The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal AboutPlan for Progress 2011-20131 Parkville Plan for Progress Economic Development Strategic Plan 2011-2013 September 2010 2 Table of Contents Introduction/Executive Summary/Background……………..……..……………………….……..3 Strategic Plan Outline…………………………………………………………………………….…………….6 Economic Development Sustainability………………………………………………………..6 Business Retention and Expansion..…………………………………………………………...6 Community Marketing…………………………………………………………………….…………7 Residential Growth………………………………….………………………..…………….…………7 Development Process and Incentives……………………………………………….………..8 Downtown Sustainability…..…………………………………………………………….…………9 Employment Growth………………………………..…………………………………….………….9 Organizational Development………………….………………………………………………………….11 A View of the Current Environment in the City of Parkville...………………………………16 Mission Statements and Review of Organizations………………………..…………………….20 Ad Hoc Economic Development Committee Members……………..………………………..23 Appendix…………….……………………………………………………………………………………………..24 Demographic/Fiscal Data Report – 2009 Aging Baby Boomers & the Generational Housing Bubble Article - 2008 Business Closure Report – 2008 Main Street/Park University Survey – 2009 Smart Solutions Group Report – 2009 ETC Resident Survey – 2009 Existing Business Survey Samples 3 INTRODUCTION/EXECUTIVE SUMMARY/BACKGROUND Through an eighteen month long planning process various community stakeholders dedicated their time and efforts to better the economic opportunities for the City of Parkville through an ad hoc committee. The ad hoc committee developed the following mission statement which guided their efforts: To help maintain and enhance the valued quality of life of Parkville by encouraging and coordinating responsible economic activity and community improvement. The first strategic question that the group answered was, “why does the city of Parkville, Missouri need to develop a strategic vision for the economic development of the city?” This ad hoc committee reviewed various data and opinion documents. This data generated by the Kansas City Power & Light Economic Development Department, through their demographic data vendor SRC, DemographicsNow.com showed the following (full report is located in the appendix of this document on page 23:  The city of Parkville is estimated to have grown from 4,507 in 2000 to 5,399 in 2009 which computes to an almost 20% increase.  Projections show that in five years the city’s population is anticipated to grown another 12.6%.  The community is becoming more affluent. Median Household income has grown 32% from 2000 to 2009, $59,620 to $78,438.  Educational attainment has significantly increased. In the 1990 census, Parkville resident’s reported that the largest educational attainment level was “High School Graduate”. In the 2000 census, the largest educational attainment level was reported as “Some College, No Degree”. 2009 projections show that the largest reported education attainment level is “Bachelor’s Degree.  With regards to capturing sales tax purchases, over the last ten years, Parkville has seen its retail sales grow 106%. This includes 2009 which saw a decrease in sales taxable purchases of 9%. Using a “pull factor” formula that looks at the ratio of sales taxable purchases by population compared to the state, Parkville collects $1.46 of every dollar earned in the community. For Platte County overall, the current pull factor is $1.52. 4  However, on the other end of the spectrum… unemployed Parkville residents have grown, in line with current economic conditions, from 2.7% in 2000 to a projected 7.3% in 2009. This compares to a 7.8% for Platte County in 2009.  Total housing units have grown 26.8% from 1990 to 2000 & 22% from 2000 to 2009. However, the number of vacant housing units has grown from 132 (9.6%) in 1990 to 84 (4.8%) in 2000 to 341 (16.0%) in 2009.  According to the Missouri Municipal League, communities with populations comparable to Parkville, see 52% of their revenues come from sales tax & 14% come from property taxes. During the 2008 fiscal year, the city of Parkville derived 38% of their income from sales taxes and 25.3% from property taxes. The conclusions that the ad hoc committee made with regards to this and other research is that while Parkville possesses great strengths, there are areas that need to be addressed in order to have consistent and sustained holistic economic strength that benefits the citizens of Parkville. With the continuing and projected growth of Parkville into new development areas, it will be necessary to bring new economic development to the city. Responsible economic growth and the resulting increase in sales and property taxes are necessary to pay for these increased costs. Simply put, residential development alone does not pay for itself. For example, the average home sold in Parkville over the last two years (July 2008-July 2010) was $256,411. The property taxes that would be received annually by the city of Parkville, based on the 2009 levy of .5972/$100 assessed valuation, would be $291. Using just the new home sales average over the same period of $527,187, the city of Parkville’s portion of the property tax for those homes will be $598 annually. However, currently the cost per household for city services is $3,597 (city expenditures from the General Fund, Sewer Service Fund, Debt Service Fund & Transportation Fund divided by 1,786, which is the projected number of households in Parkville in 2009 according the KCP&L demographic report). The intent of this “Planning for Progress Economic Strategic Plan” is to present specific goals and policies that a Parkville, Missouri effort in community economic development could and should focus. Additionally, this plan presents some implementation recommendations that could be used to achieve the stated goals. These tactics are not meant to be comprehensive in nature. Therefore, the goal 5 of this document is to give city leaders a framework for looking at community economic development activities for the city of Parkville. It is expected that the next step, in the event that city leadership endorses this conceptual framework, would be to ask “next phase” organizational leadership (board and staff) to develop a full implementation document that would include SMART objectives: Those that are Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic and Time Bound. The following are the suggested goals that the ad hoc committee felt is necessary for successful economic development in the City of Parkville:  Economic Development Sustainability  Business Retention and Expansion  Community Marketing  Residential Growth  Development Processes and Incentives  Downtown Sustainability  Employment Growth Goals, Policies and possible Implementation Recommendations have been identified in this document to guide the City of Parkville in achieving the above stated items. The first step in the organizing process, after adoption by the city of Parkville, is the formal adoption of an organizational framework to implement the strategies and goals outlined in this document. It is anticipated, that a new organization, a Parkville EDC would be created. The suggested framework for this proposed economic development organization is presented on page 11 of this plan proposal. 6 STRATEGIC PLAN OUTLINE Goals, Policies and Implementation Items 1. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SUSTAINABILITY Definition of the Goal: Economic Growth shall add resources directly to the city and general community. Policies:  Attract high value, high growth business investment opportunities.  Economic growth shall demonstrate an overall positive impact on the community.  Increase tax revenues to support increasing level of city services for a growing community. Implementation Recommendations:  Identify high growth business opportunities.  Develop an appropriate return on investment model for economic development in the city of Parkville. 2. BUSINESS RETENTION AND EXPANSION Definition of the Goal: Generate new wealth and growth in Parkville through the retention and expansion of existing businesses. Policies:  Retention and expansion of existing businesses will enhance the overall economic well being of the community.  Through surveying existing businesses, a list of business issues and needs will be developed for consideration by the city of Parkville and its economic development stakeholder organizations. (Samples of business surveys are included in the Appendix) 7 Implementation Recommendations:  Create and maintain a business registry and database.  Develop a business calling plan.  Identify community resources available to businesses.  Establish an annual business survey. 3. COMMUNITY MARKETING Definition of the Goal: Proactively market the virtues and benefits of living, working, shopping, dining, playing and providing services in the city of Parkville. Policies:  Take a proactive, rather than the present reactive stance to businesses recruitment/marketing.  Coordinate and integrate stakeholder marketing messages.  Create a “top of mind” messaging as it relates to the image of Parkville. Implementation Recommendations:  Identify compatible target industries.  Create a brand easily identified with Parkville.  Create marketing materials.  Identify advertising/marketing venues to present Parkville’s brand. 4. RESIDENTIAL GROWTH Definition of the Goal: Create residential growth that will provide for a variety of housing types that are well designed and interconnected with existing and planned amenities. Policies:  Encourage “green” development processes.  Encourage the development of walkable, connected neighborhoods. 8  Sustain and develop a sense of community pride.  Maintain Parkville's quality of life and sense of place. Implementation Recommendations:  Develop a “green” development incentive.  Work to grow and maintain a mix of housing types that appeal to multi generations.  Work on a program to assist in the sale/resale of homes in Parkville.  Develop an executive recruitment initiative. 5. DEVELOMENT PROCESS AND INCENTIVES Definition of the Goal: Increase development through the creation of fair, consistent and timely review processes while providing responsible opportunities for incentives. Policies:  Create roles and processes for communicating with developers that provides consistent public position with regard to major projects.  Identify incentive programs available. Such as: Tax Increment Financing (TIF), Community Improvement Districts (CID), Neighborhood Improvement Districts (NID), Industrial Revenue Bonds (IRB) and Chapter 100 Bonds. Implementation Recommendations:  Create a development policy to determine when, what and how much of a development incentive should be provided in order to achieve an economic development goal.  Review and analyze the permitting process with representatives from the development community and the city to streamline the permitting/development process.  Serve as a development “ombudsmen” between the developer and the city.  Survey the KC metropolitan development community, to gauge the image and interest in developing in Parkville. 9 6. DOWNTOWN SUSTAINABILITY Definition of the Goal: Build upon downtown Parkville’s architectural and historical resources along with prospects for new infill development to create a livable and pedestrian friendly downtown that offers a diversity of business, residential and recreational uses. Policies:  Enhance the natural character of downtown and the Missouri river riverfront.  Build and develop a diverse retail base with a focus on unique and specialty businesses.  Strengthen the connectivity of downtown to surrounding neighborhoods, educational institutions, parks and trail systems.  Encourage policies and programs that continue to assist in maintaining downtown as the city center of Parkville. Implementation Recommendations:  Work with Main Street Parkville Association  Update the downtown master plan.  Identify community investment opportunities for the enhancement of existing uses and amenities.  Actively seek or promote new business opportunities.  Coordinate the brand that is easily identified as downtown Parkville.  Create a parking solution plan. 7. EMPLOYMENT GROWTH Definition of the Goal: Create, attract and maintain a competitive workforce while supporting and stimulating the growth of entrepreneurs and high technology firms. Policies: 10  Partner with area workforce organizations to enhance the opportunity for employment growth.  Connect workforce preparation agencies, such as elementary, secondary and higher education institutions to assist in developing a workforce compatible with the type of businesses that are desired to be located in the city of Parkville.  Work with Platte County EDC & Kansas City Area Development Council regarding compatible business location projects. Implementation Recommendations:  Assist in the acquisition of capital by Parkville businesses by establishing an inventory of available public business financing programming.  Inventory existing land sites for inclusion in business opportunity databases. This Economic Plan, Parkville Planning for Progress (P3)—is not a final document—but part of a long-term team effort to organize, focus and implement a proactive, aggressive economic development framework for the city of Parkville. 11 ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT Goal: To create a Parkville Economic Development Council (Parkville EDC) Recommended Structure:  The Parkville EDC will be organized as a 501(c)6.  There will be a public/private funding structure.  Public/City money would be provided through annual contracts with the Parkville EDC.  Private contributions would be provided through a Member/Investor Structure. Administration:  Anticipate a Board of Directors of 20 comprised from founding members, allied organizations (Parkville Chamber & Main Street Parkville Association) and the City of Parkville.  Experienced individuals in the community could be asked to participate in a non-voting capacity and serve on the board as ex-officio or advisory members  An executive board comprised of the 5-7 board members would primarily direct and hire paid staff.  The City’s board representative and 2 ex-officio city staff members would also serve on the executive board.  Volunteers from the board and membership would be solicited to assist staff through the formation and operation of committees.  An executive director and other professional staff are charged with the implementation of this economic development strategic plan. Mission of the Parkville EDC: Help maintain and enhance the valued quality of life of Parkville by encouraging and coordinating responsible economic activity and community improvement. How will Parkville EDC activities coordinate with existing Parkville E.D. Organizations? 12 Organization Primary Focus Parkville Chamber of Commerce Develop and promote Parkville as a quality place to live, work and recreate. Provide business development and retention through education and networking. Main Street Parkville Association Promote downtown to Metro area residents and tourists, provide organizational support for downtown business recruitment, retention and education, maintain and enhance the historic character of downtown. Parkville Community Dev. Corp. 501c3, organizational support for various downtown activities, volunteer opportunities like festivals, historic preservation, beautification projects. Parkville EDC Regional business recruitment, pursues public private partnerships, resource of knowledge and data base, website development/maintenance. Recognizing the roles of existing economic development organizations in Parkville, the purpose of the new Parkville EDC would be: 1. Facilitate collaboration between other economic and community development organizations within Parkville. 2. Initiate business recruitment strategies for high value businesses and new public/private opportunities as outlined in the Parkville Plan for Progress. 3. Develop and garner public/private resources. Proposed Budget – 2010 **Propose to use $3,000 (originally budgeted for ED marketing materials) on recruitment expenses for an executive director and other start up costs through end of 2010. 13 Proposed Budget – 2011 - 2013 Revenues: $40,000 from membership and stakeholders* $20,000 from the city, plus provide office space $60,000 total annual revenue budget *Founding Board Members will contribute at a $2,500 level or above and will pledge a 3 year commitment. Expenditures: Executive Director Salary: $42,000 Benefits: $8,000 Other: $10,000 (Memberships, Conferences, Marketing Materials,Printing) Total annual expenditure budget $60,000 Organizational roll out time line Sept. 7: Present Parkville Plan for Progress to Parkville Board of Alderman. Sept. 8: Assuming good feedback from BOA, continue soliciting Charter Memberships. Sept. 21: Board of Aldermen adopt a resolution committing $20,000 to the Parkville EDC in the 2011 – 2013 budget. Sept. & Oct.: Complete formation of the Parkville EDC (Articles of Incorporation, bylaws, board and staff job descriptions, etc.). Nov.: Advertise for Executive Director position. Dec.: Conduct interviews with the expectation to hire executive director to begin in January 2011. Anticipated 2011 Activities:  Begin business recruitment efforts  Establish committees.  Develop real estate & existing business inventory.  Develop a city incentive development policy. Possible Parkville EDC Committees 14 Regional Recruitment and Marketing Committee: Actively implements city- wide business recruitment to attract high value business investment. Works alongside local developers and property owners, Main Street and Chamber partners, the Community Development Committee (vision), Partnerships Committee (incentives), Marketing sub committee develops branding strategy, website, data base and marketing materials to support the other committees, promotes the economic development toolkit. Sub Committees: Business Recruitment Marketing Partnerships Committee: Pursues public private partnerships, develops support for targeted use of incentives, grants, establishes a loan committee (when funded), assists by use of incentives in business retention strategies, works with City in planning and refining the process of permits, licensing, zoning use changes (issues relating to how new and existing businesses can work best with local government). Sub Committees: Public Policy Loan Committee Incentive Policy Grants and Applications Other Development Organizations Community Development Committee: Using the Master Plan and ETC Citizen Surveys, Develops and refines the priorities to be used for high value business recruitment and incented activity, i.e. healthcare services, sales tax revenue businesses, jobs creation, green projects, cross generational living, connectivity of communities to each other; work with Main Street Parkville Association on downtown public improvements and quality of life improvements for Parkville. Community Living Committee: Reviews development public policy and processes, works with government, developers and realtors, creates the Development Policy, development “ombudsman”, plans and implements the executive recruitment initiative, develops a plan to educate real estate agents on the qualities of relocating and living in Parkville. Sub Committees: Development Policy Community Living 15 Organizational Development Committee: Assist initially in organizational structure, ongoing member relations, meetings and functions, membership development Sub Committees: Memberships Annual Meetings/Events 16 A VIEW OF THE CURRENT ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT IN THE CITY OF PARKVILLE The Ad Hoc committee reviewed and developed information regarding economic development and its perception with a number of audiences. There were five particular research projects that the committee reviewed and discussed. Those were: Aging Baby Boomers & the Generational Housing Bubble Article – 2008 Business Closure Report – 2008 Main Street/Park University Survey – 2009 Smart Solutions Group Report – 2009 ETC Resident Survey – 2009 The following is a summary of each study/report. A copy of the full reports is included in the appendix. Aging Baby Boomers & the Generational Housing Bubble Article – 2008 The committee reviewed an article published in the Journal of the American Planning Association, published in the Winter of 2008. The authors defined the problem as: “The 78 million baby boomers have driven up housing demand and prices for three decades since beginning to buy homes in 1970 and continuing up the housing ladder. What will happen when boomers begin to sell off their high-priced homes to relatively smaller and less-advantaged generations?” The results and conclusions of the article were: “Sellers of existing homes provide 85% of the annual supply of homes sold, and home sales are driven by the aging of the population since seniors are net home sellers. The ratio of seniors to working-age residents will increase by 67% over the next two decades; thus we anticipate the end of a generational housing bubble. We also find that younger generations face an affordability barrier created by the recent housing price boom.” 17 Business Closure Report – 2008 In late fall of 2008, the city of Parkville requested that the Platte County Economic Development Council complete an “exit interview” with 29 businesses that the city had reported to have recently closed operations in Parkville. Staff of the Platte County EDC was able to make contact with 16 of these businesses. Most of the responses regarding their business closure revolved around the economy. However, the most stated community reasons were:  Parking issues.  Building/Landlord issues.  Signage/Traffic (not enough) issues. Main Street/Park University Survey – 2009 In early 2009, the Platte County Economic Development Council in collaboration with the ad hoc committee, Main Street Parkville and Park University conducted an on line survey of 670 Park University (Parkville Campus) employees and 1,230 Park University students. The goal of the survey was to ask Park University staff and students their perceptions and suggestions regarding shopping and dining in the Parkville downtown area. The response rate for this survey was exceptional at 22%. The following are generalization extracted from the survey responses.  There is no significant difference between staff and student perceptions regarding downtown Parkville.  The largest share of Students and staff responded that only monthly do they visit downtown Parkville. The smallest share of respondents stated that they visit Downtown Parkville daily.  Strengths of Downtown Parkville o Charming o Great Place To Visit o Wonderful Events  Weaknesses of Downtown Parkville o Parking o Nothing for Students to Do o Hours of Operation An additional finding is that there needs to be more outreach/connections made between Downtown Parkville merchants and Park University staff and students. 18 Every day Park University brings almost 2,000 students and staff to Parkville. These individuals are ready made customers for downtown merchants. Smart Solutions Group Report – 2009 In February of 2009, the ad hoc committee met with Irv Jensen of Smart Solutions Group. The purpose of the session was two-fold: 1 – Raise issues/Build consensus concerning Parkville’s economic development efforts and 2 – determine a reasonable course of action for further implementation. Through this discussion the following were identified as priority issues for Parkville as it pursues economic development:  Work on improving communications between all those involved in development.  Add focus to the community economic development process.  Create an operating structure to enhance community growth.  Take some immediate action to demonstrate progress.  Identify community talent/leadership to supplement/enhance existing leadership.  Need a plan.  Reach consensus on the revitalization plan for downtown.  Implement a true and effective brand management effort to maintain reputation.  Focus on business support - Need entrepreneurial development.  Need partnership. ETC Resident Survey – 2009 In the summer of 2009, the city of Parkville engaged the ETC Institute to conduct a citizen satisfaction survey of Parkville residents. With regards to economic issues, residents responded to the following:  Residents were asked if they shopped for a variety of goods and services in Parkville, and if not, why not. The top four goods or services most often frequented in Parkville were gasoline, groceries, pharmacy items and restaurants (sit down casual). Those least frequented were major 19 appliances, large retail stores, theaters, museums and hotels. The reason given for not frequenting those five was that they were not available in Parkville, but the reason given for not frequenting the other twenty-one, was that there were better selections elsewhere.  The top two reasons that residents shop in Parkville now, is the proximity to their home, and to support local businesses.  The top two reasons that would encourage residents to shop in Downtown Parkville more often were a better selection of products and services, and a better selection of restaurants.  86% of residents stated that they would like to build their next home in Parkville. 20 MISSION STATEMENTS AND REVIEW OF ORGANIZATIONS CONNECTED TO PARKVILLE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: City of Parkville Ad Hoc for Economic Development Committee: Mission Statement: Help maintain and enhance the valued quality of life of Parkville by encouraging and coordinating responsible economic activity and community improvement. Purpose/Vision: Coordinate the efforts of the various organizations serving economic development needs in Parkville. Develop a strategic plan for Economic Development including recommendations for a permanent Economic Development structure. Main Street Parkville Association: Mission Statement: To preserve, maintain, and promote the hometown character of historic downtown Parkville. Purpose/Vision:  Stay true to our historic character and the look and feel of our unique “Old Towne” district with attention to maintaining and restoring the downtown’s historic buildings and creating a streetscape that communicates our historic nature.  Enhance the current downtown business mixture of locally-owned, unique shops and restaurants with additional compatible businesses that offer dining and shopping experiences that respond to today’s consumer needs.  Maintain the downtown as a pedestrian-friendly shopping and dining district.  Create an entertaining downtown atmosphere with live entertainment, street performers (buskers), and an inviting streetscape. Enhance the downtown’s connection with English Landing Park and the Missouri Riverfront.  Support the development of affordable housing within walking distance of the downtown district with attention to providing housing opportunities for Park University staff and students and for retirees and families. 21  Encourage the development of family-oriented entertainment opportunities including the continued development of recreational facilities in the park areas and a museum or other cultural attractions. Parkville Area Chamber of Commerce: Mission Statement: To bridge the communication between business and community resources to develop and promote Parkville as a quality place to live, work and recreate. Purpose/Vision: The focus of the Parkville Area Chamber is on networking, business development, retention and education. Parkville Community Development Corporation: Mission Statement: Furthering the economic development of the area within the boundaries of the city limits of Parkville, Missouri, including preserving the city’s historic structures and records, promoting the economic development of the business area, particularly the downtown, assisting small businesses to bring customers to the city, plan and carry out community activities, celebrations. Purpose/Vision: Was created to gain tax credits for Main Street in the 1990's. Presently the organization supports festivals/Main Street Parkville Association primarily as providers of administrative or financial support. Parkville Economic Development Allies: Park University: Mission Statement: The mission of Park University, an entrepreneurial institution of learning, is to provide access to academic excellence which will prepare learners to think critically, communicate effectively and engage in lifelong learning while serving a global community. Purpose/Vision: Park University will be a renowned international leader in providing innovative educational opportunities for learners within the global society. 22 Park Hill School District: Mission Statement: Through the expertise of a motivated staff, the Park Hill School District provides a meaningful education in a safe, caring environment to prepare each student for success in life. Purpose/Vision:  Building Successful Futures. Each Student. Every Day.  Park Hill students consistently perform above state and national average on all accountability measures.  Park Hill school district has over 10,000 students, 1,400 employees thus providing many employment and volunteer opportunities for Park Hill students.  The average teachers salary is over $56,000 highest within the metro with 80% of teachers obtaining a masters degree or higher.  The district is noted for financial stewardship by having one of the lowest tax rates in the metro area.  The Park Hill school district recently became the first school district in Missouri to win the prestigious Missouri Quality Award and is currently involved in the Malcolm Baldridge National Quality Program, an award given only to six school districts in the last 20 years. Platte County Economic Development Council Mission Statement: To enhance economic development in Platte County, Missouri. Purpose/Vision:  Expand new business locations in Platte County.  Expand and retain business opportunities in Platte County.  Expand community outreach opportunities to Platte County cities & towns.  Increase perceived value of the Platte County EDC by its member/investor constituents.  Enhance the infrastructure of the Platte County EDC. 23 The Ad Hoc Parkville Economic Development would like to thank the people who have contributed to this document, giving their time to share insights into the economic development environment in Parkville and to provide assistance in developing a results-oriented approach to organizing, focusing and implementing the community’s development efforts. Participants of the Ad Hoc Committee include: Jim Allen, President, The National and Parkville Commons Developments Erik Bergrud, Senior Director, Community and Government Relations, Park University Deborah Butcher, Reece & Nichols Realtors, Parkville Chamber and Parkville Community Development Corporation Boards, Parkville Board of Aldermen John Engelmann, CEcD, Manager - Economic Development, KCP&L Dr. Dennis Fisher, Superintendent, Park Hill School District Pete Fullerton, EDFP, CEcD, PCED, Executive Director, Platte County Economic Development Council Anna Jaffe, Partner & Executive Producer, Curious Eye Productions Carol Kuhns, Owner, HMS Beagle, Chair, Main Street Parkville Association Bob Mayer, CFRE, President, M R Capital Advisors, LLC, Executive in Residence, Park University Jim McCall, COUNTRY Financial, Co-chair Economic Development Committee, Parkville Area Chamber of Commerce Nan McManus, Owner, McManus Direct, Chair, Ad Hoc Parkville Economic Development Committee, Parkville Board of Aldermen Dr. Mark Noe, Chair, Department of Arts & Communication, Park University, Chair, Parkville Community Development Corporations Shani Porter, Community and Business Outreach Coordinator, Platte County Economic Development Council Bill Quitmeier, President, Quitmeier Law Firm, President, Parkville Area Chamber of Commerce Tim Rice, Vice-President, Commerce Bank, Former Chair, Parkville Community Development Corporation Kerby Varner, Co-chair Economic Development Committee, Parkville Area Chamber of Commerce Linda Varner, Senior Vice President, Patriots Bank 25 APPENDIX - RESEARCH PROJECTS Date: 10/08/09 Current Geography Selection: (1 Selected) Places: Parkville Current Index Base: Entire US Executive Summary Report with Charts Population Demographics The number of households in the study area in 1990 was 1,246 and changed to 1,665 in 2000, representing a change of 33.6%. The household count in 2009 was 1,786 and the household projection for 2014 is 1,790, a change of 0.2%. The population in the study area in 1990 was 3,561 and in 2000 it was 4,507, roughly a 26.6% change. The population in 2009 was 5,399 and the projection for 2014 is 6,080 representing a change of 12.6%. Percent Change 1990 Census 2000 Census 2009 Estimate 2014 Projection 1990 to 2000 2009 to 2014 Total Population 3,561 4,507 5,399 6,080 26.6%12.6% Total Households 1,246 1,665 1,786 1,790 33.6%0.2% Population by Age In 1990, the median age of the total population in the study area was 29.7, and in 2000, it was 35.3. The median age in 2009 is 36.4 and it is predicted to change in five years to 37.8 years. In 2009, females represented 52.0% of the population with a median age of 36.8 and males represented 48.0% of the population with a median age of 36.0 years. In 2009, the most prominent age group in this geography is Age 45 to 54 years. The age group least represented in this geography is 75 + years. Age Groups Percent Change 1990 Census %2000 Census %2009 Estimate %2014 Projection %1990 to 2000 2009 to 2014 0 to 4 299 8.4%296 6.6%360 6.7%368 6.1%-1.0%2.2% 5 to 14 531 14.9%657 14.6%694 12.9%802 13.2%23.7%15.5% 15 to 19 278 7.8%405 9.0%542 10.0%572 9.4%45.7%5.4% 20 to 24 353 9.9%372 8.2%502 9.3%583 9.6%5.2%16.1% 25 to 34 709 19.9%507 11.2%505 9.4%542 8.9%-28.5%7.2% 35 to 44 641 18.0%835 18.5%830 15.4%844 13.9%30.3%1.7% 45 to 54 388 10.9%743 16.5%876 16.2%945 15.6%91.4%7.9% 55 to 64 199 5.6%387 8.6%652 12.1%760 12.5%94.0%16.5% 65 to 74 102 2.9%191 4.2%323 6.0%507 8.3%87.5%57.2% 75 +63 1.8%116 2.6%114 2.1%157 2.6%84.6%37.8% Population by Race/Ethnicity In 2009, the predominant race/ ethnicity category in this study area is White. The race & ethnicity category least represented in this geography is American Indian, Alaska Native. Race & Ethnicity Percent Change 1990 Census %2000 Census %2009 Estimate %2014 Projection %1990 to 2000 2009 to 2014 White 3,288 92.3%4,052 89.9%4,735 87.7%5,341 87.8%23.2%12.8% Black 153 4.3%227 5.0%354 6.6%454 7.5%48.4%28.0% American Indian or Alaska Native 31 0.9%24 0.5%1 0.0%0 0.0%-22.7%-69.8% Asian or Pacific Islander 49 1.4%90 2.0%173 3.2%226 3.7%82.8%30.6% Other Race 41 1.2%43 1.0%51 1.0%25 0.4%3.9%-52.3% Two or More Races 72 1.6%84 1.6%35 0.6%-58.4% Hispanic Ethnicity 105 2.9%113 2.5%224 4.2%338 5.6%7.3%50.6% Not Hispanic or Latino 3,457 97.1%4,395 97.5%5,175 95.8%5,742 94.4%27.1%11.0% Households by Income In 2009 the predominant household income category in this study area is $100K - $150K, and the income group that is least represented in this geography is $15K - $25K. HH Income Categories Percent Change 1990 Census %2000 Census %2009 Estimate %2014 Projection %1990 to 2000 2009 to 2014 $0 - $15,000 137 11.0%141 8.5%112 6.3%112 6.2%3.3%-0.6% $15,000 - $24,999 238 19.1%147 8.8%102 5.7%86 4.8%-38.3%-16.1% $25,000 - $34,999 213 17.1%180 10.8%132 7.4%124 6.9%-15.8%-5.8% $35,000 - $49,999 258 20.7%194 11.6%219 12.2%198 11.1%-25.0%-9.3% $50,000 - $74,999 262 21.0%414 24.9%281 15.7%249 13.9%58.2%-11.5% $75,000 - $99,999 88 7.1%238 14.3%300 16.8%297 16.6%170.5%-1.1% $100,000 - $149,999 25 2.0%181 10.9%322 18.0%353 19.7%624.1%9.7% $150,000 +19 1.5%170 10.2%318 17.8%371 20.7%815.8%16.8% Average Hhld Income $0 $72,525 $112,852 $92,006 N/A%-18.5% Median Hhld Income $36,500 $59,620 $78,438 $85,052 63.3%8.4% Per Capita Income $15,431 $26,784 $41,849 $31,001 73.6%-25.9% Current year data is for the year 2009, 5 year projected data is for the year 2014. More About Our Data. Demographic data © 2009 by Experian/Applied Geographic Solutions. Traffic Count data © 2009 by DataMetrix. All rights reserved. © 2009. DDR is brought to you by SRC, LLC. SRC, DemographicsNow.com and the SRC and DemographicsNow.com logos are trademarks of SRC, LLC. All rights reserved. Privacy Statement | License Agreement Date: 10/08/09 Current Geography Selection: (1 Selected) Places: Parkville Current Index Base: Entire US Demographic Detail Summary Report Population Demographics Percent Change 1990 Census 2000 Census 2009 Estimate 2014 Projection 1990 to 2000 2009 to 2014 Total Population 3,561 4,507 5,399 6,080 26.6%12.6% Population Density (Pop/Sq Mi)484.5 613.1 734.5 827.2 26.6%12.6% Total Households 1,246 1,665 1,786 1,790 33.6%0.2% Population by Gender: Male 1,782 50.1%2,207 49.0%2,590 48.0%2,828 46.5%23.8%9.2% Female 1,779 50.0%2,300 51.0%2,809 52.0%3,252 53.5%29.3%15.8% Population by Race/Ethnicity Percent Change 1990 Census 2000 Census 2009 Estimate 2014 Projection 1990 to 2000 2009 to 2014 White 3,288 92.3%4,052 89.9%4,735 87.7%5,341 87.8%23.2%12.8% Black 153 4.3%227 5.0%354 6.6%454 7.5%48.4%28.0% American Indian or Alaska Native 31 0.9%24 0.5%1 0.0%0 0.0%-22.7%-69.8% Asian or Pacific Islander 49 1.4%90 2.0%173 3.2%226 3.7%82.8%30.6% Some Other Race 41 1.2%43 1.0%51 1.0%25 0.4%3.9%-52.3% Two or More Races 72 1.6%84 1.6%35 0.6%-58.4% Hispanic Ethnicity 105 2.9%113 2.5%224 4.2%338 5.6%7.3%50.6% Not Hispanic or Latino 3,457 97.1%4,395 97.5%5,175 95.8%5,742 94.4%27.1%11.0% Population by Age Percent Change 1990 Census 2000 Census 2009 Estimate 2014 Projection 1990 to 2000 2009 to 2014 0 to 4 299 8.4%296 6.6%360 6.7%368 6.1%-1.0%2.2% 5 to 14 531 14.9%657 14.6%694 12.9%802 13.2%23.7%15.5% 15 to 19 278 7.8%405 9.0%542 10.0%572 9.4%45.7%5.4% 20 to 24 353 9.9%372 8.2%502 9.3%583 9.6%5.2%16.1% 25 to 34 709 19.9%507 11.2%505 9.4%542 8.9%-28.5%7.2% 35 to 44 641 18.0%835 18.5%830 15.4%844 13.9%30.3%1.7% 45 to 54 388 10.9%743 16.5%876 16.2%945 15.6%91.4%7.9% 55 to 64 199 5.6%387 8.6%652 12.1%760 12.5%94.0%16.5% 65 to 74 102 2.9%191 4.2%323 6.0%507 8.3%87.5%57.2% 75 to 84 46 1.3%92 2.0%89 1.6%132 2.2%97.7%48.9% 85+16 0.5%24 0.5%25 0.5%25 0.4%47.1%-1.3% Median Age: Total Population 29.7 35.3 36.4 37.8 18.7%3.7% Households by Income Percent Change 1990 Census 2000 Census 2009 Estimate 2014 Projection 1990 to 2000 2009 to 2014 $0 - $15,000 137 11.0%141 8.5%112 6.3%112 6.2%3.3%-0.6% $15,000 - $24,999 238 19.1%147 8.8%102 5.7%86 4.8%-38.3%-16.1% $25,000 - $34,999 213 17.1%180 10.8%132 7.4%124 6.9%-15.8%-5.8% $35,000 - $49,999 258 20.7%194 11.6%219 12.2%198 11.1%-25.0%-9.3% $50,000 - $74,999 262 21.0%414 24.9%281 15.7%249 13.9%58.2%-11.5% $75,000 - $99,999 88 7.1%238 14.3%300 16.8%297 16.6%170.5%-1.1% $100,000 - $149,999 25 2.0%181 10.9%322 18.0%353 19.7%624.1%9.7% $150,000 +19 1.5%170 10.2%318 17.8%371 20.7%815.8%16.8% Average Hhld Income $0 $72,525 $112,852 $92,006 N/A%-18.5% Median Hhld Income $36,500 $59,620 $78,438 $85,052 63.3%8.4% Per Capita Income $15,431 $26,784 $41,849 $31,001 73.6%-25.9% Employment and Business Percent Change 1990 Census 2000 Census 2009 Estimate 2014 Projection 1990 to 2000 2009 to 2014 Age 16 + Population 2,688 3,484 4,276 4,837 29.6%13.1% In Labor Force 2,146 79.8%2,602 74.7%2,983 69.8%3,351 69.3%21.3%12.3% Employed 2,064 96.2%2,530 97.2%2,761 92.6%3,179 94.9%22.6%15.1% Unemployed 76 3.6%71 2.7%217 7.3%168 5.0%-6.9%-22.6% In Armed Forces 3 0.1%1 0.0%6 0.2%4 0.1%-68.9%-22.7% Not In Labor Force 542 20.2%882 25.3%1,293 30.2%1,487 30.7%62.6%15.0% Number of Employees (Daytime Pop)3,142 Number of Establishments 294 Emp in Blue Collar Occupations 784 31.0% Emp in White Collar Occupations 1,746 69.0% Housing Units Percent Change 1990 Census 2000 Census 2009 Estimate 2014 Projection 1990 to 2000 2009 to 2014 Total Housing Units 1,378 1,748 2,128 2,475 26.8%16.3% Owner Occupied 768 55.7%1,101 63.0%1,182 55.6%1,079 43.6%43.4%-8.7% Renter Occupied 478 34.7%564 32.2%604 28.4%711 28.8%17.8%17.7% Vacant 132 9.6%84 4.8%341 16.0%684 27.7%-36.7%100.6% Vehicles Available Percent Change 1990 Census 2000 Census 2009 Estimate 2014 Projection 1990 to 2000 2009 to 2014 Average Vehicles Per Hhld 2.00 1.80 2.00 2.00 -8.5%-0.5% 0 Vehicles Available 30 2.2%59 3.6%59 3.3%80 4.5%98.3%36.6% 1 Vehicle Available 353 25.8%570 34.2%584 32.7%618 34.5%61.7%5.8% 2+ Vehicles Available 984 72.0%1,035 62.2%1,143 64.0%1,092 61.0%5.2%-4.5% Marital Status Percent Change 1990 Census 2000 Census 2009 Estimate 2014 Projection 1990 to 2000 2009 to 2014 Age 15+ Population 2,733 3,554 4,344 4,913 30.0%13.1% Married, Spouse Present 1,557 57.0%2,012 56.6%2,508 57.7%2,807 57.1%29.3%11.9% Married, Spouse Absent 49 1.8%71 2.0%77 1.8%90 1.8%45.0%17.6% Divorced 283 10.4%342 9.6%384 8.8%421 8.6%21.0%9.6% Widowed 86 3.1%142 4.0%147 3.4%178 3.6%65.5%21.7% Never Married 758 27.8%987 27.8%1,228 28.3%1,416 28.8%30.2%15.3% Educational Attainment Percent Change 1990 Census 2000 Census 2009 Estimate 2014 Projection 1990 to 2000 2009 to 2014 Age 25+ Population 2,102 2,778 3,300 3,756 32.2%13.8% Grade K - 8 59 2.8%26 0.9%16 0.5%13 0.4%-55.9%-14.4% Grade 9 - 12 149 7.1%181 6.5%107 3.2%111 3.0%21.2%4.6% High School Graduate 613 29.2%603 21.7%711 21.5%779 20.8%-1.7%9.6% Some College, No Degree 564 26.8%754 27.1%753 22.8%814 21.7%33.6%8.1% Associates Degree 147 7.0%213 7.7%375 11.4%449 12.0%44.7%19.9% Bachelor's Degree 382 18.2%644 23.2%868 26.3%1,038 27.6%68.6%19.6% Graduate Degree 186 8.8%348 12.5%471 14.3%551 14.7%87.3%16.9% No Schooling Completed 8 0.3% Current year data is for the year 2009, 5 year projected data is for the year 2014. More About Our Data. Demographic data © 2009 by Experian/Applied Geographic Solutions. Traffic Count data © 2009 by DataMetrix. All rights reserved. © 2009. DDR is brought to you by SRC, LLC. SRC, DemographicsNow.com and the SRC and DemographicsNow.com logos are trademarks of SRC, LLC. All rights reserved. Privacy Statement | License Agreement 17 Problem:The 78 million baby boomers have driven up housing demand and prices for three decades since beginning to buy homes in 1970 and continuing up the hous- ing ladder. What will happen when boomers begin to sell off their high-priced homes to relatively smaller and less-advantaged generations? Purpose:This article presents a long-run projection of annual home buying and selling by age groups in the 50 states and considers implications for communities of the anticipated downturn in demand. Methods:We propose a method for estimating average annual age-speciﬁc buying and selling rates, weighting these by population projections to identify states whose growing proportions of seniors may cause an excess of home selling sooner than others. We also analyze the likely supplier responses to diminished demand, and recommend strategies for local planners. Results and conclusions:Sellers of existing homes provide 85% of the annual supply of homes sold, and home sales are driven by the aging of the population since seniors are net home sellers. The ratio of seniors to working-age residents will increase by 67% over the next two decades; thus we anticipate the end of a generational housing bubble. We also ﬁnd that younger genera- tions face an affordability barrier created by the recent housing price boom. With proper foresight, planners could mitigate what otherwise could be signiﬁcant consequences of these projections. Takeaway for practice:The retirement of the baby boomers could signal the end of the postwar era for planning, and reverse Aging Baby Boomers and the Generational Housing Bubble Foresight and Mitigation of an Epic Transition Dowell Myers and SungHo Ryu The giant baby boom generation born between 1946 and 1964 has been a dominant force in the housing market for decades. This group has always provided the largest age cohorts, and has created a surge in demand as it passed through each stage of the life cycle. As its members entered into home buying in the 1970s, gentriﬁcation in cities and construction of starter homes in suburbs increased. Their subsequent march into middle age was accompanied by rising earnings and larger expenditures for move-up housing. Looking ahead to the coming decade, the boomers will retire, relocate, and eventually withdraw from the housing market. Given the potential effects of so many of these changes happening in a limited period of time, communities should consider how best to plan this transition. Communities in the United States face an historic tipping point. After decades of stability, we expect the ratio of seniors to working-age residents to grow abruptly, increasing by roughly 30% in each of the next two decades. We also expect that this change will make many more homes available for sale than there are buyers for them. The exit of the baby boomers from home- ownership could have effects as signiﬁcant as their entry, though with different consequences. several longstanding trends, leading decline to exceed gentriﬁcation, demand for low- density housing to diminish, and new emphasis on compact development. Such developments call planners to undertake new activities, including actively marketing to retain elderly residents and cultivating new immigrant residents to replace them. Keywords:baby boomers, aging, housing bubble Research support:The Fannie Mae Foundation. About the authors: Dowell Myers (dowell@usc.edu) is a professor of urban planning and demography in the School of Policy, Planning, and Development at the University of Southern California. He is the author of Immigrants and Boomers: Forging a New Social Contract for the Future of America (Russell Sage Foundation, 2007). SungHo Ryu (sungryu @usc.edu) is an associate planner with the Southern California Association of Gov- ernments and also a doctoral candidate in the School of Policy, Planning, and Development. Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 74, No. 1, Winter 2008 DOI 10.1080/01944360701802006 © American Planning Association, Chicago, IL. 74-1 03 280249 Myers P 1/13/08 8:03 PM Page 17 Recent discussion of the housing market has focused on price escalation and the creation of a housing “bubble” (Case & Shiller, 2003). During the extraordinary run-up in housing prices from 2000 to 2005, the business pages were ﬁlled with concern that this supposed real estate bubble might burst. The meltdown of mortgage markets in 2007, led by the subprime sector, has heightened anxiety about foreclosures and price reductions. Certainly this set of recent developments is cause for concern, but a larger and longer-lasting generational correction looms ahead. The changes in the housing market following the retire- ment of the baby boom generation could provide a context for local planning and development in the next quarter century that is very different from the last. Urban planners have special responsibility for cham- pioning the longer view, as underscored by Hopkins and Zapata (2007). “As planners we want to work with con- stituencies to engage and shape futures, not merely stumble upon these futures as they emerge. To shape futures, we must imagine them in advance and understand how they might emerge” (p. 1). Most plans have time horizons of 5 to 20 years. Nelson (2006) recently called for planners to take the lead in adopting a longer view, asserting that the built environment will be wholly remade in the next half century, and urging planners to place their incremental decisions in this longer perspective. Such a long-term outlook is very different from that of business forecasting, which typically informs real estate market analysis. Such forecasting rarely looks beyond 1 year.1 Analyzing the implications of demographic trends driven by human aging can help planners envision the changes ahead (Masnick, 2002; Myers & Menifee, 2000). The aging of the baby boomers has been foreseen for decades, but was for many years too distant to cause much concern except about its possible consequences for Social Security. The passage of time has brought the issues closer, and it may now be appropriate for urban planners to emphasize the broader implications of this major demo- graphic change. Only a few planners have considered what an aging society might mean for transportation, land use, or other planning concerns (Giuliano, 2004; Rosenbloom, 2004). The ﬁrst wave of baby boomers will reach age 65 (the dividing point between what we term “elderly” or “seniors” and working-age adults) in 2011, with the last of this generation scheduled to cross that threshold in 2029. Meanwhile the ratio of seniors to younger adults will surge to unprecedented levels, affecting all aspects of community life in which these two groups are systematically different. We consider the implications of this transition by viewing it through the lens of homeownership. One key question is whether the growing numbers of seniors will generate more home sales than the housing market is able to absorb. Speciﬁcally, we aim to identify the point at which boomers will begin to offer more homes for sale than they buy, with potentially serious consequences for the housing market. We project when this will occur in all 50 states, taking into account each state’s age speciﬁc population growth and prevailing patterns of home buying and selling. We begin by discussing the recent boom in housing prices and the growing gap between an older generation with high housing equity and a younger generation who ﬁnd housing increasingly unaffordable. We review the notion of a housing price bubble and consider whether a generational housing bubble might exist. We present the age-speciﬁc annual rates of buying and selling homes in each state, and use them to create long-term projections. Finally, we discuss the planning implications of these possible futures. Background Aging Baby Boomers and the New Dominance of the Elderly Since it began, the giant baby boom generation has been a dominant factor shaping housing markets. Fre- quently described as resembling a pig passing through a python, this large bulge of population surged slowly through the age structure. We focus on the adults most likely to own homes by excluding all those age 24 and younger.2 After 1970, the leading edge of the baby boomers turned 25 and entered the market for homeownership. Figure 1 shows growth in the U.S. population over seven decades, both overall and partitioned into those between ages 25 to 64 and those 65 and older. Figure 1 shows that in all decades save the 1960s, a single age group, the leading edge of the baby boomers, accounts for half or more of U.S. population growth. Between 1970 and 1980, as the baby boom children came of age, the population age 25 and older increased by 22.9 million, more than twice the growth of 10.6 million witnessed between 1960 and 1970. Whereas the largest adult growth in the 1960s was in the group aged between 55 and 64, growth in the 1970s in the 25 to 34 age group was four times greater, and many of these individuals were forming new households and buying homes. This sudden surge in demand drove several housing market trends, spurring new apartment construction, gentriﬁcation in cities where young adults congregated, and escalation in house prices in metropolitan areas where increased supply 18 Journal of the American Planning Association, Winter 2008, Vol. 74, No. 1 74-1 03 280249 Myers P 1/13/08 8:03 PM Page 18 was limited by topography or regulatory constraints. In subsequent decades the leading edge of the baby boom advanced to progressively older age groups, each time contributing half or more of the total population growth in that decade. As the cohort grew older and achieved their peak earnings, they increased demand for move-up housing for families with older children and higher amenity housing for empty nesters with mature tastes. After 2010 the leading edge of the boomers will pass age 65 and growth among the elderly population will substan- tially exceed that of younger adults, an unprecedented social and economic development. This is best seen in the ratio of those aged 65 and older to working-age adults (aged 25 to 64). After decades of relative stability, this ratio will surge 30% in the 2010s and a further 29% in the 2020s (Myers, 2007), altering the balance to which we have long been accustomed. Here, we emphasize how this surging ratio will increase the number of older home sellers relative to younger home buyers, and focus on deciphering what this age shift implies for trends in homeownership, and what responses are possible for planners. Although the phenomenon affects every state (Frey, 2007), its effects will vary somewhat across the nation. For example, from 2010 to 2030, the ratio of seniors to younger adults is expected to rise 59.0% in New Jersey, 64.0% in Ohio, 66.4% in California, and 82.4% in Arizona, a magnet for retirement migration. (For details on every state see the Appendix.) Demographics and Housing Relations between age and housing demand are central to studies of demographics and housing (Myers, 1990). Housing demographers focus especially on age because mobility declines sharply with age, and because different age groups typically occupy different types of housing (Clark & Dieleman, 1996; Gober, 1992; Masnick, 2002). Of greatest relevance to this analysis are the interactions between age and homeownership (Chevan, 1989). Home- ownership rates rise with age, and do not generally peak until after age 65. John Pitkin’s (1990) study of elderly homeownership was especially notable for showing how most variation in homeownership among older age cohorts over time is explained by demographic factors and inertia from prior decades, while current economic factors add small but signiﬁcant effects at the margin. The experience of two Harvard economists, one who later became chair of the Council of Economic Advisers, suggests it is dangerous to attempt to predict long-term trends in housing, unless the demographics are well handled. Myers and Ryu: Aging Baby Boomers and the Generational Housing Bubble 19 Figure 1. Growth in United States population age 25 and over for each decade from 1960 to 2030 (in millions). Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2003b, Tables 12 and HS-3. 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 1960-70 1970-80 1980-90 1990-00 2000-10 2010-20 2020-30 Age group accounting for largest amount of growth 1960–70 1970–80 1980–90 1990–00 2000–10 2010–20 2020–30 55–64 = 3.1 million 25–34 = 12.1 million 35–44 = 12.0 million 45–54 = 12.8 million 55–64 = 11.8 million 65–74 = 10.5 million 75–84 = 8.3 million n Ages 25–64 n Ages 65 and older 74-1 03 280249 Myers P 1/13/08 8:03 PM Page 19 Mankiw and Weil (1989) predicted a 47% decline in house prices during the 1990s, based largely on their modeling of declining demand as baby boomers aged. Instead, we have seen baby boomer demand for housing grow and prices double. Housing economist Karl Case recently called the Mankiw-Weil prophecy “one of the worst forecasts in the history of mankind” (Carmichael, 2007, p. 2). Their approach used cross-sectional analysis improperly to predict trends for age cohorts.3 Although economists have avoided long-term forecasts since Mankiw and Weil’s experience, longitudinal inferences about hous- ing demand can still be made with cross-sectional data if we are careful (Myers, 1999). Indeed, planners should attempt careful, forward-oriented analysis so as not to make major policy errors and to avoid either undue pessimism or unwarranted optimism (Krainer, 2005). Short-Term Correction and a Generational Housing Bubble We argue that the United States is currently experi- encing a short-term housing market bubble that is nested within a longer-term, generational housing bubble of greater magnitude. The recent housing price boom has been remarkably strong. From 2000 to 2005, the median sales price reported by the National Association of Realtors rose 48.6% nationwide, and in some areas, such as Califor- nia, the median sales price rose 117.1%. Only in 2007 did prices begin to slip in particular metropolitan areas and nationwide. This price run-up had a two-edged effect that substantially increased the home equity of existing home- owners while at the same time making housing less afford- able for would-be home buyers. The result is a sharply increased generation gap, with the baby boomers largely gaining, while members of younger generations face higher affordability hurdles. Short-Term Housing Cycles.According to Case and Shiller (2003), the term housing bubble “refers to a situa- tion in which excessive public expectations of future price increases cause prices to be temporarily elevated” (p. 299). In a housing bubble, expectations of price appreciation feed further escalation of prices; people buy houses for “future price increases rather than simply for the pleasure of occupying the home. And it is this motive that is thought to lend instability to bubbles, a tendency to crash when the investment motive weakens” (Case & Shiller, 2003, p. 321). Underlying the increases are changes in market fundamentals, or what Shiller (2005) calls “precipitating factors”: increases in employment or income in the area, increases in population, reductions in ﬁnancing costs, or reductions in land permitted for development. Over the long run, housing construction is closely linked to growth in population, though it can be constrained by recession or by regulatory constraints. There are also substantial lag effects, and the age group experiencing the most growth disproportionately inﬂuences the type of housing constructed (Campbell, 1966). Regulatory Effects.A number of economists have recently addressed the price effects of regulations that restrict new construction (Glaeser, Gyourko, & Saks, 2005; Green, Malpezzi, & Mayo, 2005; Quigley & Raphael, 2005). Local activism to protect the environment and protect local livability has caused many communities to add development restrictions since 1970 (Fulton, Shigley, Harrison, & Sezzi, 2000). This was especially true in California, where population grew rapidly in large metro- politan areas, but surrounding water and mountains set physical limits to urban expansion and were protected as resources. Over the years, both demographic pressure for more housing construction and regulatory restrictions increased. When demand increased during expansionary phases of the business cycle and was not met quickly by increases in sup- ply, housing prices surged. The corrections that followed were rarely as large as the price surges, amounting most often to a few years of price stagnation, not sizable busts, and thus prices have ratcheted upward over the long term.4 Role of Young Adults.The numbers of young adults in the population and their home-buying behavior are especially important in driving these price trends. They make up the principal reservoir of new demand in the marketplace, a pool of ﬁrst-time home buyers poised to enter the market or not, depending on perceived conditions. When market fundamentals drive housing prices up, word of mouth and the fear that rising prices will make future purchases unaffordable amplify the trend. As a result, the number of buyers in the market increases to include both speculators5 and young adults accelerating their entry into homeownership. Thus, paradoxically, because of the investment incentive, homeownership generally rises when housing prices are rising rather than when housing is becoming more affordable. A study of changing home- ownership rates among young adults in the 1980s and 1990s found that in states where prices had increased substantially, homeownership rates declined very little or even rose, whereas in states where prices had declined markedly, homeownership rates plunged by 10 to 20% (Myers, 2001).6 Potential buyers in declining markets had an incentive to wait for prices to bottom, while those in booming markets felt pressure to accelerate their purchases, to get on board before the train left the station. Thus the housing market’s volatility is ampliﬁed by buyers’ responses to trends in market fundamentals. 20 Journal of the American Planning Association, Winter 2008, Vol. 74, No. 1 74-1 03 280249 Myers P 1/13/08 8:03 PM Page 20 Housing markets depend on the ability of the young to buy homes, but they face greater challenges in some parts of the nation. Figure 2 shows, for each of the states, the ratio of the median value of all owner-occupied homes to the median income of households with heads between the ages of 30 and 34 in 2000 and 2005.7 This ratio allows us to compare housing prices in different places and over time, and focuses attention on the potential buying power of the generation entering the housing market. House prices in New Jersey nearly doubled, for example, going from 2.89 times the median household income of this group of young adults in 2000 to 5.00 times their income in 2005. Although prices increased in virtually every state between 2000 and 2005, the spikes in some states are clearly evident. The already high-cost states of California and Hawaii became nearly twice as expensive between 2000 and 2005, with median housing value increasing to roughly 9 times the median income of young adults. A second tier of expensive states, with ratios of 5 or greater, includes Nevada in the West and Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and New Jersey in the Northeast. A third grouping has ratios greater than 4 in 2005: Arizona, Colorado, Oregon, and Washington in the West, Florida and Maryland in the South, and Connecticut and New York in the East. Much of the nation, however, still had low ratios of housing prices to incomes, even after the boom years. The Generational Housing Bubble.The current gap between generations has grown unsustainable, and the risk of a generational housing bubble now compounds the risk of a shorter-term housing bubble. The recent upsurge in prices is so extreme in many states, and has been so abrupt, that many real estate observers fear a sharp downward correction.8 Not only do increased housing prices pose a particular challenge to young households entering the market, but also ﬁnancing terms became much less favorable after 2005. What have not been recognized to date are the grave impacts of the growing age imbalance in the housing market. If the elderly are more often home sellers, and are more numerous than the young who are buyers, a market shift could come on quickly after 2010, causing housing Myers and Ryu: Aging Baby Boomers and the Generational Housing Bubble 21 Figure 2. Ratios of median home values to median incomes of household heads aged 30 to 34 in 2000 and 2005, by state. Sources: U.S. Census Bureau (2003a, 2005a). 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 W yom ing Idaho Arizona M ontana N evada N ew M exico Alaska Utah Colorado O regon W ashington California H awaii N orth D akota Iowa South D akota Kansas Indiana N ebraska M issouri O hio W isconsin M ichigan M innesota Illinois Arkansas Texas O klahom a M ississippi South Carolina Alabam a W est Virginia Kentucky Louisiana Tennessee Florida N orth Carolina Georgia D elaware Virginia M aryland Pennsylvania M aine N ew H am pshire Verm ont N ew Jersey Rhode Island Connecticut N ew York M assachusetts 2000 2005 West Midwest South Northeast 74-1 03 280249 Myers P 1/13/08 8:03 PM Page 21 prices to fall. Even if prices remain ﬂat, without the invest- ment incentive young households will likely slow their entry into homeownership, worsening the imbalance between sellers and buyers. Once past the tipping point, market adjustments will cascade in virtually every com- munity, as the ratio of seniors to working age adults will increase for the greater part of two decades. New Data on Buying and Selling by Age Groups Those aiming to anticipate the future of housing markets commonly extrapolate trends obtained by com- paring homeownership rates and numbers of homeowners at two different times. Yet these indicators compare hous- ing stocks at different times rather than ﬂows of annual activity. The stock of housing would adjust only gradually even if the annual ﬂows changed abruptly, and thus is not a very sensitive indicator. In fact, even if the number of homeowners remained constant over time, demand would exist for trading up and trading places. Thus, homeowner- ship rates are insufﬁcient for understanding the future of housing markets, and could be misleading. Instead, we use annual per capita rates at which people of differing ages sell and buy homes, to allow us to project what will happen to the housing market as the demographic proﬁle of the nation changes. These rates are estimated for the period 1995 to 2000, under the assumption that this period yields an expression of more normal market behavior that can be expected to prevail in future years than behavior in the boom years of 2000 to 2005 or the recession years of 1990 to 1995. Sales rates are difﬁcult to know because sellers relocate after they sell and cannot be surveyed. As a result, far more is known about recent buyers. But to understand the market, we need comparable information about both buying and selling. Thus we employed a new method. We began by assembling 2000 Census sample data for individuals. Our data represented the complete Census sample for each 5-year cohort between the ages of 15 and 85 and older, in each state. We also knew whether these individuals were householders (the persons owning or renting the unit where the household lives), their housing tenure in 2000, the length of time they had lived at their 2000 residence, and the state where they had lived 5 years earlier. We estimated the number of home purchases between 1995 and 2000 in each age cohort, for each state, as the number of householders who were also homeowners and had occupied their homes for less than 5 years, ad- justing for those who purchased more than one home for occupancy in this interval. We estimated the number of home sales, again for each age cohort, for each state, in two ways. First we assumed that home buyers were also previous home sellers, after adjusting for the estimated share that are ﬁrst-time homebuyers (as derived from the American Housing Survey). We assigned their sales to the states where they had reported residing 5 years earlier, whether or not that was where they had purchased a new home. In addition, for those over age 60, we compared the number of homeowners in 2000 to the number of homeowners in the same cohort when it was 10 years younger in 1990. We considered this difference to be a measure of all the home sales that were not followed by purchasing another home, but by renting, moving to a retirement home, or death. To use these rates of purchase and sale with population projections, they must be estimated on a per capita, not per household, basis. Thus we divided the purchases and sales in each age group for each state over the decade9 by the average size of the cohort during the decade, and then converted this to average annual rates of buying and selling.10 Figure 3 displays the annualized, age-speciﬁc rates of buying and selling homes per 100 people we calculated for the nation as a whole. The highest buying rate (3.6 pur- chases per year per 100 persons) occurs between ages 30 and 34. From this peak, rates of buying homes gradually decline at later ages. Readers may ﬁnd it surprising that the per capita rate of home buying remains as high as it does among the elderly. Over 1% of people aged 75 to 79 buy new principal residences in any given year. Nonetheless, the likelihood that a person in this age group will sell an owner-occupied home is more than three times higher than the likelihood that they will buy a home. At age 80 and above the annual rate escalates to nearly 9 home sales per 100 people.11 However, until age 70 the annual sell rate remains at about 2% per year for a remarkably broad range of ages. For most of the modern American lifespan the rates of buying and selling are closely related, because most of those who sell a home then replace it by buying another. However, below age 50, buying is more common than selling, and net homeownership rates rise to this point. When people enter their late-50s and early-60s, as the leading edge of the baby boom generation has now done, buying and selling are in balance. Among individuals in their mid-60s sellers come to outnumber buyers before selling dominates among those in their 70s and beyond. Among people of the same age, sellers come to exceed buyers at about age 65 nationwide, but this varies markedly by state, as shown below. 22 Journal of the American Planning Association, Winter 2008, Vol. 74, No. 1 74-1 03 280249 Myers P 1/13/08 8:03 PM Page 22 Projections of Future Numbers of Buyers and Sellers in the 50 States We now apply our estimates of buy and sell rates in each age group to projected state populations in the same age groups to anticipate the future of home buying in each state. This approach assumes that the age-speciﬁc home selling and buying rates of the late 1990s reﬂect long-run average behavior.12 Although metropolitan regions are generally regarded as the best geographic units for repre- senting housing markets, data limitations lead us to focus on states. Below, we review variations among the states that reﬂect many of the same differences that we can observe among metropolitan areas and regions in the nation. We then compare projected numbers of home buyers to sellers for the 50 states. State Variations in Annual Buy and Sell Rates It is reasonable to expect that rates of buying and selling would not be the same across all states. States with higher overall homeownership rates surely have higher rates of home buying and, later, greater home sales. Also, states with more affordable housing might be expected to have higher rates of home buying among young people. Although growth in the population of seniors in most states results mostly from people aging in place (Frey, 2007), a few states are retirement destinations, likely causing them to have higher rates of home buying among older age groups than other states. Conversely, states with cold climates or more congested living environments may ﬁnd their elderly residents selling homes at earlier ages to escape unpleasant living conditions. We compare buying and selling in the following states (each shown with its 2005 ratio of median housing prices to median household income among adults ages 30–34 from Figure 2): Arizona, a retirement state (4.13); Ohio, a midwestern state, low-cost but cold (2.75); New Jersey, a high-cost eastern state (5.00); and California, a western, very-high-cost state (8.65). As predicted above, Arizona stands out for its exceptionally high buy rates, especially at older ages, which reﬂect its rapid population growth and high retirement in-migration (see Figure 4). In the other three states home buying rates peak when people are in their 30s and fall as individuals approach their retirement years. However, Ohio, the low-cost state, has home buying rates that are substantially higher among residents in their 20s and early-30s. California, by contrast, has very low home buying rates among its young adults. This is not surprising given that California’s extremely high housing Myers and Ryu: Aging Baby Boomers and the Generational Housing Bubble 23 Figure 3. Average annual percent of persons buying and selling homes in each age group, for the United States, 1995 to 2000. Note: On average, 8.8% of persons 80 and older sold homes each year. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 20–24 25–29 30–34 35–39 40–44 45–49 50–54 55–59 60–64 65–69 70–74 75–79 80+ Age groups % of persons buying and selling in each age group Buy rate Sell rate % of persons buying and selling in each age group 74-1 03 280249 Myers P 1/13/08 8:03 PM Page 23 prices require young adults to save longer for larger down payments, and advance further in their careers until they earn the higher incomes required to support large mortgage payments. California’s buying rates in middle and older ages are somewhat higher than New Jersey’s or Ohio’s, likely because buying has been delayed. New Jersey has home buying rates among young adults midway between those of Ohio and California, reﬂecting its intermediate housing prices, but has the lowest rates of home buying among older residents. Turning to home selling (see Figure 5), Arizona’s high rates stand out among middle-aged persons. Since sales by those from outside the state are counted in their previous state of residence, these represent sales by repeat buyers in Arizona.13 Arizona has long had some of the highest resi- dential mobility rates in the nation, and so this pattern of high rates of selling and buying is not surprising. The patterns in the other three states are even more similar than they were for buying rates. In middle age, about 2% of people sell their homes each year, although the rate is a bit lower in New Jersey, just as it was for home buying in this age range. California’s lower sales among young adults follow because they also have lower buying rates. After age 60 or 70, all four states exhibit rising home selling rates that appear roughly similar. To understand the future home selling of the giant baby boom generation as they reach age 65, we compare net rates of buying or selling at ages 65 to 69 across the states. Figure 6 displays these rates in a bar graph ranking states within four regions. The states range from Nevada, with a net buying rate of 1.56% per year, to Connecticut with a net selling rate of 1.02% per year. In general, very substantial net selling prevails among people of this age across the states of the Northeast and Midwest. In the South, only Maryland and Louisiana have similar rates of net selling, while Florida has very substantial net home buying at ages 65 to 69, far ahead of its closest southern rival, South Carolina. In the West, only Califor- nia and Alaska have substantial net home selling among people aged 65 to 69. Most of the other western states, led by Nevada and Arizona, have net home buying among people of these ages. Crossover Point: The Age at Which Selling Surpasses Buying We begin our analysis of the timing of the baby boomers’ impact on the housing market by ﬁnding the age at which selling typically begins to exceed buying in each state, shown in Figure 7. In some states the elderly are such active buyers that their growing numbers will not lead to an excess of sellers. In others states, however, the buyers fall behind the sellers at an early age. In six states, the number of sellers begins to exceed buyers at ages 55 to 59, while in seven states sellers exceed buyers at ages 60 to 64. Five of the states that reach this point before age 65 are located in the Northeast and ﬁve are in the Midwest, with Alaska, 24 Journal of the American Planning Association, Winter 2008, Vol. 74, No. 1 Figure 4. Average annual percent of persons buying homes in each age group, for selected states, 1995 to 2000. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 20–24 25–29 30–34 35–39 40–44 45–49 50–54 55–59 60–64 65–69 70–74 75–79 80+ Age groups % of persons buying in each age group Arizona Ohio New Jersey California % of persons buying in each age group 74-1 03 280249 Myers P 1/13/08 8:03 PM Page 24 California, and Maryland rounding out the group. Thus, it is a mix of the coldest, most congested, and most expensive states, rather than high-growth states of the South or West, which we expect to lose older homeowners most rapidly. The northeastern states lead the way, and are shaded for emphasis. In 22 states crossover occurs when people are between 65 and 69. Another 15 states, all in the South or West, have crossover points after age 70, occurring latest in Arizona, Florida, and Nevada. This reﬂects the historically higher rates of migration toward the South and West, and historically higher retirement out-migration from the Northeast and Midwest. If the baby boomers behave similarly at these ages, their effects on the housing market should exhibit strong regional differences. Net Excess of Sellers Over Buyers in the 50 States The ultimate number of sales and home purchases by owner occupiers in a given time period is the product of each state’s unique proﬁle of buying and selling rates per capita and the forecasted population for each age group at that point. Some states may have high rates but few people in the relevant age groups. Of greatest importance is whether a state has a growing or static population of young adults to absorb the homes its senior population will sell. The worst case would occur where the older population is numerous and sells its homes at an early age, but the young adult population is growing slowly or not at all, and has a low rate of home buying. We used population projections for future periods to calculate when we expect home sellers to begin to exceed home buyers in each state, and Figure 8 summarizes the results. Six states have already entered long-term buyer shortages, with seven more to follow in the next decade. However, for 30 states, we do not expect the number of buyers to fall below the number of sellers until well after 2025. Construction and Market Response The foregoing analysis centers on the magnitude of the sell-off among owner-occupants who are baby boomers. In fact, buyers will likely appear for every house because the price will be lowered until the market clears. If prices fall low enough, home buying rates may rise, sellers who are able to remain in their homes may decide to keep them, and investors may step in to claim some properties. If prices fall we also expect home builders to scale back on construction, reducing the growth in supply. The question is whether these adjustments will be sufﬁcient to cushion the baby boomer sell-off. Myers and Ryu: Aging Baby Boomers and the Generational Housing Bubble 25 Figure 5. Average annual percent of persons selling homes in each age group, for selected states, 1995 to 2000. Note: On average, between 8 and 9% of persons 80 and older sold homes each year in all these states. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 20–24 25–29 30–34 35–39 40–44 45–49 50–54 55–59 60–64 65–69 70–74 75–79 80+ Age groups % of persons selling in each age group Arizona Ohio New Jersey California% of persons selling in each age group 74-1 03 280249 Myers P 1/13/08 8:03 PM Page 25 Reasonable observers might view the problem thus: ... in the long run at least, contraction in the real estate industry may mitigate any impacts of overall decreases in housing demand. The question appears to be whether the impacts of the demographics will result more in industry contraction or in declines in value.14 Shiller (2007) stresses the importance of supplier responses in ending housing booms. Though past failures to appreciate the competition from other new construction have often led to oversupply, he asserts that large develop- ment companies today possesses better information and behave more rationally than in prior decades, as McCue and Belsky (2007) agree. In fact, in the post-2005 housing market, when sales fell and inventories grew, builders exhibited a disciplined response, scaling back production only 6 months behind the decline in sales (Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies, 2007). Unfortunately, that decline was so precipitous that many home builders were caught with greater debt than cash ﬂow. It is often overlooked that existing homeowners supply ﬁve or six times as many homes for sale as do builders of new homes.15 Existing homeowners’ decisions to sell are not professionally managed, but are driven by personal ﬁnancial, community, and aging-related life-cycle decisions. The many baby boomers facing these same issues in the future could ﬂood the market with excess supply without regard to declining demand. Undesirable effects could be magniﬁed by the duration of the baby boomer sell-off. Homebuilders are more likely to survive a short-term pullback than a prolonged contrac- tion that requires them to lay off core staff, abandon land contracts, and sell assets. Firms in the construction indus- try will attempt to keep building homes at some minimal level just to stay in business. For example, after 2 years of job losses totaling 313,000 in the long recession of the 1990s, production in California only fell to 83,341 new units in 1993, still roughly half the previous volume. Finally, construction is likely to continue because home builders are in the business of serving buyers whose needs cannot be met by the existing inventory. The fact 26 Journal of the American Planning Association, Winter 2008, Vol. 74, No. 1 Figure 6. Net annual percent of persons aged 65–69 buying or selling homes, by state and region. -1.2 -0.8 -0.4 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 California Alaska W yom ing M ontana W ashington H awaii Colorado O regon Utah Idaho N ew M exico Arizona N evada M ichigan Indiana Illinois O hio W isconsin N orth D akota Iowa M innesota N ebraska M issouri Kansas South D akota M aryland Louisiana W est Virginia Virginia Kentucky Alabam a M ississippi Texas O klahom a Georgia Tennessee N orth Carolina D elaware Arkansas South Carolina Florida Connecticut N ew York Rhode Island Pennsylvania M aine N ew Jersey M assachusetts Verm ont N ew H am pshire West Midwest South Northeast Net annual percent buying or selling Midwest South NortheastWest 1.6 1.2 0.8 0.4 0 -0.4 -0.8 -1.2 74-1 03 280249 Myers P 1/13/08 8:03 PM Page 26 that older people outnumber younger people nationally (see Figure 1 and Appendix Table A-1) ensures that most builders will try to serve the former by building housing better suited to their needs than what is already on the market. Although the older population will be selling more homes than they buy, better than 1% of them will still buy homes each year. And younger people will still buy homes at three times this rate. People may demand new construc- tion in order to get novel design or to locate in growing areas where supply is insufﬁcient, or in locations with better access to jobs and transit. In sum, supply will be dominated by the actions of aging homeowners who have little ability to postpone decisions, and home builders who cut back as little as possible. Large builders will shift to markets with good growth prospects and scale back their operations elsewhere. Other builders will ﬁnd niches of underserved demand, particularly among the elderly, even in stagnant or declin- ing markets. Thus we expect the number of properties for sale to grow ever larger, creating a buyer’s market, and vacancies to accumulate in less desirable neighborhoods and parts of the nation. Consequences of a Generational Housing Price Correction There will be winners and losers in the correction to the generational housing bubble. Many young adults will wait for downward price adjustments to make home pur- chases more affordable. However the baby boomers were born over an 18-year period, and their housing sell-off could stretch over two decades instead of the typical 3 to 7 years for a housing market correction. Few young adults Myers and Ryu: Aging Baby Boomers and the Generational Housing Bubble 27 Age group <55 55–59 60–64 65–69 70–74 75–79 80+ AK CA AL AR AZ CT IN IA CO FL IL MD KS DE NV NJ MI KY GA NY MN LA HI MA OH ME ID RI MS NM MO NC MT OR NE SC NH TN ND UT OK PA SD TX VT VA WA WV WI WY Total 0 6 7 22 12 3 0 Figure 7. Crossover points: ages at which selling exceeds buying for each state. Note: Shaded states are in the Northeast. Buyers and sellers are owner- occupants, and do not include investors or those buying or selling second homes. States crossing over 2006– 2011– 2016– 2021– 2026– 2031 Period 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 and after CT MA IA CA AL AK HI LA IL KS AZ NY NE ME KY AR ND NJ MT MD CO PA OH SD MI DE WV RI VT MS FL WY NM GA OK ID WI IN MN MO NH NV NC OR SC TN TX UT VA WA Total 6 1 6 7 9 21 Figure 8. Period in which sellers exceed buyers in each state. Note: Shaded states are in the Northeast. Buyers and sellers are owner- occupants, and do not include investors or those buying or selling second homes. States crossing over CT CT NY PA MA ME VT NH NJ RI NJ NY MA RI ME NH PA VT 74-1 03 280249 Myers P 1/13/08 8:03 PM Page 27 are likely to wait that long for prices to bottom out before purchasing. Members of the baby boom generation themselves who are homeowners could be losers. As home values decline, so will home equity, shrinking retirement savings. For exam- ple, Nothaft and Chang (2004) recently reported that home equity—the difference between the home value and the amount of mortgage debt on the property— comprised at least 50% of net wealth for one-half of all households. Home equity is not only the single largest component of net wealth for most families, but it is also held by a broader cross section of families when compared with other assets. (p. 2) Home equity is less important for high-income house- holds, because they hold a disproportionate share of stocks and other investments, but it is especially important for working- and middle-class households. Moreover, equity may be more vulnerable to downturns than in prior decades. The ease of reﬁnancing or obtaining home equity loans has led many middle-class homeowners to already use up substantial portions of their equity. Analysis of recent trends indicates that many more of the soon-to-be-elderly will be heavily encumbered with debt late in life than has been the case in the recent past (Masnick, Di, & Belsky, 2006). A 25% reduction in home values could erase half the equity of homeowners with large mortgages.16 Even among those who do not sell their homes, downward reappraisal will erode the equity that would otherwise have supported reverse mortgages or home equity loans (Ed- munds & Keene, 2006). People who intend to retire using these means of extracting income from their wealth must maintain or increase the value of their homes. Implications for Local Planning Communities where home sellers are highly concen- trated could be adversely affected by the developments we describe. Our analysis compared the 50 states, and yet we know that substantial variation exists within states, with important differences among cities, suburbs, and rural areas. Given that all housing markets are local, we make the following observations about the potential local impacts and their implications for planners. Where demand falls short of housing supply, property value assessments could fall after increasing for many years, creating municipal budget deﬁcits and playing havoc with ﬁscal planning. Although it seems wise for states and localities to use current ﬁscal surpluses to pay down debt and save for later, this is often difﬁcult for local govern- ments to do. In addition, shifts that abruptly make formerly high-priced properties more affordable will create a differ- ent set of problems that could destabilize middle-class neighborhoods. We already know that aging homeowners do less to maintain their homes (Galster, 1987; Myers, 1984), and under the scenario we anticipate there may be many more such homeowners who are unable to sell. If they rent their homes or sell them to investors at a discount, neighborhoods once largely owner-occupied will have more renters. During the adjustment process many homes could stand empty for long periods, creating neighborhood nuisances. Beleaguered homeowners will put pressure on local ofﬁcials to protect their former quality of life. Yet there are a number of ways to plan in advance both to mitigate symptoms and to address the root of the problem. Plan Housing Construction Anticipating the consequences of an aging baby boom generation should help planners manage the supply of new construction to meet future housing needs and balance the demands of competing interests. Recognize New Housing and Locational Preferences. After decades of neglect, apartment construction is resurgent in many central cities (Birch, 2002), meeting preferences for housing that is higher density and more centrally located. Fishman (2005) has declared this a new “ﬁfth migration” that will focus residential growth in coming decades toward the centers, not peripheries, of metropoli- tan areas. To date, however, there is little evidence of any net shift of total or elderly population toward central cities (Englehardt, 2006; Frey, 2007). Nelson (2006) called for analyzing both housing preferences and the location of existing inventory to de- termine needs for new construction. Our analysis provides the demographic driver for these needs and preferences in the aging of the baby boom. Our projections support Nelson’s conclusion that the existing supply of large-lot homes, largely located in the suburbs, may be sufﬁcient to meet needs through 2025, at least in many parts of the nation. New construction should remedy the current undersupply of units in the more compact central city and suburban environments shown to be in growing demand, especially for aging boomers (Myers & Gearin, 2001). Regulate Overall Supply.If the aging baby boomers sell one type of housing and buy another, this could stim- ulate substantial construction. Since decisions about new construction are generally decentralized, this could lead to oversupplies of housing in many metropolitan areas. The excess vacancies would likely be clustered in localities with older and less-preferred housing. This could reverse the 28 Journal of the American Planning Association, Winter 2008, Vol. 74, No. 1 74-1 03 280249 Myers P 1/13/08 8:03 PM Page 28 post-WWII pattern in which new construction in the suburbs left vacancies and abandonment concentrated in older central city neighborhoods.17 Some are already warning of decline in early post-WWII suburbs (Lucy & Phillips, 2006), but planners should monitor supply and demand conditions in outer suburbs as well. Planners in the near future may contend simultaneously with neglected low-density single-family districts, dwellings left vacant by waves of exiting baby boomers, and controversial proposals for redevelopment at higher densities. In the past, development restrictions have protected against oversupply, although they have also led to housing price escalation and decreased affordability. A growing move- ment aims to relax those restrictions in order to facilitate denser development and make housing more affordable. Although these objectives have merit, planners should evaluate the consequences of making such changes in the context of the long-term decline in housing demand pre- dicted here. How ironic would it be if, after years of price run-ups, development restrictions were suddenly loosened in many states just in time for baby boomers’ big sell-off? Local and regional planners should manage additions to the supply of housing to avoid a glut as baby boomers age. Fight the Rising Ratio In addition to managing the construction of new housing, local planners should work on managing the ratio of seniors to working-age residents directly. Planners should aim to alleviate the potential impacts of large numbers of elderly home sellers while stimulating demand among younger adults. Plan to Retain Elderly Residents.Frey (2007) has emphasized that most people will age in the same state or metropolitan area where they have lived, though not necessarily in the same community or house. Communities should retain their elderly residents as long as possible to slow the ﬂow of houses for sale. This makes it imperative to develop elderly friendly, vital communities (Achenbaum, 2005). Rather than encouraging segregation of the elderly in separate retirement institutions, urban designers should foster their social integration into more lively communities, whose essential features include community activity centers for seniors, close-by retail services, and small, easy-access parks for midday socializing. The new movement toward planning healthy cities for active living can also help plan- ners attract and retain elderly homeowners (Frank & Engelke, 2001), as can homeowner maintenance programs, dial-a-ride transportation services, and mobile meals services (Gilderbloom & Rosentraub, 1990). Attract the Young.Planners should also aim to attract younger home buyers by increasing local employment growth, marketing to the “creative class,” (Florida, 2003) and building a cultural economy (Currid, 2007; Markusen & Schrock, 2006). Strategies to improve amenities and urban livability may appeal to some, but families also need practical help with convenient day care, afterschool pro- grams, and better local schools. Workforce housing programs can help young people absorb more of the homes for sale in a community by providing counseling and purchase assistance. It would be more effective to institute such programs early, before an excess of homes for sale tarnishes the community reputation and deters middle-class buyers. Attract New Immigrants.Fostering the settlement of new immigrants can also stimulate home buying. Immigrants are typically drawn to concentrations of job growth, but have also taken root in places experiencing average job growth or worse (like the populations of Somalis in Lewiston, Maine, and Hmong in Fresno, California). Once a group is estab- lished, it may pull in more residents of the same ethnicity. Thus, community development strategies to promote immi- grant settlement can help build a base of young residents. Per capita rates of homeownership rise dramatically as immi- grants reside longer in the United States, and immigrant populations are growing faster than native-born populations (Myers & Liu, 2005). As a result, the foreign-born share of the increase in homeowners has roughly doubled each decade since 1980, rising from 10.5% in the 1980s, to 20.7% in the 1990s, and 40.0% in the period 2000 to 2006 (Myers & Liu, 2005, Table 2).18 These shares are even higher in several states, exceeding 60% in California, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and Illinois, and they will climb much higher after the baby boomer sell-off commences. It is immigrants who will lead many markets out of the current downturn in home sales and prices. Invest in the Young.The foregoing strategies merely help one community compete against others for a ﬁxed number of potential home buyers. A longer-term strategy would expand the numbers of home buyers among the younger generation by investing in their human capital development. A state that invests more in higher education not only trains a workforce with greater earnings potential, but also cultivates the next generation of taxpayers and home buyers. Tax dollars invested today in higher education are reported to return beneﬁts two or three times greater than the original investment, in the form of future tax collec- tions on higher earnings (Myers, 2007). College graduates can also afford substantially higher priced homes. Upgrad- ing human capital among young adults will be especially crucial as the ratio of seniors to working-age adults grows. Previously neglected minority youth will beneﬁt, as will the rest of society, if state and local governments enhance the productivity of all their human resources. Myers and Ryu: Aging Baby Boomers and the Generational Housing Bubble 29 74-1 03 280249 Myers P 1/13/08 8:03 PM Page 29 Conclusion: On the Precipice of a New Era Our analysis depicts a coming generational transition in the housing market that will upset the historic balance of buyers and sellers. Residents in most states are net buyers of homes well into their 50s. The resulting upward pressure on demand by the large baby boom generation will soon peak, and after age 70 they will be net sellers in all except three states. Mankiw and Weil (1989) may have miscalculated the timing of decline, predicting its beginning 20 years or more prematurely, but the baby boomers will ﬁnally start retiring from the housing market. Their demand for housing will begin to contract, and then will decline at an accelerating rate. Boomers will dominate the housing market, as they have through their entire adult lives, when the ratio of seniors to working-age adults soars by 67% in the next two decades. This tilt toward age groups that are net sellers of housing is historically unprecedented, and it challenges planners to foresee and forestall adverse impacts. The baby boom generation was born over a period of 18 years, and once its sell-off commences, it could domi- nate the housing market for up to two decades. Planners could lessen the negative consequences of the deﬂating generational housing bubble by anticipating these long- term trends and initiating pre-emptive programs to retain elderly homeowners, attract young home buyers, and closely monitor additions to the housing inventory to forestall overbuilding. Planners must adjust their thinking for a new era that reverses many longstanding assumptions. Though planners in many urban areas have been struggling against gentriﬁ- cation, they may now need to stave off urban decline. Whereas decline once occurred in the central city, it may now be concentrated in suburbs with surpluses of large-lot single-family housing. Whereas residential development once focused on single-family homes, many states may swing toward denser developments clustered near amenities. Whereas the major housing problem was once affordability, it could now be homeowners’ dashed expectations after lifelong investment in home equity. The new challenge may be how to encourage buyers in distressed environments and how to sustain municipal services in the face of declin- ing property values. All of these reversals result from the aging of the baby boomers. By using foresight, planners have a better chance of leading their communities through the difﬁcult transition ahead. Notes 1. Occasionally housing industry analysts will take a 10-year view. For example, in a recent special effort, a consortium of leading housing trade organizations forecasted the market for a full decade, from 2004 to 2013 (Berson, Lereah, Merski, Nothaft, & Seiders, 2006). Unfortunately, a 10-year forecast horizon was not long enough for this group, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, or the Economic Development Administration to anticipate the effects of the retirement of the baby boom generation. A 10-year forecast launched from 2007 might now begin to detect these consequences. 2.According to the 2000 Census, only 1.4% of owner-occupied households in the United States were headed by a person under age 25. Age 25 is also generally regarded as the lower boundary of prime working age, when individuals are most likely to hold secure employment. 3.In 1980, the highest per capita spending on housing occurred at age 45; accordingly, Mankiw and Weil (1989) concluded that once the baby boomers passed age 45 they would begin to spend less on housing, reducing housing demand and lowering prices as the boomers aged. But it turned out that lower spending on housing after age 45 was not a result of older adults cutting back. Rather, members of the generation that was over 65 in 1980 were unlike their younger counterparts in that they had never spent much housing. The fallacy of Mankiw and Weil’s reasoning was revealed once researchers followed individual cohorts’ behaviors as they grew older (Pitkin & Myers, 1994). 4.A recent study by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (Angell & Williams, 2005) reviewed historical housing booms in all U.S. metropolitan areas for which data were available and concluded: “In over 80% of the metro-area price booms we examined between 1978 and 1998, the boom ended in a period of stagnation that allowed household incomes to catch up with local home prices.” 5.Those buying for investment purposes increase their market activity when prices are rising most rapidly and withdraw when prices ﬂatten or decline. For example, between 2002 and 2005, when the recent boom began to crest, the investor share of mortgage originations grew from 6.8 to 10.9% in Los Angeles, from 5.8 to 13.8% in Austin, and from 8.1 to 15.8% in Miami (Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies, 2007, Appendix W-4). 6.There was a very strong positive correlation between changes in homeownership rates among heads of households aged 25 to 34 and changes in median house values for states, with r = 0.75 in the 1980s and r = 0.65 in the 1990s (Myers, 2001). 7.This ratio is not a representation of the purchase calculation of actual households, but a relative index. In fact, the median income pertains to both renters and owners, and many young buyers are likely to purchase homes below the median price. 8.This is certainly the conclusion of Robert Shiller (2005, 2006), who plots house prices against other asset classes and shows that the recent run-up in house prices is unprecedented. 9.We converted data for the 5-year interval preceding the census to its equivalent for a full decade by summing the experience of adjacent 5- year cohorts. For example, we aggregated 5-year rates for persons aged 35 to 39 in 1995 to 1999 with those for persons aged 30 to 34 in the same time period, synthetically estimating the experience of a full decade. 10.Complete data on estimated buy and sell rates for all 50 states for each of 13 age groups are available from the authors on request. 11.Death rates climb markedly after ages 55 to 64. Averaged between men and women (weighted for the population at risk), the annual probability of death rises to 2.4% between the ages of 65 to 74, 5.7% between 75 and 84, and 15.5% at 85 and older (U.S. Census Bureau, 30 Journal of the American Planning Association, Winter 2008, Vol. 74, No. 1 74-1 03 280249 Myers P 1/13/08 8:03 PM Page 30 2003b). Considering that elderly persons also face higher risks of severe illness or physical incapacity, it is not surprising that they would be two to three times more likely to sell their homes than younger homeowners. 12.The choice of calibration period is important, because the estimated rates of behavior are intended to represent underlying demographically based demand and will be held constant in future periods. For this purpose, we judged the period of 1995 to 2000 to be much better for estimating normal market behavior than the boom years of 2000 to 2005, or the recession years included in 1990 to 1995. Although we expect the annual rates will likely rise and fall in the future, we assume that they will ﬂuctuate around the rates we estimated from the age schedule in the baseline period. Thus we feel our result properly depicts the changes in underlying demographically based demand likely to prevail in future periods. 13.In Arizona, the sell rate without correcting for those who sold before migrating to the state is 4.2 per 100 among those aged 55 to 59, and 2.9 per 100 after making this adjustment. 14.This comment is by an anonymous reviewer of the article. 15.In 2005, the year of peak sales of newly built homes, 1.28 million newly built units were sold and 7.08 million existing homes were sold, a ratio of 5.5 to 1. In the low point of the 1991 recession, 0.51 million newly built homes were sold and 3.22 million existing homes were sold, a ratio of 6.3 to 1 (Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies, 2007, Table A-1). 16.For example, among homeowners ages 50 to 54 in 2004, the median equity was $92,000 and mortgage debt $85,000 (Englehardt, 2006, Table 1). 17.As an example, during the 1980s the number of households in the Cleveland metropolitan area grew by only 18,000, but 46,700 new housing units were constructed, mostly in suburban areas, and un- needed dwellings were left empty in the central city and older suburbs (Bier & Howe, 1998). 18.We estimated growth after 2000 by comparing data from the 2006 American Community Survey to the 2000 Census. References Achenbaum, W. A.(2005). Older Americans, vital communities: A bold vision for societal aging.Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Angell, C., & Williams, N. (2005). U.S. home prices: Does bust always follow boom? (Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Report). Retrieved June 25, 2007, from http://www.fdic.gov/bank/analytical/fyi/2005/ 050205fyi.html Berson, D., Lereah, D., Merski, P., Nothaft, F., & Seiders, D. (2006). America’s home forecast: The next decade for housing and mortgage ﬁnance. Washington, DC: Homeownership Alliance. Bier, T., & Howe, S. R. (1998). Dynamics of suburbanization in Ohio metropolitan areas. Urban Geography,19 (8), 695–713. Birch, E. L. (2002). Having a longer view on downtown living. Journal of the American Planning Association, 68 (1), 5–21. Campbell, B. O.(1966). Population change and building cycles. Urbana: University of Illinois Bureau of Economic and Business Research. Carmichael, M. (2007, March 25). The real estate generation gap. Boston Globe Magazine. Retrieved November 12, 2007, from http://www.boston.com/news/globe/magazine/articles/2007/03/25/ the_real_estate_generation_gap/ Case, K. E., & Shiller, R. J. (2003). Is there a bubble in the housing market? Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 2,299–362. Chevan, A.(1989). The growth of home ownership: 1940–1980. Demography, 26 (2), 249–266. Clark, W. A. V., & Dieleman, F. (1996). Households and housing: Choice and outcomes in the housing market. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers University. Currid, E.(2007). The Warhol economy: How fashion, art, and music drive New York City. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Edmunds, G., & Keene, J. (2006). Retire on the house. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Engelhardt, G. V.(2006). Housing trends among baby boomers. Wash- ington, DC: Research Institute for Housing America, Mortgage Bankers Association. Fischel, W. A.(2001). The homevoter hypothesis: How home values inﬂuence local government taxation, school ﬁnance, and land-use policies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Fishman, R.(2005). The ﬁfth migration. Journal of the American Planning Association, 71 (4), 357–366. Florida, R.(2003). The rise of the creative class: And how it’s transforming work, leisure, community and everyday life. New York: Basic Books. Frank, L. D., & Engelke, P. O. (2001). The built environment and human activity patterns: exploring the impacts of urban form on public health. Journal of Planning Literature, 16 (2), 202–218. Frey, W. H.(2007). Mapping the growth of older America: Seniors and boomers in the early 21st century (Living Cities Census Series, Metro- politan Policy Program). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution. Fulton,W., Shigley, P., Harrison,A.,& Sezzi, P. (2000).Trends in local land use ballot measures, 1986–2000. Ventura, CA: Solimar Research Group. Galster, G. C.(1987). Homeowners and neighborhood reinvestment. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Gilderbloom, J. I.,& Rosentraub, M. S. (1990). Creating the accessible city: Proposals for providing housing and transportation for low income, elderly and disabled people. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 49(3), 271–282 Giuliano, G.(2004). Land use and travel patterns among the elderly. In Transportation Research Board, Transportation in an Aging Society: A Decade of Experience, Conference Proceedings 27 (pp. 192–212). Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences. Glaeser, E., Gyourko, J., & Saks, R. (2005). Why have housing prices gone up? American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings, 95 (2), 329–333. Gober, P.(1992). Urban housing demography. Progress in Human Geography, 16 (2), 171–189. Green, R., Malpezzi, S., & Mayo, S. (2005). Metropolitan-speciﬁc estimates of the price elasticity of supply of housing, and their sources. American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings, 95 (2), 334–339. Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies.(2007). State of the nation’s housing, 2007.Cambridge, MA: Author. Hopkins, L. D., & Zapata, M. A. (2007). Engaging the future: tools for effective planning practices. In L. D. Hopkins, & M.A. Zapata (Eds.), Engaging the future: Forecasts, scenarios, plans, and projects (pp. 1–17). Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. Krainer, J.(2005). Housing markets and demographics (FRBSF Eco- nomic Letter 21). Retrieved November 5, 2006, from http://www.frbsf. org/publications/economics/letter/2005 /el2005-21.html Lucy, W. H.& Phillips, D. L. (2006). Tomorrow’s cities, tomorrow’s suburbs. Chicago: Planners Press. Mankiw, N. G.,& Weil, D. (1989). The baby boom, the baby bust, and the housing market. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 19 (2), 235–258. Markusen, A., & Schrock, G. (2006). The artistic dividend: Urban artistic specialization and economic development implications. Urban Studies, 43 (10), 1661–1686. Myers and Ryu: Aging Baby Boomers and the Generational Housing Bubble 31 74-1 03 280249 Myers P 1/13/08 8:03 PM Page 31 Masnick, G. S.(2002). The new demographics of housing. Housing Policy Debate, 13 (2), 275–322. Masnick, G. S., Di, Z. X., & Belsky, E. S. (2006). Emerging cohort trends in housing debt and home equity. Housing Policy Debate 17 (3), 491–527. McCue, D., & Belsky, E. S. (2007). Why do house prices fall? Perspectives on the historical drivers of large nominal house price declines (Working Paper W07-3). Cambridge, MA: Joint Center for Housing Studies, Harvard University. Myers, D.(1984). Turnover and ﬁltering of postwar single-family houses. Journal of the American Planning Association, 50 (3), 352–358. Myers, D.(1990). The emerging concept of housing demography. In D. Myers (Ed.), Housing demography: Linking demographic structure and housing markets (pp. 3–31). Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. Myers, D.(1999). Cohort longitudinal estimation of housing careers. Housing Studies, 14 (4), 473–490. Myers, D.(2001). Advances in homeownership across the states and generations: Continued gains for the elderly and stagnation among the young (Fannie Mae Census Note 08). Washington, DC: Fannie Mae Foundation. Myers, D.(2007). Immigrants and boomers: Forging a new social contract for the future of America. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Myers, D., & Gearin, E. (2001). Current housing preferences and future demand for denser residential environments. Housing Policy Debate,12 (4), 633–659. Myers, D., & Liu, C. Y. (2005). The emerging dominance of immi- grants in the U.S. housing market, 1970–2000. Urban Policy and Research,23 (3), 347–65. Myers, D., & Menifee, L. (2000). Population analysis. In C. Hoch, L. Dalton, & F. So (Eds.), The practice of local government planning (pp. 61–86).Washington, DC: International City Management Association. Nelson, A. C.(2006). Leadership in a new era. Journal of the American Planning Association,72 (4), 393–407. Nothaft, F. E., & Change, Y. (2004). Reﬁnance and the accumulation of home equity wealth (Working Paper BABC 04-10). Cambridge, MA: Joint Center for Housing Studies, Harvard University. Pitkin, J.(1990). Housing consumption of the elderly: A cohort economic model. In D. Myers (Ed.),Housing demography (pp. 174–199). Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press. Pitkin, J.,& Myers, D. (1994). The speciﬁcation of demographic effects on housing demand: Avoiding the age-cohort fallacy. Journal of Housing Economics, 3 (3), 240–250. Quigley, J., & Raphael, S. (2005). Regulation and the high cost of housing in California. American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings, 95 (2), 323–328. Rosenbloom, S.(2004). Mobility of the elderly: Good news and bad news. In Transportation Research Board, Transportation in an aging society: A decade of experience, Conference Proceedings 27 (pp. 3–21). Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences. Shiller, R. J.(2005). Irrational exuberance (2nd ed.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Shiller, R. J.(2006). Long-term perspectives on the current boom in home prices. The Economists’ Voice, 3 (4), Article 4. Retrieved June 24, 2007, from http://www.bepress.com/ev/vol3/iss4/art4 Shiller, R. J. (2007). Historic turning points in real estate [Discussion Paper no. 1610]. Hartford, CT: Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University. U.S. Census Bureau.(2003a). Public use microdata sample, 5% ﬁle: 2000 Census of Population and Housing. [Machine readable data ﬁle.] Washington, DC: Author. U.S. Census Bureau.(2003b). Statistical abstract of the United States. Washington, DC: Author. U.S. Census Bureau.(2005a). Public use microdata sample: 2005 American Community Survey. [Machine readable data ﬁle.] Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved November 20, 2006, from http://factﬁnder .census.gov/home/en/acs_pums_2005.html U.S. Census Bureau. (2005b). Interim state population projections. [File 2. Interim state projections of population for ﬁve-year age groups and selected age groups by sex: July, 1 2004 to 2030.] Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved October 31, 2006, from www.census.gov/ population/www/projections/projectionsagesex.html 32 Journal of the American Planning Association, Winter 2008, Vol. 74, No. 1 74-1 03 280249 Myers P 1/13/08 8:03 PM Page 32 Myers and Ryu: Aging Baby Boomers and the Generational Housing Bubble 33 Ratios of seniors to working-age adults, and percent change, by state, 2000 through 2030. Seniors (aged 65 and up), per 1000 working-age adults (aged 25–64) in each year Percent change each period 2000 2010 2020 2030 2000–2010 2010–2020 2020–2030 2010–2030 Alabama 252 267 352 450 6.0 32.1 27.8 68.8 Alaska 104 152 248 316 46.2 62.8 27.5 107.6 Arizona 259 274 374 499 5.8 36.6 33.6 82.4 Arkansas 276 275 348 432 -0.3 26.7 24.0 57.1 California 204 219 284 365 7.7 29.7 28.2 66.4 Colorado 177 196 277 342 11.0 41.5 23.3 74.4 Connecticut 258 269 335 444 4.1 24.7 32.6 65.4 Delaware 247 262 355 499 6.2 35.3 40.7 90.3 District of Columbia 222 211 239 265 -5.0 13.3 10.9 25.7 Florida 342 340 437 600 -0.8 28.6 37.5 76.8 Georgia 179 191 254 329 7.0 33.0 29.6 72.3 Hawaii 251 276 387 493 10.1 40.1 27.6 78.7 Idaho 228 227 306 377 -0.3 34.5 23.3 65.8 Illinois 232 234 292 369 0.7 25.0 26.4 58.0 Indiana 240 241 304 378 0.5 26.1 24.5 56.9 Iowa 299 286 368 480 -4.4 28.8 30.4 67.9 Kansas 265 258 334 433 -2.7 29.4 29.7 67.8 Kentucky 236 242 318 407 2.6 31.6 27.7 68.1 Louisiana 229 243 324 418 6.2 33.1 29.1 71.8 Maine 267 279 389 540 4.2 39.6 38.8 93.7 Maryland 207 226 284 360 9.0 25.7 26.6 59.1 Massachusetts 252 253 324 431 0.4 27.7 33.3 70.3 Michigan 235 239 306 394 1.6 28.3 28.7 65.1 Minnesota 231 229 296 390 -1.0 29.3 31.6 70.1 Mississippi 243 244 324 430 0.7 32.5 32.6 75.8 Missouri 263 264 332 425 0.4 25.9 28.1 61.2 Montana 260 275 405 549 5.6 47.5 35.6 100.0 Nebraska 272 267 353 459 -1.6 32.2 29.8 71.6 Nevada 201 227 299 386 12.7 31.7 29.4 70.4 New Hampshire 219 229 318 430 4.6 38.6 35.4 87.6 New Jersey 245 250 308 398 2.0 23.1 29.2 59.0 New Mexico 231 271 412 601 17.5 51.9 46.1 121.9 New York 243 255 317 411 4.9 24.4 29.5 61.0 North Carolina 225 234 299 376 4.2 27.7 25.7 60.5 North Dakota 301 295 403 566 -1.9 36.4 40.3 91.4 Ohio 256 258 331 423 1.0 28.4 27.7 64.0 Oklahoma 261 267 341 420 2.3 27.6 23.2 57.3 Oregon 242 237 318 365 -2.0 33.7 15.0 53.7 Pennsylvania 302 292 365 474 -3.3 24.8 29.9 62.2 Rhode Island 281 266 331 446 -5.3 24.2 34.8 67.4 South Carolina 230 256 355 470 11.3 38.5 32.4 83.4 South Dakota 295 282 379 524 -4.3 34.2 38.2 85.5 Tennessee 231 249 326 405 7.7 31.0 24.2 62.6 Texas 194 203 264 328 4.5 30.1 24.5 62.0 Utah 189 190 249 296 0.8 30.7 19.2 55.7 Vermont 237 259 374 506 9.3 44.4 35.2 95.2 Virginia 205 231 307 391 12.9 32.8 27.5 69.3 Washington 210 222 297 362 5.7 34.0 21.7 63.1 West Virginia 289 290 396 505 0.3 36.6 27.4 74.0 Wisconsin 253 250 328 443 -1.5 31.4 34.9 77.3 Wyoming 224 255 404 562 13.5 58.8 39.1 120.9 U.S. Total 238 246 318 411 3.2 29.6 29.0 67.2 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2005b. Appendix 74-1 03 280249 Myers P 1/13/08 8:03 PM Page 33 Copyright of Journal of the American Planning Association is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However. users may print. download. or email articles for individual use. 11724 NW Plaza Circle, Suite 400 Kansas City, MO 64153 Phone: (816) 270-2119 Fax: (816) 270-2135 www.plattecountyedc.com TO: City of Parkville Alderman FROM: Shani Porter, Business and Community Outreach Coordinator DATE: January 6, 2009 SUBJECT: Business Exit Interview Overview This report documents findings regarding Business Exit Interviews. The attached list of businesses that closed was provided by Sean Ackerson, Community Development Director through Nan McManus, Alderperson. All contacts were made via phone and comments are presented anonymously. Twenty-nine businesses are listed as “Business that closed”. Of those 29, 16 (or 55%) actual contacts were made. Of those 16, three are still in business in Parkville. The businesses that follow have closed or relocated. Comments were gathered from these 16 businesses and are presented on the following page: 1. 307 Main Antiques and Interiors 2. Aristocrat Homes Inc. 3. Bhoeme 4. Brodies Backyard BBQ 5. Design in the City’ 6. DSW Computers 7. Eldecon, Inc. 8. Farley State Bank 9. Home Performance Service LLC 10. La de da 11. Linda’s Original Hairworks Salon 12. Reynolds & Company Real Estate 13. River Rock Coffee Company 14. Sports Rehabilitation & Physical Therapy 15. The Rose 16. Watercolors High Fashion 11724 NW Plaza Circle, Suite 400 Kansas City, MO 64153 Phone: (816) 270-2119 Fax: (816) 270-2135 www.plattecountyedc.com The following businesses were listed as closed or moved but are still in operation in Parkville: 1. Eldecon, Inc. 2. Reynolds & Company Real Estate 3. Watercolors High Fashion The following businesses did not have working numbers or were disconnected: 1. Irwins West by Southwest 2. Nani’s Impressa, LLC The following questions were asked of the business: 1. Have you chosen to relocate to a new location? 2. If so, what was your primary motivation? 3. If not, why have you chosen to close your doors at this time? 4. What scenario would have helped you stay in Parkville? 5. What should the business community, City or others strive to improve? 6. Would these changes have helped you stay in Parkville? The following are the comments, in no particular order, that were shared by the businesses to the above questions with regards to why the closed or relocated: a. Parking was an issue for employees and customers. b. Some businesses use all the parking spaces. c. Ownership has changed. d. Quit the retail portion of the business. e. Retail not profitable. f. Moved business to their home. g. Relocated to another existing facility. h. Hard to get people to shop. i. Landlord difficulty. j. Signage. No direction for shoppers. k. Sold to new owner. l. Moved to another city. m. Not enough traffic. n. Festivals are great but they hinder local businesses. o. Not enough community advertisement. p. Economy is terrible. q. Had to move. Building was condemned. Page 1 Park University City of Parkville Satisfaction Survey Report: Comparison of Staff Responses and Student Responses Conducted by the Platte County Economic Development Council -May 2009 Page 2 City of Parkville -Ad Hoc Economic Development Committee’s Main Street/Park University Survey As Parkville’s largest employer, Park University draws approximately 400 employees and 1500 students into our city every day. The goal of this survey was to increase business by attracting more of the University students, faculty and staff to the downtown area. Input was gathered from: Main Street Parkville Association members Business and Property Owners Student Government leaders at Park University Ad Hoc Economic Development Committee Other Interested Parties. The Questionnaire was designed by the Platte County EDC and refined by the Ad Hoc Economic Development Committee and the Park University Student Government. The Survey was administered by Park University to 1,906 recipients using the University’s proprietary email system. 421 responses were received for a 22% response rate. Additionally, 116 respondents took the time to offer comments or suggestions on downtown could better serve their needs. Page 3 Survey Statistics Survey was sent to 672 staff and 1,234 students for a total of 1,906 survey’s sent. Total of 22% response rate. Survey Status: Status:Closed Launch Date:04/23/2009 Closed Date:05/072009 Total Survey Takers:212 Median Response Time:3 mins, 35 Seconds Web Deployment Status: Total Takers:421 Complete Responses:399 Partial Responses:22 Staff Responses Student Responses Survey Status: Status:Closed Launch Date:04/23/2009 Closed Date:05/07/2009 Total Survey Takers:209 Median Response Time:3 mins, 35 Seconds Not all survey respondents answered every question. Some questions allow multiple answers. Page 4 What do you do in downtown Parkville? Staff Responses Student Responses Page 5 How often do you visit downtown Parkville? Staff Responses Student Responses Page 6 If you do not visit downtown Parkville, why not? Staff Responses Student Responses Page 7 How do you access downtown Parkville? Staff Responses Student Responses Page 8 How would you prefer to access downtown? Staff Responses Student Responses Page 9 What type of shop is missing in downtown Parkville that you would like to have? Staff Responses Student Responses Page 10 How do you get information about events in downtown Parkville? Staff Responses Student Responses Page 11 Would you like to get information about Parkville events? Staff Responses Student Responses Page 12 Do you feel safe in downtown Parkville? Staff Responses Student Responses Page 13 In an average week, how much do you currently spend on... Staff Responses Student Responses Page 14 What other entertainment districts do you frequent? (check all that apply) Staff Responses Student Responses Page 15 Do you live... Staff Responses Student Responses Page 16 If you are a student are you... 110 105 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 o ~--- 4527 Non-tradollooal (26 years +) --- 91 CJ) Noo-tradioona (26 years•) 110 • Tradi:ional (18-25 years) Trad11lonat (18-25 years) Page 17 Are you from... Staff Responses Student Responses Page 18 If you are a student, would you consider working in downtown Parkville? 130 125 120 115 110 105 100 ~ 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 o ~--- ? --- 129 CJ) v.. 65 -No No Page 19 Are you... Staff Responses Student Responses Page 20 What is your age group? Staff Responses Student Responses Page 21 116 Written comments Strengths Charming Great Place to Visit Wonderful Events Unique Small and Quaint Great Downtown Great Place to Live Weaknesses Parking Nothing for students to do General store needed Hours of Operation Traffic Transportation (bus service) Main Street/Park University Survey Ad Hoc Economic Development Committee Members: Jim Allen, Developer, The National and Parkville Commons Erik Bergrud, Director, International Center for Civic Engagement, Park University Deborah Butcher, Ward One Alderman, City of Parkville Pete Fullerton, Executive Director, Platte County EDC Carol Kuhns, President, Main Street Parkville Association Jim McCall, Co-Chair, Parkville Chamber of Commerce ED Committee Nan McManus, Alderman, City of Parkville & Ad Hoc ED Committee Chair Shani Porter, Community and Business Outreach Coordinator, Platte County EDC Bill Quitmeier, President, Parkville Chamber of Commerce Tim Rice, President, Parkville Community Development Corporation Kerby Varner, Co-Chair, Parkville Chamber of Commerce ED Committee Linda Varner, Senior Vice President, Patriot’s Bank Smart Solutions Group 1 Parkville Economic Development Discussion Summary and Recommendations February 18, 2009 On February 4th, 2009 community leaders and stakeholders from Parkville met for a strategic input session. The purpose of the session was to:  Raise issues/Build consensus concerning Parkville’s economic development efforts  Determine a reasonable course of action for further implementation The session was moderated by Irv Jensen of Smart Solutions Group, an economic development consulting firm which specializes in planning, marketing and organizational development. Discussion began with a presentation by Mr. Jensen concerning the changing nature of today’s economic development efforts. The basic premise of his remarks concerned the changes from both external pressures and internal pressures which have reshaped community development approaches. Some of the external pressures mentioned included the dramatic increase in available information, increases in competition, the impact of the global communication and the ability to quantify return on investment for time spent on community development efforts. Internal pressures included redefining and broadening the definition of business service and development to include improving the overall product which organizations are promoting or ―selling‖ as well as a role in the marketing of the entire community, the need for rapid response to opportunities, the need to work collaboratively and from a consensus direction and the pressures of maintaining an compelling business development product. The meeting next moved to an open discussion of economic development in Parkville. Smart Solutions Group 2 Discussion Summary Parkville and Economic Development - Where are we now? Participants were asked to describe where Parkville currently stood in terms of economic development. Comments included:  Downtown struggling  Engaging new residents to become actively involved in community development is difficult  Parkville has a unique brand which can be built upon  Main Street is the community's core but separate segments exist. Plans are underway to address and consider this issue.  Market has been over built  Sales tax not keeping up with residential growth  Need to take care of what we have - Existing business support is key  Strong Parks and Recreation amenities  Defined Downtown o District o Old Town o However more business competition - many existing businesses are small family owned o Losing restaurants  Unique character/Brand o River/pretty/environment o Park University  Brand distinction  Access - higher education/world-class  Currently studying how to attract students downtown  Community Access - Airport/Metro  The strong community reputation equals a strong brand o Quality of life o Education o Income levels o Downtown o Festivals o History o "Biggest small town" o Country but close to city Additionally discussion centered on the roles of the various groups involved in community and economic development: Smart Solutions Group 3 The Chamber of Commerce Was created for networking Now more community development and ED focused Parkville Community Development Corporation Was created to gain tax credits for Main Street in 1990's Since then the group supports festivals/Main Street org. primarily as providers of administrative or financial support City Has created an Ad Hoc Committee on ED Need to finish their master plan - zoning Envision some type of an ED Commission While many issues were discussed, the participants indicated that, from an economic development perspective, Parkville needs a number of focus points: Parkville Priority Issues  Work on improving Communications between all those involved in development  Add Focus to the community economic development process  Create an operating Structure to enhance community growth  Take some immediate Action to demonstrate progress  Identify community talent/leadership to supplement/enhance existing leadership  Need a Plan  Reach consensus on the revitalization plan for Downtown  Implement a true and effective Brand Management effort to maintain reputation  Focus on Business Support - Need entrepreneurial development  Need Partnership General Observations The facilitator of this session makes several observations concerning the current situation in Parkville regarding economic development. Smart Solutions Group 4 Parkville needs to come together on a joint planning effort for community economic development. This should not be City led or Chamber led but a true jointly led effort. An ED Commission becomes a city function. A Chamber initiative is owned by the Chamber. To make a program fully come to life you need to have all the elements at the table. Equally important, you can't just "start doing something." You need to step back, consider your options, determine your priorities (usually the options you have the most likelihood of achieving quickly) and determine who will be responsible for what. Planning is a bit tedious, it takes up effort, it sometimes raises uncomfortable issues, but it is critical if you are to ensure that the payback for your effort achieves something. The other option is to wait for something to happen by chance or pursue an immediate perceived need prior to considering all the consequences of that pursuit. While the community is not unified in their approach or structure to economic development, you do seem unified in your discussion of the attributes or "brand" of the community. However, that brand must be built on facts, positioned to reflect the interests of the business world and be constantly and consciously nurtured. Communications should be improved between all economic development stakeholders (city, chamber, business leaders, elected officials, economic development influencers and support groups). Jointly developed, mutually beneficial plans can reap rewards for the entire community. Parkville has an opportunity to demonstrate unity and joint leadership of their economic development destiny. The alternative is to remain fragmented and unfocused, a strategy which will surely further weaken the Parkville’s economic development efforts. Smart Solutions Group 5 Philosophical Suggestions Unite Going it alone makes little sense in today’s economic climate. Working from ―silos‖ will not accomplish much in our competitive, complex economic development environment. No one individual or group can hope to ―create‖ business without the full cooperation and support of all the key community stakeholders. Not only is there safety in numbers, there are good, mutually beneficial ideas in numbers when groups come together for the common good. Focus You will not get anywhere if you don’t have a destination. The community needs a comprehensive game plan in order to move forward. This should be a plan that considers all options, outlines a consensus driven course, sets measurable (but achievable) objectives and engages a cross section of community resources in the implementation and achievement of these objectives. Promote Your light won’t get noticed under a basket. The community needs to find ways to increase their visibility to key influencers, business targets, the existing businesses and residents of the community. Promoting/defining the image of a community takes a concerted effort by many groups, all speaking the same language. Some call it an umbrella, some the key selling points, but the consistency that these messages are delivered is key to success. Messages that resonate are created and delivered by group consensus. And spreading the good word is not about hype, it is about delivering factual information that demonstrates the success or emphasizes the assets of the community. Come to agreement on the overall approach Parkville wishes to take o Develop a statement of expectations which would be agreed to by all participating parties related to Parkville-wide economic development, including Downtown Smart Solutions Group 6 o Clarify the outcomes/services expected a comprehensive Parkville Economic Development effort o Further discussion of Parkville economic development priorities and goals. Ensure that these are accountable to the variety of interests/community needs of the Parkville o Consider organizational/representational issues that should be reviewed to ensure a proactive, successful Parkville economic development effort is truly collaborative Prior Consensus sets the stage for planning Continue a progress with a goal of developing a consensus built, comprehensive community economic development plan o Organize taskforce to address key issues – create a fixed time period for these efforts. These are not on-going committees, but short-term get it done taskforces o Consider the organizational approach  Who should be represented?  How well is the business sector represented?  Meet with those who should be involved and stimulate their participation  Focus the deliberation into three primary categories  Administration Process  Marketing  Community (Product) Development o Engage Community and community leadership in actively promoting the sharing of plans, ideas, obstacles and opportunities with the aim of creating greater synergy throughout the community. Specific Process Recommendations Based on the results of the input session, Smart Solutions Group would strongly recommend that community leaders in Parkville undertake the development of a comprehensive community economic development plan. This plan would spell out the Smart Solutions Group 7 various roles of all parties involved in economic development and outline specific goals for the joint effort. We would recommend a collaborative, consensus-building process with the goal of producing a fact-based Parkville Economic Development Roadmap.  An assessment of the current economic development situation including a detailed demographic/economic profile and analysis of the competitiveness of the “product”—City of Parkville —as a business prospect/site location consultant would analyze a location’s assets, strengths, weaknesses and opportunities for an investment opportunity. Also included would be an analysis of the competitiveness of City of Parkville economic development policies and tools to generate and spur economic development growth.  An organizational/operational framework review that would ensure the alignment of the various organizations involved in economic development in Parkville to effectively and efficiently implement the plan to achieve and maximize success.  A comprehensive, integrated strategic economic development marketing plan including goals and objectives; target audiences; brand position statement/key messages; strategies and tactics; measurements of success; budget; and an action plan/timeline. Specific strategies would include: overall business attraction, retail business attraction, retention and expansion approaches and competitive product enhancements. This plan would also be considered based on city/chamber/school district and other existing plans to seek opportunities for developmental synergy. This Proposed Approach…  Would provide a forum for the identification, discussion and resolution of issues and approaches to working together more effectively and efficiently.  Would provide a comprehensive analysis of Parkville’s current economic development situation—assets, challenges/weaknesses and opportunities—to Smart Solutions Group 8 determine effective solutions and creative approaches to market and build upon the strengths, capitalize on new, emerging opportunities and address barriers to growth.  Would create an economic development roadmap providing a comprehensive results- oriented action plan to achieve success. The Proposed Process A Parkville Economic Development Roadmap Steering Committee would need to be established to direct the consideration of options, data and the development of the plan. We recommends a group of 10-15 individuals representing the economic development partners—the Board(s), City, Chamber, school district, key stakeholders/investors including business leaders representing key business sectors in the economy; and economic development partners, e.g. utilities, education/training institutions, etc. Given the process suggested, the Steering Committee should participate in a series of no more than five strategy sessions to finalize development of Parkville’s Economic Development Roadmap. Step 1: A Comprehensive Audit of the Current Economic Development Situation Where are we now? What does this suggest to us? Prior to the first Steering Committee session, information should be compiled to conduct a comprehensive audit of the current economic development situation including demographic/economic profile, perceptions/attitudes, features/benefits of the product—Parkville, marketable assets/strengths, potential barriers to growth, potential priority opportunities for growth and development, and roles of the current key players in economic development. A major portion of this audit should be created from a fact-based perspective, using the data to help make directional decisions. Additionally, the audit should include consideration of the following data: Smart Solutions Group 9  Populations Trends o Total Population o Ranking in state o Increase/Decrease o By age group o Median age  Income trends o Per capita over past 5 to 10 years o Mean wage o Entry level wage  Top Employers o Describing business environment  Education and Training Resources o School enrollment/achievement o College/University Connections  Utility/Telecom Providers  Available sites and buildings  Financial Community  Existing incentive programs  Quality of Life issues o Healthcare facilities o Recreational o Tourism Our experience has shown that the audit has the most impact when it also involves primary research including one-on-one interviews with key internal and external stakeholders/influencers and analysis of secondary information/research. We suggest adding a survey all of the Steering Committee members and an equal number of stakeholders/influencers not on the Steering Committee. This survey could be conducted via email, phone and regular mail. This survey could consider key leaders opinions concerning:  Definition of Economic Development – setting forth their expectations for the effort  Image and Current Perceptions of Parkville – considered from an internal and external perspective  Consideration of the Product Attributes of Parkville  Access to Skilled Workers  Physical Infrastructure  Business Climate  Capital for Growth  Quality of Living  Parkville’s Most Marketable Assets/Strengths Smart Solutions Group 10  Key Challenges/Barriers to Growth  Potential Opportunities for Growth and Development  The Competition for Economic Development Opportunities - regionally The findings would be considered by the Steering Committee to provide further insight and would be utilized as the foundation for economic development planning for Parkville and outline the key components for the strategic economic development marketing plan. Additionally, this step would consider ways to enhance and connect the existing development plans of the various community development partners. This step would also involve an analysis of Parkville’s current economic approach and policies to identify potential competitive enhancements. Outcome: A fact-based report summarizing the current economic development situation in the Parkville to be used as a planning tool for decision-making. Step 2: Development of the Strategic Marketing Plan and Operational Framework What specifically will we do? How will we measure achievement? This step in the process involves strategizing and building consensus to answer the following questions:  How do you wish your development image…the combined efforts of Parkville to be perceived in the minds of your target audiences? Does it position your efforts in a way that differentiates you from the competition and is relevant to your target audiences?  What are the key messages that substantiate your marketing claims?  What are the combined goals and objectives your economic development effort hope to achieve with your economic development marketing program? Smart Solutions Group 11  Who are your target audiences including internal audiences, e.g. economic development partners, general public and external audiences, e.g. targeted business sectors, geographic markets?  What approach and methods (strategies and tactics) should you take to deliver the key messages to your target audiences and enhance the competitiveness of the product—Parkville?  How will success be measured—short-term and long-term?  What are the priority strategies and tactics?  How can Parkville effectively align and leverage economic development resources (partnerships, financial and human) to implement the plan effectively and efficiently? The plan will reflect an eighteen month action plan (program of work) and a three and five year vision plan for development. Outcome: Parkville Strategic Economic Development Plan including the following elements:  Overview of the Current Economic Development Situation  Target Audiences—Internal and External  Goal(s) and Objectives  Brand Positioning Statement (The Core Message)  Key Messages  Strategies and Tactics  Measurements of Success—Short-Term and Long-Term  Budget  Action Plan/Implementation Timeline  Recommendations for Organizing for Success Planning participants could consider the following process timeline for each of their deliberation meetings: Smart Solutions Group 12 First Meeting – Brief Steering Team members on process and outcomes. Review preliminary audit information. Discuss overall economic development needs/opinions. Agree on and implement Team/stakeholder questionnaire. Second Meeting – Review Team/stakeholders input. Review final audit data. Review and determine key components/areas of consideration for the strategic plan. Third Meeting – Work a plan development outline and review first draft of plan. Discuss marketing options for development efforts. Outline key objectives for the successful outcomes of the plan. Fourth Meeting – Finalize positioning and objectives, determine potential strategies and outline broad tactics. Review second draft of plan. Fifth Meeting – Review final draft of entire plan and supporting documentation. Achieve consensus acceptance of plan or make needed modification/adjustments. Review PowerPoint presentation of the plan components. 2009 DirectionFinder® Survey FINAL Report conducted for The City of Parkville, Missouri by ETC Institute 725 West Frontier Olathe, Kansas 66061 (913) 829-1215 August, 2009 Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................... i Executive Summary - 1 2009 DirectionFinderP ® P Survey Executive Summary Report Overview and Methodology ETC Institute administered the DirectionFinder® Survey for the first time to residents of the City of Parkville, Missouri. Results in 2009 establish a baseline of citizen satisfaction with the delivery of major city services and priorities for the City’s ongoing planning process. The seven-page survey was administered by mail only, to residents of Parkville. A “mail only” administration was used because of a reference map required for one question. The survey took an average of 15 to 20 minutes to complete. A random sample of 410 residents completed the survey during July of 2009. The results for the random sample of 410 households have a 95% level of confidence with a precision of at least +/-5%. In order to better understand how well services are being delivered by the City, ETC Institute geocoded the home address of respondents to the survey. The map to the right shows the physical distribution of survey respondents based on the location of their home. The color delineation on the map indicates the four Wards. The percentage of persons who gave “don’t know” responses is important because it often reflects the level of utilization of City services. For graphing purposes, the percentage of “don’t know” responses has been excluded to facilitate valid comparisons with other communities. The percentage of “don’t know” responses for each question is provided in the Tabular Data Section of this report. When the “don’t know” responses have been excluded, the text of this report will indicate that the responses have been excluded with the phrase “who had an opinion.” This report contains:  an executive summary of the methodology and major findings  charts depicting the overall results of the resident survey  GIS maps showing the physical distribution of the resident survey respondents Executive Summary - 2  benchmarking data that shows how the resident survey results for Parkville compare to communities in the Metropolitan Kansas City area  importance-satisfaction analysis to help the City use the resident survey data to set priorities  tabular data for the overall results to each question of the survey  cross-tab data by Ward  copy of the survey instrument. Major Findings  UPSatisfaction with Life in Parkville Very high levels of satisfaction were indicated by residents, when asked about various aspects of the City; 98% were satisfied with Parkville as a place to live, 95% were satisfied with Parkville as a place to raise children, and 86% indicated that they would buy their next home in Parkville.  UResidents were generally satisfied with the overall quality of services provided by the City of Parkville.U Most of the residents surveyed who had and opinion were satisfied with the quality of police services (86%), the quality parks and recreation (85%), the maintenance of City streets, buildings and facilities (80%), and the overall quality of customer service (74%).  UServices that residents thought were most important for the City to provide.U The three major areas that residents thought were most important for the City to emphasize over the next two years were: (1) the effectiveness of community planning and development, (2) the maintenance of City streets, buildings and facilities (3) the overall flow of traffic and congestion management.  UPPublic Safety ServicesU The highest levels of satisfaction with public safety services, based upon the combined percentage of “very satisfied” and “satisfied” responses from residents who had an opinion, were the visibility of police in neighborhoods (95%), police personnel response to emergencies (90%), and the City’s overall efforts to prevent crime (87%). Residents were least satisfied, relative to the other issues, with the quality of animal control (56%) and police safety education programs (44%). It is important to note that Parkville reached two high benchmarks for the Metro Kansas City area, in the category of the City’s overall efforts to prevent crime, and the visibility of police in neighborhoods.  CCity Maintenance. The highest levels of satisfaction with City maintenance, based upon the combined percentage of “very satisfied” and “satisfied” responses from residents who had an opinion, were snow removal on neighborhood streets (90%), overall cleanliness of streets and public areas (90%), the maintenance of major City streets (83%), and the maintenance of City street signs and traffic signals (82%). Respondents were least satisfied with the maintenance of sidewalks in the City Executive Summary - 3 (56%). The maintenance category reached a high benchmark for the Metro Kansas City area in the category of overall cleanliness of city streets and public areas.  UParks and Recreation.U The highest levels of satisfaction with parks and recreation services, based upon the combined percentage of “very satisfied” and “satisfied” responses from residents who had an opinion, were the maintenance of City parks and park equipment (86%), the number special events and festivals (73%), and the number of City parks (68%). Respondents were least satisfied with the use of portable restrooms in the park (33%), and the quality of restrooms in English Landing Park (28%). The issues most important to emphasize over the next two years were: (1) the number of walking and biking trails (2) the maintenance of City parks and park equipment.  Code Enforcement. The highest levels of satisfaction with code enforcement, based upon the combined percentage of “very satisfied” and “satisfied” responses of residents who had an opinion, was the enforcing of codes designed to protect public safety (64%), and enforcing sign regulations (60%). The two areas of code enforcement that residents thought were most important for the City to emphasize over the next two years were: (1) enforcing clean up of litter and debris on private property and (2) the maintenance of residential property.  Transportation Improvements. When asked about transportation improvements, respondents’ highest level of agreement was with the suggestion that the City build a network of sidewalks and trails that link neighborhoods with recreational, cultural, and business centers (73%); the second highest level of agreement was with the suggestion of upgrading existing neighborhood streets to include sidewalks (66%).  Special Issues Residents were given an opportunity to state their level of agreement with three issues for the City; they were in equal agreement (52%) with the City adopting “green” codes in new development and raising awareness about sustainability, but fewer agreed that train noise was a problem that the City should commit dollars to fix (27%).  Why Residents Decided to Live in Parkville. Residents were given several reasons why someone would choose to live in a community. Their top four choices for living in Parkville, are that it is a safe community (96%), its proximity to Kansas City (90%), the resale value of homes (90%) and the sense of community (89%). In a separate question, residents were asked if they would recommend Parkville as a place to live to their family and friends, and 89% said “yes”. Economic IssuesU  Residents were asked if they shopped for a variety of goods and services in Parkville, and if not, why not. The top four goods or services most often frequented in Parkville Executive Summary - 4 were gasoline, groceries, pharmacy items and restaurants (sit down casual). Those least frequented were major appliances, large retail stores, theaters, museums and hotels. The reason given for not frequenting those five was that they were not available in Parkville, but the reason given for not frequenting the other twenty-one, was that there were better selections elsewhere.  The top two reasons that residents shop in Parkville now, is the proximity to their home, and to support local businesses.  The top two reasons that would encourage residents to shop in Downtown Parkville more often were a better selection of products and services, and a better selection of restaurants. Other Issues  92% of those surveyed felt that it was important to preserve the historic character of downtown, and 90% felt it was important that new development and re-development also reflect an historic appearance.  The primary sources of information about activities and services in Parkville, are most often communicated by word of mouth (first), local newspapers (second) and banners, flyers, and posters (third). That the first selection was word of mouth, reflects a closeness of the community that is rarely seen in other communities.  Only 30% would like to have access to an off-leash dog park in Parkville.  42% would like to have lights installed so the ball fields can be used for extended hours.  50% were supportive of the City contracting with one trash hauler.  When asked if they were satisfied with the number of special events and festivals in Downtown Parkville, 71% said “yes”-the number was just right, 13% said “no”-there were not enough, 7% said “no”-there were too many, and 9% did not know. 1997 Busines s Retention Survey 0 A K L A N D COMMERCE CORPORATION Business retention is the foundation for a healthy local economy. Your response to this survey enables our retention program to help broaden that founda tion with stronge r, growing firms. All responses are strictly confidential. Please supply the missing data or information that has changed. Company Divisionof -------------- Address ___________________________ Zip-------- Contact ______________ Phone -----------Fax-------- In Oakland Since 19 __ TypeofBusiness Sic Code------ NumberofEmployees~ Current. ____ 1996 ____ 1995 ____ 1994 _____ 1991 ----- 1) During the past 3 years, Company has had Increased/ Decreased/ No significant change in: (Please indicate I, Dor N) a) Sales/Business b)Employment c) Plant/Facility __ _ d) Equipment e) Product Line f) Locations ___ _ 2) During the next 1-3 years, Company expects to expand: (Please circle appropriate areas) a) Sales/Business b) Employment c) Physical Facil ity d) Equipment e) Product line f) No. of locations Please@the number beside statements true for your company and comment where applicable. 3) Company leases current site; lease expiration date(s) (MofYr): ___________________ _ 4) Company is undecided about renewing lease upon expiration.-------------------- 5) Company is considering plans to relocate from Oakland. If so, where ------------------ 6) Company is considering closure or sale of business (as of MofYr) __ If so, why-------------- 7) Company is considering closure or sale ofOakland facility (as of Mo/Yr) __ If so, why ----------- 8) Company operates from facility requiring seismic upgrade or other modification. -------------- 9) Regulatory pressures are affecting business operations. Reg.Air ___ Reg. Water ___ City ___ Other 10) Company is experiencing difficulty obtaining financing.---------------------- 11) Company has undergone recent change in ownership orownershipchange is pending. ------------- 12) Company has facilities outside Oakland that make or sell sa me product or provide same service. --------- 13) Company is experiencing difficulities recruiting employees with adequate skills. _____________ _ 14) Company has problems with security and safety.------------------------ 15) Company has union agreement; contract expiration date(s) (Mo/Yr): 16) Company has difficulties finding suitable space in Oakland for growth I expansion. ------------- 17) Company perceives Oakland as a positive location for business. (Please comment on back of survey) *Company needs assistance to keep and grow company in Oakla nd. (Please Comment) ___________ _ Thank you forcompleting the survey. Save time· Fax your survey to (510) 632-2815 or mail toOCC, 333 Hegenberger Road, Suite 306, Oakland, CA 94621. Questions? Call the OCC@(510) 632-1238. Interview Date: _____ _ Lancaster Business Retention and Expansion Interview Guide (This section to be completed prior to visit if possible) Business/Industry Name: Physical Address : Contact Name: Phone Number Fax Number E-mail Address Web Address Chamber Member Y N -Chambe r Member Since - General Characteristics: Nature of Business: Number of Employees : Annual Payroll: Est imated number of Employees living in Lancaster (i.e., 75134 , 75146 zip) Size of Facility (Acres or Square Feet): Status of Local Operation : Have you identified a five-year objective for this facility? What local assistance is needed to help meet your five-year objective? Supplier Support Needed in Lancaster : Workforce Requirements : Highly Skilled # Semi-Ski lled # Unskilled# Additional Skills Needed : Comments. Interview Follow-Up: Recommendations : Action : Referred to : Follow-up Date : Comments: Prepared by: Date: Retention Team Members Present: City EDC Chamber Other Rev 0112003 11 What impact will or would your modernization have on the number of employees? a. __ No Change b. __ Add Employees c. __ Reduce Employees d. Not Sure · ____ 0_Vo How Many~ ____ 0'""Vo How Many? 12 Are you currently considering closing your business or relocation outside the community/area? If relocation, where? a. __ Closing b. __ Relocation c. Neither __ In this County In this State In the United States 13 If you are considering relocation, which of the following are reasons for your planned move? a. __ Changing Market Conditions b. __ Overcrowded Building c. __ No Land for Expansion cl __ Transportation Problems e. Crime/Vandalism ( __ Low Work Productivity g. __ Environmental Concerns h. __ Rigid Code Enforcement i. __ High Local Taxes j . __ High State Taxes k. __ Lease Expiration I. __ Other (SPECIFY) 14 If you are considering closing, which of the follo~iog are reasons for closing? a. __ Changing Market Conditions f. __ Rigid Code Enforcement b. __ Transportation Problems g. __ High Local Taxes c. Crime/Vandalism h. __ High State Taxes d. __ Low Work Productivity e. Environmental Concerns i. __ Lease Expiration j. __ Other (SPECIFY) IS Are there any changes in your bu_siness plans for the next three years? a. __ No Change b. __ Change Goods/Services c. Add Product d. __ Change Technologies e. __ Other (SPECIFY) COUNTY RATING 16 How would you r:ate Kossuth County with respect to the following location factors? (Please indicate your choice below) I • POOR 2 • FAIR 3 • GOOD 4 • EXCELLENT 5 • NO OPINION a. __ Availability of Labor b. Labor Costs c. __ Base Skill Level of Employees d. __ Vocational Training e. __ Business Supplies f. __ Business Services (Legal, Acctg, etc.) g. __ Reliability ofUtilities h. __ Shipffransportation Costs/Services i. __ Parking j. __ City Government k. __ Highways/Street I. __ Water Quality & Supply m. Sewer n. Solid Waste o. Pol ice/Fire Protection p. __ Energy Costs q. __ Quality ofTelecommunications r. Business Taxes s. __ Banking Services t __ Availability of Capital u. __ Land & Development Costs v. __ Planning & Zoning/Code Enforcement w. __ Housing Availability x. __ Quality ofHousing y. __ Recreational Opportunities z. __ Quality of Education (K-12) aa. __ Community College bb. Media cc. Medical Services dd. __ Community Appearance ee. Chamber of Commerce 17 What is your overall opinion of this county to conduct business? a. Excellent b. Good c. Fair d. Poor e. __ No Opinion PRIME ON-SITE VISIT FORM Page 3 To he.filled 011r by the interviewer -Information is co11fidentia/ 8.4.10 18. Do you anticipate any federal, state, or local legislation changes that will benefit your business in the next five years: 0Yes 0 No I DNA/K Del If yes, what changes? ______________________________ _ How will they affect the company? -------------------------- Industry Notes Management 19. Has the company's ownership changed in the last 18 months , or 0 Changed 0 Change Pending 0 No I DNA/K Del do you anticipate a change: If changing, please explain: Has the company's top management changed or is it expected to 0 Changed 0 Change Pending 0 No I DNA/K Del change in the next 18 months: If changing, please explain: If changed, what impact will this/these changes have on the local operation? 20 . Are the projected employment needs for this facility : 0 Increasing 0 Stable 0 Decreasing DNA/K Del 21. What are the community's strengths as a place to do business? DNA/K Del 22. What are the community's weaknesses as a place to do business? I DNA/K Del 23. Are there any barriers to growth in this community? 0Yes 0 No I DNA/K Del If yes, what? 24. Does the attitude among executives at corporate headquarters toward this community as 0Yes 0 No I DNA/K Del a place to do business differ from local management: If yes, please explain? e-Synchronist System• and Synchronist Business Jnfonnation System' C Blane. Canada Ltd. DN A/K =Does not apply/know; Del = Decline PRIME ON-SITE VISIT FORM Page 4 To he filled ow by 1he inten•iewer-lnformalion is co11fide111iol 8.4.10 25. Are there any reasons the community may not be considered for future expansion? 0Yes D No I DNA/K Del If yes, please explain? 26. Who are the largest supplier in the area and the three largest out-of-area suppliers? DAns D No Ans I DNA/K Del If Ans, product/service, company, and current location? Management Notes . Workforce Low 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 High 27. How do you rate the avai lability of workers in this area: D D D D D D D DNA/K Del 28. How do you rate the quality of workforce in this area: D D D D D D D DNA/K Del 29. How do you rate the stability of workforce in this area: D D D D D D D DNA/K Del 30. As compared to other company facilities, how would you rate D D D D D D D DNA/K Del productivity in this facility : 31 . Is the company experiencing recruitment problems with any employee positions or skills: 0Yes 0No DNA/K Del If yes, what problems, positions, skills? 32. Is the number of unfilled positions: D Increasing D Stable D Decreasing I DNA/K Del Estimated number of unfilled positions today: Approximately when will these jobs be filled? (mm/yy) 33. Have you experienced or do you anticipate any significant changes in the make-up of your D Yes D No I DNA/K Del workforce? If yes, how did/will you deal with this change? 34. Are primary recruitment problems limited to : 35. Is company investment in employee training: D Increasing D Stable If investing in employee training, what percentage of the training budget is for: Workforce Notes e-Synchronist System• and Synchronist Business lnfonnation System~ C Blane. Canada Ltd. 0Community Olndustry DNA/K Del D Decreasing D None DNA/K Del New job skills training % Proficiency training % Remedia l skill training % DNNK =Does not apply/know; Del = Decline PRIME ON-SITE VISIT FORM Page 5 To he_(il!ed ou/ by !he in1e11'iewer -ll1formalion is confidential 8.4.10 Technology 36. Is there new technology emerging that will substantially change either your company's D Yes D No I DNA/K Del primary producUservice or how it is produced? Explain new technology: (Interviewer: Circle one -Positive, Negative, Both) 37. Compared to your business segment, how would you rank your company's use of technology for: Use Low High Internal office operations 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DNA/K Del Production 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DNA/K Del Sales and inventory management 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DNA/K Del Marketing 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DNA/K Del Comments: 38. Compared to your business segment, rate your company's Low High I technology investment: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DNA/K Del Comments: 39. Is the community's technology infrastructure adequate for your company's growth plan? D Yes 0 No I DNA/K Del Comments: Technology Notes Utility Services 40. How is the consumpti on of the following utilities changing? 41 . Please rate your satisfaction with your utility providers Type of Utility I' s· D' A) Water D D D DNA/K B) Sewer D 0 D DNA/K C) Natural Gas D D D DNA/K D) Electric 0 D D DNA/K E) Telecom (voice) D D D DNA/K F) Cellular service 0 0 0 DNA/K G) Internet access 0 0 0 I DNA/K H) Internet speed 0 0 0 DNA/K • I = lncrea sina, S = Stable, D = Decreasina e-Syn chroni~t System• and Synchronist Business Jnfonnation System•' 0 Blane. Ca nada Ud. Low 1 Del D Del D Del D Del D Del D Del 0 Del 0 Del 0 High 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 0 D D D 0 DNA/K Del 0 D 0 D D D DNA/K Del 0 D 0 D D D DNA/K Del 0 0 0 D 0 D DNA/K Del D D 0 0 0 0 DNA/K Del 0 0 0 D 0 0 DNA/K Del 0 0 0 0 0 0 DNA/K Del 0 0 0 0 0 0 DNA/K Del DNNK =Does not apply/know; Del = Decline PRIME ON-SITE VISIT FORM Page 6 To he filled 0111 hy th e inte1viewrr -lnf'orma1io11 is co1ifidenlial 8.4.10 Please comment on any utility services with low satisfaction (3 or lower) or high (5 or above): Utility service comment 1 (circle one) Low/High Rank Comment 1: (Interviewer: Circle one -Positive, Negative) A B c D E F G H Utility service comment 2 (circle one) Low/High Rank Comment 2: (Interviewer: Circle one -Positive, Negative) A B c D E F G H Utility service comment 3 (circle one) Low/High Rank Comment 3: (Interviewer: Circle one -Positive, Negative) A B c D E F G H Utility Notes Quality of Life/Community Services 42. Please rate the quality of the following services provided by the community on a scale of 1 to 7, 7 being high. Low High 2 3 4 5 6 A) Police protection 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DNA/K De! B) Fire protection 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DNA/K Del C) Ambulance paramedic service 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DNA/K De! D) Health care services 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DNA/K De! E) Child care services 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DNA/K Del F) School (K-12) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DNA/K De! G) Tech college 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DNA/K Del H) Community college 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DNA/K Del I} College(s) and university(ies) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DNA/K Del J) Public transportation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DNA/K Del K) Traffic control 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DNA/K Del L) Streets and roads (local) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DNA/K Del M) Highways (State & Federal) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DNA/K Del N) Airline passenger service 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DNA/K De! 0) Air cargo service 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DNA/K De! P) Trucking 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DNA/K Del e-Sync hroni st System• and Synchronist Business lnfonnation System• C Blane, Canada lJd. DN A/K = Docs not apply/know: Del = Dec line PRIME ON-SITE VISIT FORM Page 7 To be.filled 0111 by the inte11'iewer-!11formatio11 is co11fidentia/ 8.4.10 42. Continued 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Q) Property tax assessment (fair & equitable) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DNA/K Del R) Zoning changes and building permits D 0 0 0 D D D DNA/K Del S) Regulatory enforcement (fair & equitable) D 0 D D D D D DNA/K Del T) Community planning D 0 D D 0 0 0 DNA/K Del U) Community services (not otherwise listed) 0 D D D 0 0 D DNA/K Del V) County services (not otherwise listed) D D D D 0 0 D DNA/K Del W) Chamber of Commerce or business association 0 D D D D D D DNA/K Del X) Economic development organization 0 D D D 0 0 D DNA/K Del Y) Worl<force Services D D D D D D D DNA/K Del Please comment on any community services with low satisfaction (3 or lower) or high (5 or above): Service comment 1 (circle one) Low/High Rank Comment 1: {Interviewer: Circle one -Positive, Negative) ABCDEFGHIJKLM NOPQRSTUVWXY Service comment 2 (circle one) Low/High Rank Comment 2: (Interviewer: Circle one -Positive, Negative) ABCDEFGHIJKLM NOPQRSTUVWXY Service comment 3 (circle one) Low/High Rank Comment 3: (Interviewer: Circle one -Positive, Negative) ABCDEFGHIJKLM NOPQRSTUVWXY Community Service Notes Do you have any final comments you would like to share? Thank you for your assistance. e-Synchronist System• and Synchronist Business Information System' C: Blane, Canada Lid DNNK =Does not apply'know; Del= Decline