBD was important for rockland and for New Zealand so the summary of the literature survey at least the North American literature survey you know basically

Indicated you know based on light rail and commuter rail and some of this literature is a little bit dated now that for residential property within a half mile you get depending on the system and the location you get about ten to twenty five percent premium in value the premium falls away after a

Half mile from the station for suburban office it’s actually more its twenty five to sixty percent premium for CBD office the premium could be a hard percent of more and for urban retail there was maybe a thirty to fifty percent premium on rents and values so that’s that’s the first step sort of

Just to set the stage for for the subsequent analysis and then we try to screen for or and develop city pairs and this was actually fairly difficult because they’re not that many like cities where one has built rail and one has not and we wanted to be statistically rigorous

So we didn’t want to forecast in the future we wanted to go back in history to see what was actually built in terms of urban development so we wanted to select city pairs that one were a similar international profile or reputation we wanted metropolitan areas of comparable population and employment

You know about similar size economies and suicides economic growth we wanted CBDs of similar size and geographic orientation and then we have to have cities where one built rail one did not and we want to use a defined 20 year time frame with the rail project completed during the early parts of that

۲۰ year time frame to actually track what did happen some of the impact as most of you would would know is anticipate or if the project is said it’s funded you see the construction starting developers are starting to make investment decisions in anticipation of completion of the rail project so some

Of the impact leads the project completion by 3 45 years and some of the impact comes after and we think most of the impact happens within the first one or two decades after so the after struggling with this for about two weeks we selected three City pairs we selected

San Francisco in contrast it to Los Angeles I know Los Angeles now is very active in rail construction and has a lot of rail but the time period we wanted to look at was nineteen seventy-two 1990 the first segment of bard was completed in 1972 and the I

Think the system was all hooked up by 74 the second pair we selected was Portland which is very famous for rail and light rail supported downtown and where we decided to contrast Portland with Memphis Tennessee because the Memphis region and the Portland region matched up extremely well in terms of size of

Population size of employment and even the profile is included and since the first Portland line was done in was finished in the mid 80s and we took 1982 2000 and fees are slightly biased to systems I even wrote papers on or worked on no as a student or early in my career

So I knew their histories and then San Diego California the blue line that Tijuana trolley opened in 81 we compare that to st. Petersburg Florida both coasts of waterfront cities and econ of regional economies of very similar size again a 20-year period so we compared we wanted to compare what we could actually

Measure and so we define a CBD for San Francisco of five square kilometers approximately and for downtown Los Angeles of nearly comparable size it’s bounded by the freeways and in a remember what speed that is on the east maybe los angeles street so you can see they’re about the same size and shape

Then over this period for the San Francisco Bay Area taking the six-county region 114 million square feet of office space was built this is not an estimate co-star in their office statistics tracks the construction dates of individual office buildings so we went back and added those up and during those

۲۰ year period at 70 to 90 period in the region 114 million square feet of office construction this is not net addition but this is new construction and we think influenced by part thirty percent was built in the San Francisco CBD in that area you saw in the previous slide

In Los Angeles we took Los Angeles and Orange counties and the Southern California economy is actually quite a bit bigger than the San Francisco Bay Area although we we believe being biased up here that in terms of international reputation and profile the two regions are fairly comparable downtown LA only

Got eight percent of the office construction about 25 million out of the 300 million square feet so in terms of actual office construction measured on a building by building year-by-year basis for a 20-year period even though the LA region did a lot more construction San Francisco at 10 million square feet more

Office construction than downtown LA during that period la’s rail investment came pretty much after 1990 so we think the access that was provided by Bart particularly across the bay was instrumental in this difference so one case one pair you know you can’t generalize from that so then we move

Down to Portland and Memphis Portland is a riverfront city it’s downtown fronts on the Willamette River and in the nineteen seventy pound Portland was pretty seedy you wouldn’t want to walk around much of it at night Memphis is also a riverfront cities on the Mississippi River and Portland took its

Mount Hood freeway money and converted over to a male didn’t have rail wasn’t even thinking about rail build a loop freeway system from the downtown to the east of big loop which tended to disperse development so over the 20-year period from 1982 2000 Portland region added 29

Million square feet of office in terms of new construction miss region added 30 million so in terms of economic growth in office division I got twenty percent market share Memphis downtown about five percent well the office development in Memphis you know distributed along the Ring Road in went out the popular corridor where

Portland most of it remain in the CBD most of the high-profile office statement CBD there was a seven to one ratio so this looks pretty good let’s let’s do another one so then San Diego is a waterfront city from Songz San Diego Bay Pacific Ocean and we decided

To compare to st. Petersburg Florida another waterfront city fronting on the Atlantic again the CBDs are about the same size and as you can see both regions over that 20-year period had 55 million square feet of office construction you know track from individual buildings by year and the San

Diego CBD got eleven percent market share st. Petersburg well he got three percent San Diego built rail st. Petersburg did not again 6.1 million square feet of office construction in San Diego 1.7 million in st. Petersburg so we thought that was fairly convincing it implies that CBDs that benefited from

Rail investment got about twenty two percent of the regional office construction when the average three and vs five percent for the CBD that did not so about a four-fold difference I we didn’t think that fourfold difference was completely accurate applicable to Auckland because often already kind of

Remark station so we thought maybe a two-fold increase in an office construction in over a 20 year period would be a reasonable expectation now why is additional office construction focus on the CBD important for Auckland and important for New Zealand and important for cities like San Francisco we were

Very fortunate in that a nonprofit research institute calmo to have done a survey a couple of years before comparing value-added per worker in New Zealand for different geographic regions value-added per worker is the value of firm output total sales gross sales basically you know subtracting out less the value of intermediate inputs

Excluding employee compensation depreciation and taxes so what is basically what does each worker add in terms of the value of yet your output and this study found that was in the Auckland CBD that number was 107 thousand per worker for aqua city as a whole including the CBD was about 77,000

And as you got more and more suburban more more rural the numbers dropped clearly there is a economic premium for having a more concentrated CBD and that premium comes from the firm’s ability if you’re located in the CBD to select labor from the largest possible labor pool if your employer

And you locate where you have the best access to the largest possible labor pool during the peak commute period you can be most selective in who you pay and how you use your salary dollars when I ran the San Francisco office the VRA I put our office right on top of the

Embarcadero station and I thought that was a tremendous advantage I could pick on the best and brightest in our regional labor market so those are the first to become most successful they pay the highest rents and there’s probably a collaboration effect you get more people doing face-to-face business and their

Efficiencies that way you could walk across the street where I was I can walk across the street to som two blocks the field pale the most of the planners and urban designers i bought i met with were within ten minute walk I didn’t have to

Get in a hard drive part take a half hour so there’s some advantages to that so that was a very fortunate fine for us study team so based on the case studies we then did a market study of Auckland CBD this is a traditional market study were you know we did forecasts of

Employment and development with them without the rail link or the maps called the City Link project we thought now the gray is there sort of baseline forecasts and the blue is the new forecast so out ten years after completion we thought there was a 20-percent 20,000 premium in downtown employment and this is

Sustained over time not all of these people are coming in by rail there’s going to be more people living downtown you have more employees downtown you have less land about it for parking and streets so based on the experience of the case study cities and the employment forecast

You know we looked at different cities in the profile of employment in their CBDs typically in a city fifty-five sixty percent of the employment in the CBD is office employment so we work that number back and forth we know that office is the land use that benefits greatest from improved transit service

Due to its need for peak our labor force access we believed a new it AOTS station with height increases in urban design improvements in the CBD will make that a major employment hub and probably allow the development of some of the tallest buildings in operative with additional office employment growth you’re going to

Get more retail entertainment dining and cultural venues they have a 30-story height limit around the aota station we suggest that that should be lifted and if they ever want to use tax increment financing that additional height and value will be very helpful this is our forecast of office space development

Since the net change in office space in square meters so it’s 1.6 million 1.7 million square meters or about 17 million square feet over 20 years after rail completion without the rail project and about 20 million with the rail project since this is forecast into the future this is more opinion based on

Case studies and long large body of practice you know you can’t really prove it housing they’ve been working on a housing redevelopment getting more housing downtown they’ve got so many student housing that then you need to get this urn but there is a waterfront area a doc’s area that was going to be

Viva Elvis redevelop so these the units would have waterfront views and actually a very nice neighborhood we think with more office and more employment downtown there would be more housing demand in the CBD as well about eight thousand more is our estimate bringing the rail in underground means you get a lot more

People in here without needing more Road capacity and more parking structure capacity to chew chew up land and air space as you have more employees downtown more residents downtown you’re going to have more restaurants more retail more entertainment venues when you do auto oriented shopping centers we

Have one or two large parking structures they tend to go reasonably well with vertical stack malls because all of your parking all of your customers are you know in one area and you could feed them from the parking structure into a vertical mall but when you have rail

Stations in multiple stations where the people are coming up from underground stations and walking along the street that tends to be good for street meat a late and the retail trend internationally is pending away from vertical malls into more vibrant street retailing so so rails kind of reinforce

That as well one of our conclusions that kind of surprised them was that with more office downtown more housing downtown more retail downtown more cultural venues downtown you’re going to get more hotel development downtown 21 is there more business reasons to come downtown to is that often now is it’s

Not a very exciting City on the average length of stay for people tourists coming to New Zealand is a one and a half day oakland and the rest of the time in the rest on the balance of the country nazila it’s a beautiful country we had a two-week vacation in New Zealand shortly

After I did this project and we spent one night in Auckland we felt with a more vibrant than actually in downtown with better restaurants and cultural venues you know you get people to stay an extra day and awkward you know it’s half the people say the next day is a

Huge increase in hotel de man so we thought I was very significant so in summarizing the benefits of you know largely from our perspective this is North American perspective the greater CBD density shifts a number of suburban to see Ed vehicle trips these could be auto trips of bus trips to pedestrian

Trips within the CBD by changing from vehicle trips to pedestrian trips you have lower average trip costs and you have time savings we think there’s substantial urban form benefits you don’t need as much street capacity no transportation planners that are auto oriented tend to always widen streets One Nights reads multiple lengths to

Facilitate flow if you bring me an underground by rail and you don’t need it as much of that your signal phasing can be more friendly to pedestrians ever try to cross less wood into cross wilshire boulevard into westwood village from the south side those signal cycles take about ten minutes another big part

Of it if you have an auto served CBD you need a lot of land and a lot of air rights area for parking structures and you have a lot of driveways that intruder on the pedestrian environment so the air space you’re using for parking you’re not using for buildings that

House people whether the employees or residents or hotels and that reduces the number of pedestrians you put on the street and you also don’t have as much area for bus loading and as Portland well knows their bus malls where the people wait for the bus historically block the retail entrances that stores

The stores all open away from the bus mall day they put their interest is on the side streets or on the backside from the bus mall that was a problem we’re looking at that there’s some long-term development economic development effects as well you create a more vibrant pedestrian district that’s you provide

More opportunity for chance social encounters and it’s more attractive for retention and attraction of talented young workers on compare Auckland to Sydney when I was in the aecom Sydney office um they wanted to transfer some of the younger people to Auckland to New Zealand even though the cost of living

In New Zealand is quite a bit lower than sitting in office the young people didn’t want to go you know it’s it was kind of like being sent to Siberia for the same pay and lower living costs they didn’t want to go because Sydney is so vibrant and they thought aqua was kind

Of slow and did so when we took the urban regeneration benefits into consideration and put it into the cost-benefit analysis we got quite a bit more benefits than costs for the system what we did is we took the employment premiums at 20,000 additional employees in the CDD and then multiply that by the

Labor productivity or value-added for worker premium about 30,000 per word / and say that’s part of your benefit you should take that into consideration now this is a pretty good sell to you guys like preaching to the choir it was a good sale to the city of oakland but the

Central government of New Zealand and the Ministry of Transport didn’t believe this is bill your bias way we do it it’s like this you know we don’t believe in land use change you just keep the land use constant and do the transportation analysis and that’s how we do our

Benefits so this went back and forth for the better part of a year the Commonwealth countries UK Australia Britain have been using a what they call an economic evaluation manual for transportation projects and they like you know they have a basis for doing this they like doing it that way they’ve

Done it for 10 years that’s the only way it works and this approach they treat this well this approach in combination with their fairly weak transport modeling capability basically ignores the land use changes you know they treat the CBD is a single zone so all those trips that suburban to CBD auto trips

That became pedestrian trips because of because you have more people downtown more housing more employment downtown you know that’s sort of lost you know the time savings the cost savings of those trips don’t count and the better urban design benefits of fewer parking structures narrower streets more pedestrian-friendly environments and

Long term appeal of a vibrant CBD you can’t prove that bill we can’t count that so and then we dug into their traffic modelling you know most traffic models don’t really fully account for that pedestrian or bike trip to the transit station and then clearly was not

Paying much attention to the width in CBD adestria trip and we found as the employment and housing grew the CBD it had no way of adding congestion to the sweet system for vehicles and buses so it soon free flown off by autos and then it had no way of accounting for

Higher cost of parking as you’ve got more and more people into the CBD and they clearly did not have the ability to interact land use some change in land use with changes in transportation system improvements when I started the assignment that client told me bill don’t worry about land use just keep it

Constant you know so that was sort of the mindset we were faced with in to try to change policy this got into a bit of a political stalemate at the same time the city of Auckland was being restructured it took six the smaller cities in the region including Oakland

And to the regional agencies and formed super City Auckland I guess Parliament did that it didn’t take didn’t take required votes by all the cities like it was here so all of a sudden you had a super city that was you know maybe forty percent of the national economy and

About thirty five percent of the political representation in Parliament so it became a lot more powerful and the new mayor len brown was a strong proponent of rail just got elected in the super city and city council was all for it a local press was all for it but

The central government which had the responsibility to fund most of it didn’t why I think do with the project you had a minister of transport that says he wanted to fund 10 scenic highways because I was better for the national economy so they hired a consulting firm

Of the UK called SVG they hire the guy that from the UK that originally wrote the economic evaluation manual that you know he went two rounds to discredit our work basically say you can’t count this you can’t prove that we can’t count this

This is not how we did it in the last 10 years so you can’t do it this way you can’t count land use changes as benefit to rail investment so over a period of time the local New Zealand offices of aecom felt their reputation was being

Battered it’s a bill you can go back to San Francisco but we have to live here and we have to do business here we’re taking a beating here let’s hire a u.s. professor and have him do a peer review of our work and the SPG work and see

What he says so I went out and we got dr. Roberts vero Berkeley professor in transportation and urban planning and actually to my surprise he was surprisingly supportive of our work here are some quotes from him that on balance I found the use of international cait’s experience secondary data sources and

Modeling assumptions used by the ATV abiti to inform estimates of economic benefits to be well reasoned unbiased and justifiable I would be hard-pressed to improve upon the case selection or methods employed by a TV and be I was our team to evaluate likely impacts of a

City rail link while the SVG provides at times useful suggestions on how to possibly improve on the forecast I found some critiques to be a dubious value and perhaps even a bit polemical I commend APB be for the rigor and care used in building a business case for City Link

While another router revisions will no doubt provide the estimates on balance my sense is that they pretty much got it right in assessing the likely impacts of city link on urban regeneration and CBD labor productivity so that took a lot of pressure off the local people and over

Time we think the project will go ahead here are some quick lessons for city planners ironmen very well they’re developed for highways and cars and trucks we need another generation the model development to get at you know true transit potential and be skeptical of quantitative model output I mean when I

Got into the lead models I it was you know it was really alarming how weak they were but there is no question in my mind from four decades of practice that transportation systems shape urban form over decades hub and spoke design rail systems clearly reinforce the central business district

You could argue we never proved that a central visit stronger central business district gives you a stronger regional economy but I do believe it it gives you a better competitive position international CBD is more vibrant is more appealing to workers of talent I think San Francisco is a good example of

That Sydney as well transportation planners like to spread the traffic out so you don’t have congestion so they like grid pattern streets and freeways and that spreads the development evenly over the landscape and you don’t have that single point or multiple nodes of focus and sort of give your urban area

The character the vitality to be internationally noteworthy City I have a little youtube video that just came out a month ago but by the look you know by the mayor of Oakland that brings this analysis up to date the political implications of this is analysis up to

Date and if I can get the technology right I’ll play a free it’s about four minutes I think I’m going to try it again if it doesn’t work if the sound doesn’t work I’ll give up we are always late we’ve done so we’ll trick is a neurosis one space afraid and

We also go electric train coming on but we leave their density rail links to ensure the week where the tires of time of getting into fruition as a bristly hair you basically have a call the sake of it you go out to market 23 times the number of people friend of

Lea little be around people a total of morale I don’t know how well you guys could hear the audio portion but I want to just see some images of Oakland and in essence what has happened is that the City of Oakland has decided to reserve the right away and has funded property

Acquisition on the rail line to preempt developers from you know forcing them to buy property later the plans for huge developments on them and they are negotiating the central government as to who pays for what share they asked us initially to take a cup at you should

Pay for what and we looked at the benefits we felt there were three levels of benefits there was national benefits you can improve global competitiveness of New Zealand particularly bachlin some acceleration of tax base expansion they’re clearly regional benefits acceleration of regional economic growth travel time benefits across the rail

Network not just the link part of the whole system time savings for long rail users and quality of life improvements for the region and there are local benefits which I didn’t get into a lot in this presentation but their property value increases for both raw land that can be developed and for existing

Properties that can charge higher rents because of proximity to transit or development pro formas you don’t have to build as much parking you get more value out of it so we suggest that a 40-60 Auckland central government split and that’s what they’re fighting about now but I’m happy to see the project is

Moving forward at least from Auckland’s perspective I think my hour is up and we’ll go to questions so Andy another how to proceed from here Andy Here I am sorry about that forgot I have a mute button on anyway odd yeah I here’s Andy and I some questions people

Have submitted during the course of presentation I’ll posed you bill if you’re ready I already okay let’s see start with a question from Barbara Barbara Gilliland who asks did you look at the land use policies of the city pairs and did the cities with real do anything to encourage drove along those

Lines I actually the end because I worked in some of those cities clearly in San Francisco when barb was coming in there was a deliberate shift to focus the development on that bart portal the previous go back to nineteen seventy before the loma prieta earthquake there were the freeway ramps coming into clay

And washington if you came in from the east bay you looped around the embarcadero got off at clay in washington which is several blocks north of market street the hunter set location of san francisco for office space was at montgomery in California when all that transit capacity was added to market

Street it was a deliberate policy shift to develop south of market with office housing retail ballpark and all that so the rail corridor had a two-sided downtown assert I think that policy has largely been very successful in Portland um yes they were very conscious of land-use changes at the stations but the

East side was sort of the weaker lower-income blue-collar side of Portland and a lot of those stations didn’t get developed right away but I think you could look at the near east side near lloyd center and that the senate ee there was a lot of government investment public infrastructure investment in

Parks urban design improvements with prevention centers and things like that so the near east side is now much better than in the 80s freshen has had good revitalization and i attribute you know a lot of portland downtown vibrancy to not just that rail line but the subsequent rail lines they build city of

Portland cap the number of parking spaces that you can have downtown at something like thirty two thousand you know you have if you were building new development you have a fight to get a share that parking and if you didn’t build any parking that was sprayed with

Them and then you can look at the lad use policies of memphis they try to get downtown going and and they try very hard because of that ring road in the movement of office to the east they struggle for several decades they put in a little rail line trolley line that has

Stimulated some development along the line and the downtown is starting to come around with a bit San Diego um yeah San Diego tried very hard to redevelop its downtown they finally got hot put it in a shopping center I think you the late seventies early eighties but again

I’m primarily an economist and you know not as focused on specific glad use policies that answer the question Eddie I certainly hope so no I think so i think it does save another question here from someone from Gregory Perkins in your San Francisco Los Angeles comparison you said that San Francisco

Have about 34 million square feet downtown I’m about 200 million square feet Metro why does that include all of Oakland and San Jose to and if it does should the downtown numbers also include some in Oakland and maybe little in San Jose it’s so with that downtown number

Of 34 million and percent of about twenty percent be even greater the San Francisco region number was if I remember correctly was a hundred if you go back to that period of 70 to 90 if you added it in downtown Oakland and added in san jose san jose

You know it was good for Palo Alto yeah so maybe if you put in Oakland and San Jose wouldn’t have been 35 million more than 37 million ok it’s another question so I asking it took into account other factors that influence CBD growth such as topography or natural manatees or any

Other growth factors well we tried to take sort of geographic and climate characteristics into consideration in comparing them but actually getting these pairs is probably the hardest thing they did now we San Diego is a you know bayfront City sunny in Petersburg Florida is a similar city Portland CDs

On the river Memphis is on the river la San Francisco sort of comparable in terms of international reputation repress speeds so we try to take as many factors into consideration as we put but if you’ve got to fine grain you’ll never be able to come up with these pairs okay

Thank you it is a question of someone you know that they found it very interesting that you get pushback on making private investments to the transit projects and as he did do they attribute the investments to you got pushed back from private investment to the transit projects the pushback we got

Was from the ministry of transport in New Zealand who had a strong highway bias I also think that they felt they could get more money out of Auckland they could get the city off of paper more horrible probably they’re negotiating strategy I don’t think we got pushed back from

The private sector the private sector was generally supported and we lay it on earth around the future stations with that definitely support push back there was one critical property owned by westfield where if you expanded the brigham our station and the trains through you would have to run under that

One block owned by westfield which is a big shopping center developer property owner out of australia and what the city of often was concerned about is that westfield would submit plans for a huge building with a big underground garage right in the path of that rail expansion

When they try to acquire that property when I asked forward an exorbitant amount of money because it jeopardized that project so the city of Auckland wanted to reserve the right away and started offering property before Westfield did that I think maybe that was the intent of the question ok ok

Thanks another question another tempe about the fact of your studies focus on underground rail and difference between impacts of underground route here between the impact of underground rail the impact of above above bubbeleh above-ground rail would there be a drastic change in statistics between underground versus that great real

Fletching higher res with it Damon and cultural venues in the same manner I think in larger cities the best impact is from underground rail even though it costs a lot more above got above ground rail in medium-sized cities probably work pretty well I like in Portland it

Looks pretty well a lot of it depends on how it’s designed on importantly the tracks are not that intrusive and you can cross the tracks as a pedestrian you can park a lot of certain streets that are served by the light rail there are other cities that put up barriers so pedestrians cannot

Cross the rail line right the patronize the local stores so it’s a function of urban design and how intrusive the above-ground rail not be but for larger cities I think the underground rail works best for medium-sized cities that can’t afford the cost carefully design above-ground light rail to work

Reasonably well Portland is a great example and I think Charlotte’s probably another good example although I hadn’t been there no person has the question about the the pushback has to follow question if he can name the state of the agency if she could name the agency

Again they give you push back oh it was the federal government of New Zealand okay and all their ministry of transport and then they had a they had a guy that was there gatekeeper for the for the funding of infrastructure projects I can’t remember his title you know he he

Was the gatekeeper and he wanted to minimize the amount of money they have to pay soul sister the central government versus the city you know Len Brown the mayor of New Super City Auckland is probably the second most powerful person in New Zealand now with the Prime Minister being the most

Powerful I would suspect the Len Brown at some point will run for Prime Minister and once he gets in there he’ll appoint new minister transport have a picture of a change substantially it was so obvious in some of the meetings they pulled me into our start presenting this

All your bias you’re picking the rail cities that had faster economic growth you didn’t think of this of that you know after prop next imagine okay another question give velleman impact fees or other transportation related taxes gas taxes retail taxes to fund a Jack without aid from the federal government oh they’re

Not at that point yeah both Museum in Australia have higher tax rates than we do income tax rates so their central government has a lot more money to spend them than ours or regional government as well so I mean they’re consulting contracts engineering contracts over there three or four times what we get

Over here they’re not worrying about fees you know their tradition is in central government pay for everything for these big projects so they’re not they’re worrying about these they’ve taken higher taxes through their personal income tax corporations okay and then see another question how did you answer the question how can be sure

That the percentage share of growth will be directly related to the rail system you can never be sure so many variables going on at the same time you could just you know build a case from these case studies saying look here’s two cities that are pretty similar one did this one

Did that one got four times the office construction the dams have them the other and you if you can present enough cases eventually people think maybe you have a point what what this analysis doesn’t show is that the additional development in the downtown is not necessarily net change for the week most

Of the most of that is a redistribution of suburban development to the stro city but i do believe overtime better more vibrant more interesting well designed downtown gives you a better position to compete globally and you do get some acceleration in economic growth but you know nobody’s been ever

Approve I can’t prove that okay okay see ya then we have a Hulk question an earlier question about your CBD market share data from 1970 through nineteen ninety wondering what the data would show if the range was nineteen ninety through 2010 I don’t know I’d have to go

Dig it out and try to assemble it look at it Los Angeles has started to build rails a lot more housing downtown but it hasn’t had a lot of office construction even with the rail and maybe that’s yet to come I don’t know I have to look in

The theta to let it speak for itself okay I’m seeing last question before we get to our pools for a close-up if you could let’s see as people have been if you provide people with a link for the YouTube video if you show them tell them how to get that oh I care

Where should I put that you Andy with that where should I put that if you put that up on your screen it’s this one right here but when you guys hear the video very well the audio of the video I think that some people could so people couldn’t I can hear very

Well but hopefully people get a chance to watch it on their own later on see it’s this link right here okay there’s another one that deals with the same issue but it covers three rail lines okay you want me to forward to this email sure actually it’ll be great thank

You I guess now we’ll launch we have a few pools to ask people over their occupations are and report of the country they’re from various okay what’s your email Andy it is well hey I’ll call you afterwards and i’ll give you my email address the theater a see it all

Right now grace people to see this occupation pool she’s go ahead take a quick second answer those appreciate it give you a couple minutes okay so we have a lot of folks from playing in public public agency films here today some students and economic zones as well how can I see the poll

Results i put this plus button let’s see it should be prettier go to webinar window right now let’s see that’s a quick question to ask you all week or the country you from I’m from the San Francisco Bay Area have been a resident here for four years now

On 40 years 40 years right on you like that grew up in Los Angeles I like Sam Cisco I go out there whenever I can take a vacation great we like you coming out here okay give folks a few more seconds to answer this pool okay for those for

Those of you couldn’t hear the audio portion of the video the essence was that the city of council Laughlin adopted resolution to reserve the right away and to acquire the right away properties needed and they’re negotiating with the central government as to what who pays for what share and

Since a third of a representation in Parliament represent the Auckland region they’re pretty good position pretty cool other folks from eastern time zone today very cool okay well i think that does it for us today on this Billy guy anything in any last class to add well I want to

Thank everybody for giving me the privilege of presenting this webinar and Abby if you could send me the results of your little surf paal love to see it will do and I just sent you the email the link is that second one there and thanks a lot okay thank you Bill I

Appreciate it hey thanks everyone for joining you you you

ID: J9zngzFmBq4
Time: 1350928869
Date: 2012-10-22 21:31:09
Duration: 01:21:17

منبع