University City - Assessment and Market Analysis, March 2020

Page 1

UNIVERSITY CITY ASSESSMENT AND M A R K E T A N A LY S I S MARCH 2020


This page intentionally left blank.


Note to Readers: This ‘Assessment and Market Analysis’ is the first deliverable (product) in the process of developing an economic development strategy for the City. It represents the end of the first phase of the planning process. This report focuses on: • Assessment, benchmarking, and evaluation. • Market and industry cluster analysis. This report should be considered an “In-Progress” document and will be updated and edited, as needed, for inclusion in the draft and final economic development strategy. The intent of this document is to provide a foundation of existing conditions, data, research, and analysis for the formation of the draft and final economic development strategy. We realize the current coronavirus health and economic crisis is a key issue for University City. The coronavirus crisis is having a devastating impact on the economy, especially many of the industries and sectors that are in University City. The overall schedule of this planning effort may change and the resulting economic development strategies will need to address the impacts of the coronavirus crisis. However, it will also be important to continue this planning as the economic development strategy will be an important tool for the City to utilize as the economy recovers. Data included in this report is from a variety of sources. The latest available and frequency of data varies by source. Future deliverables include: • Draft Economic Development Strategy (Summer 2020) • Final Economic Development Strategy (Fall 2020) Updates during the planning process are available at: www.InvestUCity.com


This page intentionally left blank.


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS City Council Terry Crow | Mayor Jeff Hales | 1st Ward Councilmember Steve McMahon | 1st Ward Councilmember Paulette Carr | 2nd Ward Councilmember Tim Cusick | 2nd Ward Councilmember Stacy Clay | 3rd Ward Councilmember Bwayne Smotherson | 3rd Ward Councilmember Task Force - Economic Development Strategy Matt Bellows Kurt Eller Matthew Erker Sam Estep Susan Glassman Natasha Kwan Traci Moore Karen Neilson Frank Ollendorf Byron Price Bwayne Smotherson Kathleen Sorkin Kevin Taylor City Staff Gregory Rose | City Manager Libbey Tucker, CEcD | Assistant to the City Manager/ Director of Economic Development Clifford Cross | Director of Planning and Development

5 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

Planning Team

i 5TThe he i5 Group Urban & Community Planning

Public Affairs Landscape Architecture

The i5Group Stephen Ibendahl, ASLA, AICP Laura Linn Katie McLaughlin Community and Economic Development Solutions Jacqueline Davis-Wellington Elizabeth A. Noonan Colliers International Allison Gray

MARCH 2020


This page intentionally left blank.


CONTENTS PA R T 1 : N A R R AT I V E 13 23 31 39 45

SWOT Analysis Economic Development Ecosystem Municipal Economic Capacity and Tools Macro Economic Trends Market and Cluster Analysis

PA R T 2 : D ATA

7 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

MARCH 2020


SCHEDULE

1

■■ ■■ ■■ ■■

Project kickoff Stakeholder and focus group meetings Assessment, benchmarking & evaluation Market & industry cluster analysis

Deliverable: Assessment and Market Analysis Report

We Are Here

2

■■ Neighborhood economic nodes (placebased growth strategy) ■■ Draft recommendations & best practices ■■ Follow-up stakeholder meetings ■■ Community Open House

April - July 2020

Draft Economic Development Strategy

December - March 2020

Economic and Market Assessment

Deliverable: Draft Economic Development Strategy

3 8 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

■■ Refinement of recommendations and best practices ■■ Implementation strategies and metrics ■■ Adoption of plan Deliverable: Final Economic Development Strategy

July - October 2020

Final Economic Development Strategy and Adoption

MARCH 2020


TASK FORCE A Task Force has been appointed by the City Council and Mayor to help guide the development of the Economic Development Strategy. The main purpose of the Task Force is to be an advisory group to the planning team and to act as a sounding board during the process.

Presentations, meeting minutes, and documents from Task Force meetings are available at www.InvestUCity.com.

Each Councilmember was able to appoint two members to the Task Force. The Mayor was able to appoint three members. Current Task Force members include: Matt Bellows Kurt Eller Matthew Erker Sam Estep Susan Glassman Natasha Kwan Traci Moore Karen Neilson Frank Ollendorf Byron Price Bwayne Smotherson Kathleen Sorkin Kevin Taylor The first Task Force meeting was held on February 3, 2020. It is expected that the Task Force will meet five times during the planning process. Task Force Meeting #1 on February 3, 2020

9 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

MARCH 2020


STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS Individual and small group stakeholder meetings are a great early step in the economic development strategy. Stakeholder meetings have multiple benefits. One, the meetings identify early in the process key issues and priorities. The meetings also allow for a more robust dialogue than is often possible in a larger meeting setting. Second, the meetings also begin to identify “project champions� that can assist in promoting the planning process and the plan itself. In February and March the planning team conducted a series of stakeholder and focus group meetings with various property owners, businesses, entrepreneurs, organizations, institutions, Task Force members, and City Council members. The initial goal was to conduct 15-20 meetings. The planning team ended up conducting 30 meetings. The planning team strove to meet with stakeholders from across the City.

Stakeholder meeting with small business owners February 18, 2020

10 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

Meetings Included (in alphabetical order): Jonathan Browne, Novus Companies Capacity (Jenny Fritz, Kathryn Love) Paulette Carr, Councilmember Stacy Clay, Councilmember Terry Crow, Mayor Tim Cusick, Councilmember Charles Deutsch, The Gatesworth Sam Estep, Task Force Member and Saratoga Capital Group Nina Ganci, SKIF International Mary Gorman, Property Owner (and tenants: Clarity Salon & Spa, Ivy Grace Boutique, Subterranean Books, Three Kings Pub, The Wizards Wagon) Jeff Hales, Councilmember Deborah Henderson, Midwest Association of Farmers Markets Stacey Hudson, CORE Facility Services Bill Krenn, Winco Windows Arthur Krichevsky, Kismet Pharmacy Natasha Kwan, Task Force Member and Small Business Owner Loop Special Business District Board Steve McMahon, Councilmember Sean Mullins, Asian American Chamber of Commerce John Simanowitz, Integrity Bwayne Smotherson, Councilmember and Task Force Member Steve Stone, Property Owner Kevin Taylor, Task Force Member Ty Thornhill, Desco Group Max Tsai, Gourmet Soy Foods University City School District (Susan Hill, Clay Ware) Dan Wald, Rodan Management Washington University (Mary Campbell, Stephen Condrin, Jodie Lloyd, JoAnna Schooler) Jeff Weintrop, Silver Lady MARCH 2020


PART 1: NARRATIVE


This page intentionally left blank.


CHAPTER 1: SWOT ANALYSIS Demographic research, interviews with local business owners, property owners, City Council members along with other local stakeholders (e.g., University City School District, Washington University and the Asian chamber of commerce) and dialogue with University City’s planning, administration and economic development staff helped create a profile of University City that reveals the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats that bear on its potential for economic growth and development. It should be noted that generally strengths and weaknesses relate to internal capacities while opportunities and threats emerge from situations that are external or in the environment.


STRENGTHS Diversified Business Base University City is home to a broad range of business sectors and industries. The diverse, multi-sector base of businesses (light industrial/manufacturing; office; and retail, dining and entertainment) contributes to a more stable and resilient economy and affords the City greater opportunity for economic growth.

Iconic Delmar Loop The Delmar Loop is an iconic anchor for University City and the retail, dining and entertainment heart of the community. An historic retail district, the contemporary Loop’s unique character developed over time and through long-term investment by local businesses and the City with support from the broader community. As a result of this long-term revitalization effort and the resulting vibrant sense of place, the American Planning Association named it one of America’s Ten Great Streets in 2007. The Delmar Loop continues to attract regional and national tourists and serves as an important “brand’ for University City.

14 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

MARCH 2020


STRENGTHS

Authenticity A mature inner-ring suburb, University City possesses an important mix of community assets that make it an appealing place to live, work and play. A walkable, authentic neighborhood centered community, the City also offers appealing historic architecture, parks and neighborhood commercial offerings that help attract and retain residents, providing a sense of stability that is important to businesses considering locating or expanding in the community. The proximity to cultural and community assets in University City (e.g., COCA, CASA, art galleries, Craft Alliance) and the City of St. Louis (the Pageant, Forest Park) not only attracts residents, but results in a stable inflow of visitors to the community who support retail and dining establishments.

Central Location & Accessibility A central location and easy accessibility for customers and employees are key considerations for businesses considering locating or remaining in a community. Additionally, proximity to good highway/ roadway transportation corridors is particularly important for manufacturing/light industrial businesses that depend upon trucking to deliver supplies and transport products to customers. University City’s location in midSt. Louis County near I-170 and only a short distance from I-64 provides local business’s with outstanding access to the metropolitan area’s workforce and potential customers. Regional access for employees and visitors also is enhanced by close proximity to four Metrolink stations (Delmar, Forsyth, University City-Big Bend and Skinker stations), which provide public transit options. Strong transportation infrastructure also supports the businesses that are located in the City’s light industrial areas on Woodson Road and Olive (Cunningham Industrial Park).

15 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

Small but Growing Tech Cluster The technology sector is a primary driver of the national and global economy helping to increase operational efficiencies and business performance. Tech sector businesses provide high quality and well-paying jobs, increasing affluence and the capacity of employees to invest in their communities and spend dollars in the local economy. University City is home to a growing tech cluster – local firms Capacity and Integrity were among the City’s top ten largest employers in 2019. The presence of these firms adds a vibrancy to the community and can help attract other tech businesses to the City. Their ability to attract employees from across the region and country who can be advocates for the community also helps elevate University City’s profile as a place to do business. These firms also provide a steady stream of customers for local shops and restaurants/entertainment, especially during the work week.

MARCH 2020


STRENGTHS Entry Level Opportunities A strong local economy offers job opportunities for a range of skill levels that offer opportunities for advancement. The concentration of large employers in senior care/nursing homes as well as light industrial/ manufacturing provides accessible, entry level job opportunities for residents.

Proactive City Planning The City proactively pursues planning efforts and analysis that will provide them with a solid foundation for strategic decision-making. Professional Economic Development Staff The City has professional and highly qualified City staff members dedicated to economic development. Effective Economic Development Tools The City effectively uses economic development tools to promote development and reinvestment, including 353 Urban Redevelopment Corporations, Land Clearance for Redevelopment Authority, Tax Increment Financing and EDRST which provides a pool of funds for economic development. Strong Residential Base Overall, the City is a well-educated and strong middle- and upper-income community with significant engagement by residents, businesses and institutions that are committed to the future of the City.

Destination Retail, Dining, and Entertainment The City boasts destination retail and dining/ entertainment areas that have grown organically, e.g., the Loop and the International Corridor. These districts help to differentiate University City from other local communities and area dining and entertainment districts.

Community Support The City has a diverse residential and business community that supports and promotes a range of retail offerings and provides a broader pool of people who would be interested in living, working and playing in the community (potential employees).

Destination Retail, Dining, and Entertainment

16 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

MARCH 2020


STRENGTHS Career Centered School District The University City School District is committed to developing a range of career planning and workforce development programs for students and adults by partnering with the City and local businesses, including a construction training program and pathways to entrepreneurship. Washington University Consumers Buying power of Washington University students, faculty and staff, alumni and other visitors to the university.

2019)

Quality of Life Amenities Recreational and greenspace amenities, including Heman Park Community Center, Centennial 1 Commons Recreational Center, golf course, parks and access to the1 regional Great Rivers Greenway biking and pedestrian greenway system along with arts and cultural institutions that UNIVERSITY CITY enrich the quality of life. DEMOGRAPHICS Municipality Comparison Municipality Comparison Household by Income (Forecast 2019) $200,000

$180,000

$173,357

$173,357 $160,000 $138,860

$140,000 $138,860 $120,000

$134,704

$125,249 $106,611

$100,000 $86,581 $87,418

$94,874 $80,000

$60,000

$64,245

$94,874

$92,422

$83,564

$83,564 $64,245

$58,476 $59,344

$45,100

$59,490

$59,344

$59,490

$40,000

$53,218 $53,918 $53,409

Median Household Income University City Average Household Income Kirkwood

Clayton Olivette

$36,528

$31,350 $36,528

$31,350

$0

$53,218 $53,918 $53,409

$43,448

$43,448

$20,000

Maplewood

$134,704

$125,249

Per Capita Income

Average Household Income Maplewood Per Capita Income Kirkwood Webster Groves

Olivette

Maryland Heights

17 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

Webster Groves

Maryland Heights

Career Centered School District

MARCH 2020


WEAKNESSES + THREATS Loop has Lost its Luster • Increased competition from other retail/commercial/entertainment areas in St. Louis, including the Grove, the East Loop, Maplewood, Kirkwood and the Foundry. • Uncertainty regarding the future of the Loop Trolley potentially undermines future investment and occupancy levels of retail, dining and office space. • Volunteer-based management and operation of the Loop Special Business District undermines its impact and ability to capitalize on opportunities for growth. • Perceptions that the Loop is not safe negatively impact the number of visitors/patrons (vacancies contribute to this sensibility). • Retailers and dining establishments perceive a lack of events, marketing and communication and loss of desired street energy (e.g. musicians) in recent years that has negatively impacted retail activity. • Limited parking creates a barrier for increasing local visitors/patrons to the Loop, which is compounded by aggressive ticketing. Lack of Collaboration between City and Washington University Lack of communication and collaboration between University City and Washington University results in misunderstandings and potentially missed opportunities for mutually beneficial partnerships. Loss of Property Tax Revenues Loss of property tax revenues from Washington University and other non-profit property ownership negatively affects City and school district revenues and the City’s ability to provide high quality services and offer educational opportunities. Uncertainty of I-170-Olive Redevelopment Area Potential impact of the Novus development on existing businesses in the development’s footprint creates uncertainty, which could lead to loss of businesses. Loss of Chamber Dissolution of local chamber of commerce eliminated vehicle for businesses outside of the Loop to engage in networking, business development and advocacy that strengthens local firms and elevates the community’s profile as a place to live, work and play.

18 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

MARCH 2020


W E A K N E S S E S + T H R E AT S Increased Vacancy and Increased Rents Vacancy rates for retail in University City have increased over the last year, while rental rates remain well above the rates for both St. Louis County and the St. Louis MSA creating a barrier to attracting and retaining small businesses in the community.

Perceptions that the City is too Loop Centric Notwithstanding concerted effort and focus on the City’s other commercial corridors (Olive Boulevard, Delmar & I-170), business sector perceptions that City and Council are too Loop-centric, leave businesses in the rest of the community feeling that they are not supported. Lack of Business Community Voice Absence of a clear feedback loop by which local firms can communicate with City departments about ways to improve municipal processes and policies that affect business operations (e.g., permitting, inspections, planning decisions, policing, etc.). Olive Redevelopment Challenges Small, shallow, irregularly shaped commercial parcels on Olive, complicated by flood plain infringement in some sections, restrict development opportunities of this major commercial corridor. We note that in older, established and developed communities like University City the lack of developable real estate (e.g., vacant land, real estate that is sized or has the necessary infrastructure to support modern development etc.) is a common issue. The place-based growth strategy will examine and consider in more detail additional opportunities or limitations on new commercial development.

19 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

MARCH 2020


W E A K N E S S E S + T H R E AT S

Age and Availability of Building Stock Age and maintenance of commercial building stock in various locations in the City (76.52% of commercial buildings built prior to 1980, with the largest percentage buildings having been constructed between 1941 and 1960 (29.28%)) along with the limited amount of office space may hinder City’s ability to attract higher quality professional businesses and retail tenants. Olive Divide While overall household incomes and housing values compare favorably with neighboring communities, there is a distinct difference in incomes and housing values north of Olive.

Appraised Value of Single Family Residential

20 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

MARCH 2020


OPPORTUNITIES Technology Sector Fostering growth of small but committed technology cluster helps ensure a more diverse economic base that could attract new residents who are well-educated and affluent and who can support other local businesses and the retail/dining/entertainment outlets in the Loop and other parts of the City. I-170 & Olive Redevelopment Novus development has potential to significantly impact the Olive corridor positively by injecting new businesses and economic activity into the west end of the city; generate a pool of resources that can be beneficially reinvested in residential areas along the Olive corridor; and will provide new revenues that support City operations. New buildings and infrastructure will modernize and improve available real estate stock and will eliminate significant areas of poorly maintained and sub-standard commercial space. While racially and economically diverse, the City is divided along racial and economic lines, with the northwest and northeast sectors predominantly low or moderate income and African-American (over 80%). The City’s desire to reinvest resources from the Novus development in these areas that align with the Olive corridor represents an important commitment to equitable growth. The new development may also create new markets/customers for the Loop and the International District.

Improving University City Entries Improving key intersections and “entrypoints” into the City through transportation/ streetscape improvements would create a sense of place that helps brand University City and enhance its unique identity. Chamber of Commerce Reinstituting a city-wide chamber of commerce that helps local businesses network, encourages a stronger business climate, provides the City with an outlet for communicating with businesses and creates a vehicle for unified business promotion. Increased Collaboration with Washington University Increasing dialogue and forming a collaborative and consistent working relationship with Washington University would provide the City with the opportunity to address concerns about the university’s economic impact on the City and lay the groundwork for developing policies that leverage the University’s presence. The fiscal impact study will provide an important baseline of economic information that can be used to inform strategies and policies for managing the University’s impact on the City.

21 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

Foster Small Business Development The size, scale and character of commercial space and offerings in University City make it an ideal location for new small businesses. There are a number of opportunities for the City to encourage and foster small business development: • Enhanced marketing and community engagement activities targeted at residents to “shop (and eat) local” will help further stabilize and support local small businesses. • City-owned property on Olive Boulevard creates an opportunity to promote and attract development that could generate other economic activity and new business development along the corridor. • Leverage the existing and proposed co-working spaces in the City to create a pipeline of new small businesses that can backfill available commercial space and diversify the City’s economic base.

MARCH 2020


OPPORTUNITIES Keeping the Loop a Top Ten Street Supporting active efforts by the Loop Special Business District and property owners to revitalize and re-invest in the Loop creates an opportunity to ensure that it remains a top ten American street. Managing and operating City assets in the Loop in a business-friendly manner that contributes and aligns with revitalization efforts is an important role for the City. Additionally, new City staff for the Loop Special Business District will help manage the district’s operations (and expand the Economic Development Director’s capacity for other business retention and expansion work) and provide additional support for new marketing and events/activities that attract customers to the Loop.

City Marketing • Leveraging a new stand-alone economic development website with messaging that highlights the benefits of having your business located and/or living in University City.

International District The International District is a unique asset that has grown organically in the City. It is the kind of “happy accident” that could position the City through strategic marketing and place-making to capitalize and promote the community’s ethnic diversity, broaden and elevate this brand and create economic opportunity primarily for small businesses.

Expansion of Industrial/Light Manufacturing As a land locked and developed community, open dialogue with neighboring communities about opportunities for collaboration and partnership that promote expansion of existing industrial/light manufacturing areas may help retain and grow businesses that provide quality jobs.

• Branding and marketing all of the different commercial areas of the City. Skilling Up the Workforce Efforts by the University City School District to enhance skills and career development for student and adult residents may be leveraged to improve economic opportunity for residents. Program alignment with local businesses may support workforce needs.

New Office Development Low office vacancy rates and relatively high rents when compared with St. Louis County and St. Louis MSA rates suggest opportunity for new office development that would provide opportunities for existing office users to grow in place and for attracting other new businesses to the community.

22 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

MARCH 2020


CHAPTER 2: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ECOSYSTEM For local governments, planning is a cornerstone of creating a vibrant, sustainable community that promotes the well-being of residents, businesses and institutions and reflects their vision and desires. With respect to economic development, being proactive in the identification of areas of the City that could benefit from planning can help facilitate redevelopment and investment. At the same time, while local plans provide important direction, they also must be considered in light of evolving local and regional economic trends and policies that may affect a community’s economy and potential development opportunities.

23 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

MARCH 2020


PLANS University City has commissioned a number of prior plans or studies that provide data and insight into the city’s economy. Plans and policies developed by St. Louis County and the State of Missouri also have the potential to impact the economic development potential of University City. The findings and recommendations of these reports provide important context and serve as a foundation for developing an economic development strategy for the future. Relevant plans and their findings are summarized below. Comprehensive Plan – University City (2005) Comprehensive plans serve as long term, land use planning guides for communities and are intended to provide direction for at least a decade, and often much longer. The Comprehensive Plan Update of 2005, as amended May 21, 2007, (the “2005 Plan”) is University City’s current comprehensive plan. While the City is in the process of launching a new comprehensive planning process, the 2005 Plan still provides valuable insight into the City’s vision and goals for its commercial corridors and economic development opportunities.

include creating design standards for Olive Boulevard to improve the appearance of the corridor; initiatives to improve the overall appearance and brand of the City’s commercial districts; and supporting transportation related improvements (roads and bike/ped). Key economic development recommendations included creating an economic development organization (i.e., chamber of commerce) to address business needs and attraction; expand business retention and expansion; develop a University City marketing campaign; establish the City as a regional and national tourist destination; and investigating potential of an ‘upscale’ International District.

In terms of economic development centered strategies, the 2005 Plan addresses both commercial development opportunities and economic development policies and strategies for growing the City’s economy. As an established, inner ring suburb, the 2005 Plan identifies the need for redevelopment in the City and spells out criteria for selecting properties for redevelopment along with advocating the responsible use of incentives to foster reinvestment. Other key recommendations for commercial properties 24 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

Commercial Development Program – University City (June 1975) The City of University City with the assistance of the Missouri Department of Housing and Urban Development prepared a report to analyze and make recommendations for the future growth and development of the commercial sector throughout the City. The report detailed the physical and economic character of thirty-two distinct districts including retail, service, wholesale/ industrial and office properties. Vacant properties were also noted in the analysis and recommendations. Based on the physical and economic analysis and input from the business community strategies for redevelopment and reinvestment in each of the districts were proposed that would: 1) improve the physical, landscaping and circulation, 2) institute land use and zoning changes to accommodate the existing commercial areas and facilities in light of changing economic and shopping patterns, and 3) commercial site development that would not negatively impact adjacent residential neighborhoods. MARCH 2020


PLANS Parkview Gardens Park Plan (Adopted February 2010) In February 2009, the City of University City, The Parkview Gardens Association and Washington University undertook the development of a long-range design and implementation plan for the three (3) municipal parks located in the Parkview Gardens neighborhood – Metcalf Park, Ackert Park, and Eastgate Park. The impetus for developing the plan was the revitalization occurring in the neighborhood and the recognition by the City that the parks had deficiencies in their design and the parks were not being sufficiently utilized by residents. The redevelopment plan addressed the design, programming, operations, and maintenance of the Parks, and provided specific recommendations for how the Parks and public spaces could best serve the community and support the revitalization of the Parkview Gardens Neighborhood.

Parkview Gardens Neighborhood Sustainable Development Plan (Adopted by the Plan Commission, July 2014, Removal of Plan as a Supplement to Comprehensive Plan, February 2020 ) Utilizing a Public Private Partnership (PP3) the City of University City, in partnership with Washington University, the Parkview Gardens Association, Great Rivers Greenway, Trailnet, RHCDA, St. Louis Regional Arts Commission and the City of St. Louis submitted a proposal and were awarded a planning grant funded by the Dept. of Transportation TIGER II and the HUD Community Challenge Development Grant program that the federal agencies joined to create the Partnership for Sustainable Communities grant program. The planning process was previously specified in the implementation section of the Parkview Gardens Parks Plan adopted by the City in 2010.

The planning process resulted in the creation of an open space plan, a development program, form-based recommendations, urban sustainability systems, a vehicular access, traffic and parking design and an integrated funding plan. Design documents were prepared for: 1) Conceptual Design documents for the Ackert Walkway; 2) Design Development documents for Metcalfe and Ackert Parks; and 3) Neighborhood Housing Design Prototypes. In February 2020, the University City Council adopted a resolution to remove the Parkview Gardens Neighborhood Sustainable Development Plan as a supplement to the Comprehensive Plan.

Parkview Gardens was identified as a neighborhood with high potential for sustainable development, that could capitalize on the transportation initiatives in and around University City. The goal of the project was to create a connected and inclusive Parkview Gardens neighborhood where housing, infrastructure, open space and economic development strategies complemented the existing and planned public transportation resources to increase the long-term community and environmental sustainability of the area.

25 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

MARCH 2020


PLANS The Delmar Loop Area Retail Plan and Development Strategy (November 2011) Washington University retained a consultant team to develop a plan to strengthen the Delmar Loop as a premier destination for retail and entertainment in the St. Louis region. The planning process included analysis of the existing conditions (area demographics, the real estate market, physical conditions, real estate growth potential and consumer preferences and then the preparation of recommendations and an implementation strategy. The plan identified “The Loop Area” boundaries as starting at Trinity Avenue and Delmar Boulevard, extending east along Delmar Boulevard into the City of St. Louis to DeBaliviere Avenue and continuing south to the Forest Park - Metro Link station. The University City section of “The Loop Area” was included in the area defined as the West Loop, between the Lions on Delmar at Trinity and Hodiamont Avenue in the City of St. Louis, which was identified as “the heart of the area”. The recommendations for the West Loop focused on a strategy for increasing the demand for retail, sites for potential infill development, a parking strategy, land assemblage, safety and cleanliness, and public realm improvements that would enhance existing development and make the area more appealing. The implementation section detailed a strategy for retail recruitment and governance of the area.

26 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

MARCH 2020


REPORTS Olivette and University City – Joint Redevelopment Task Force (Sept. 2009) University City and the City of Olivette convened a Task Force appointed by the respective City Councils to help municipalities explore the feasibility of partnering to facilitate consistent and complementary redevelopment around the east and west sides of the I-170 and Olive Boulevard interchange. Various professionals with experience in urban redevelopment, LEED architecture, and economic redevelopment law, were invited to speak before the Task Force and assist them in their analysis. The professionals included the Loop Special Business District, Hellmuth – Bicknesse Architects, Jacobs Engineering, Armstrong Teasdale and an Urban Land Institute – Technical Assistance Panel. The Task Force determined that the existing land use types and businesses that existed in the area were stagnant and that privately led efforts to rejuvenate the area had not been successful. The Task Force recommended a coordinated redevelopment approach that could be accomplished through an Intergovernmental Agreement. They noted that the Agreement should address economic incentives, marketing and promotion, revenue sharing, common zoning regulations and complementary design standards to achieve the desired redevelopment objectives.

University City - Washington University Advisory Committee (July 2015 Report to City Council) The Advisory Committee was convened to examine and make recommendations to the City Council on the impact of Washington University’s tax-exempt property on the City’s revenues. Five (5) subcommittees were formed to review: 1) Tax revenue lost to University City taxing entities; 2) The taxes Washington University provides to University City taxing entities; 3) In-kind services provided to University City taxing entities; 4) Compare University City’s relationship with Washington University compared to other cities with comparable universities who have large tax exempt property holdings; and 5) determine if there is a mechanism for quantifying the increased demand on City services that result from Washington University’s ownership and development of tax-exempt property.

Feasibility Study – Proposed Hotel in University City (February 2020) University City is centrally located within the greater St. Louis metro area, but has no hotels located within the city limits. HVS was retained to identify and analyze the market for development of a hotel on four (4) distinct sites within the municipality. The consultants selected one site for an in-depth analysis of the size, neighborhood location, market conditions, supply and demand analysis, development cost and potential management and/or operation parameters of a potential hotel. The study concluded that development of a hotel on the selected site was feasible with certain economic conditions.

Following the gathering of information and analysis of the facts on tax-exempt property, service costs, monetary and in-kind services by Washington University to University City the committees provided recommendations to the City. The over-arching findings were that the taxpayers of University City are bearing a disproportionate share of the burden of Washington University holdings in the City.

27 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

MARCH 2020


REGIONAL PARTNERS In addition to the Economic Development Department of University City, economic development efforts within the city benefit from – or potentially could benefit from – the programming, resources, and assistance of numerous public and private entities that include University City within their geographic scope. These organizations include the following: St. Louis Economic Development Partnership The St. Louis Economic Development Partnership is the economic development organization for St. Louis County and St. Louis City. According to its mission, the Partnership, “provides economic development opportunities including site selection, financial incentives, lending programs, opportunity zones, entrepreneurial services, and targeted initiatives.”

St. Louis Regional Economic Development Alliance The St. Louis Regional Economic Development Alliance (aka “Alliance STL”) is a new regional economic development organization for Greater St. Louis. The Alliance has been structured as a subsidiary of the St. Louis Regional Chamber with its own board and CEO, and a sole focus of regional business recruitment and expansion for the 15-county bi-state St. Louis metropolitan region. In January of 2019, the media release announcing creation of Alliance STL noted that “business leaders from the St. Louis Regional Chamber, Civic Progress and the Regional Business Council … have come together to launch a world-class private sector economic development effort that will attract and retain businesses, jobs and top talent for the St. Louis region.”

The work of the Partnership includes a number of initiatives and focus areas including: 39 North, business development, business finance, defense initiatives, innovation & entrepreneurship, real estate & community investment, St. Louis Mosaic Project, St. Louis Promise Zone, workforce development, and the World Trade Center St. Louis.

28 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

St. Louis Regional Chamber The St. Louis Regional Chamber represents a 15-county area on both sides of the Mississippi within the St. Louis Metropolitan Area. In their own words, the St. Louis Regional Chamber asserts that it is the community’s “single source for information and professional economic development services relating to the 15-county bi-state metropolitan area.” They further note that they “take a strident customer-focused approach to economic development and will help you and/or the business you represent explore all possible solutions throughout Greater St. Louis.” With roots dating back to 1836, the chamber’s members today account for nearly 30% of the region’s employment base. The Chamber’s Entrepreneurship & Innovation Strategy includes support for entrepreneurs with the capital, infrastructure and networked relationships needed to create and scale new enterprises. One specific initiative, a collaboration with the St. Louis Economic Development Partnership, is called Accelerate St. Louis.

MARCH 2020


REGIONAL PARTNERS Bi-State Development

St. Louis Regional Freightway

Bi-State Development (BSD) is an agency established by interstate compact between Missouri and Illinois, the organization serves the City of St. Louis and seven adjacent counties. Within this geographic service area, BSD asserts that it is “dedicated to fostering economic development in the St. Louis region.”

As a business enterprise of Bi-State Development, the St. Louis Regional Freightway is charged with coordinating the St. Louis area’s freight activity. Within that broad focus, the organization provides site selection and other assistance to manufacturing, logistics, and multimodal transportation companies and their service providers within the City of St. Louis and seven adjacent counties in Missouri and Illinois.

Known primarily as the operator of the region’s primary transit system, BSD provides deep expertise in planning and implementation well beyond transit and has partnered with private and public organizations on hundreds of projects that have created thousands of jobs on both sides of the Mississippi River. East West Gateway Council of Governments

Accelerate St. Louis Accelerate St. Louis has a mission “to accelerate the growth of St. Louis’ dynamic startup community by strengthening connectivity, securing new capital, and raising awareness of the innovation that is happening in the region.”

East-West Gateway Council of Governments (EWG) serves as a forum for cooperative problem-solving and the coordinated development of regional policy in a geographic area encompassing the City of St. Louis and seven surrounding counties. Originally charged with coordinating transportation funding for St. Louis regional projects, EWG has broadened its scope over the years to “bring together governmental officials, planning professionals, citizens, and private sector partners to develop regional and local plans for transportation, environmental quality, housing, emergency preparedness, and access to employment.”

29 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

MARCH 2020


This page intentionally left blank.


CHAPTER 3: MUNICIPAL ECONOMIC CAPACITY + TOOLS

University City’s ability to foster economic development is affected by the economic policies, programs and tools available and deployed by the city. The scope and impact of economic development efforts are influenced by the availability of the human and supportive resources to promote and operationalize these tools effectively and to engage with the many constituencies who touch economic development.

31 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

MARCH 2020


PROGRAMS An assessment of University City’s key internal assets that advance economic development are addressed below. University City has proactively and judicially utilized the incentive tools authorized by the State of Missouri to facilitate redevelopment projects in the municipality. These tools have been primarily used to encourage and facilitate the development and redevelopment of commercial properties within the city’s retail and commercial corridors. Local Option Economic Development Sales Tax / Economic Development Retail Sales Tax Missouri Revised Statute Section 67.1305 authorizes municipalities to levy, subject to voter approval, at a rate of up to one-half of one percent (0.5%) sales tax to be used for economic development purposes. After the Local Option Economic Development Sales Tax is approved by the voters, the municipality levying the tax must create an Economic Development Tax Board. The membership of the Board in a City/Town /Village can consist of either 5 or 7 members with membership representation dictated by the State Statute. The purposes of the Board are to 1) develop and consider economic development plans, economic development projects and designations of economic development areas, 2) hold public hearings, and 3) make recommendations to the governing body of the municipality concerning economic development plans, projects and designation of areas. The governing body of the municipality governing will make all

final funding determinations. The revenue generated by the tax is subject to restrictions imposed by the authorizing legislation approved by the local municipality. Utilizing the statute, University City approved a one-quarter (1/4) percent sales tax in August 2006; the revenue is based on the amount of sales tax generated through point of sales within the City limits. The City created a five (5) member Economic Development Retail Sales Tax (EDRST) Board to invest the funds in projects and programs that encourage the physical and economic development of major corridors, improve infrastructure, support existing successful business districts, and enhances efforts toward business retention, expansion and attraction.

32 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

The Board has identified four (4) funding priorities: 1. To expand efforts and partnerships to encourage the physical and economic redevelopment of Olive Boulevard 2. To continue infrastructure improvements to the Olive Boulevard and Delmar Boulevard streetscapes. 3. To continue to support existing successful business districts, such as the Loop. 4. To enhance the City’s efforts of business retention, attraction and expansion. The EDRST board submits projects recommended for funding to the City on an annual basis. Funding for recommended projects is included in and approved through the City Budget process.

MARCH 2020


PROGRAMS Special Business District The Revised Statues of Missouri Sections 71.790 to 71.808 governs the creation of special business districts. A special business district (“SBD”) is a political subdivision with the power to impose a real property tax, a business license tax and special assessments, in the City where the SBD is created. The funding sources can be spent on public improvements such as streets and alleys, landscaping, sidewalk improvements/enhancements, and parking facilities. Additionally, public services such as the operation of buses, security services, promotion of business activity and maintenance of publicly owned infrastructure. The SBD is created by a city following submission of a petition by property owners that pay real property taxes within the proposed district. The SBD is governed by a separate legal entity distinct and apart from the City that creates the district. Consistent with the Special Business District Law, University City created an SBD as a mechanism to allow local merchants and property owners to collectively enhance their environment and promote retail trade. The area was established as the University City Loop Special Business District (“The Loop”) , geographically encompassing both the north and south sides of Delmar Boulevard from Kingsland Avenue to the University City eastern municipal limits and the commercial establishments fronting Kingsland, Enright., Leland, Melville and Westgate Aves. Businesses and individuals licensed to do

business in the area are subject to 1) An additional business license tax of fifty (50%) above any other business license taxes levied by the City; and 2) An Additional real property tax of eighty-five cents ($0.85) per one hundred dollars of assessed valuation. Since its establishment The Loop has evolved into a vibrant shopping and entertainment area. The SBD instituted building and development regulations that limited first floor storefronts to retail shops, restaurants and galleries resulting in a pedestrian friendly street environment. Through the efforts of the SBD, The Loop has undergone significant redevelopment activities and enhancements, resulting in it being recognized in 2007 by the American Planning Association as “One of the 10 Great Streets in America”. Some of the notable enhancements to the area include the creation of the St. Louis Walk of Fame which recognizes, with stars embedded in the sidewalks, notable St. Louisans; Blueberry Hill, a nationally renowned restaurant and music club; the restoration of the elegant 1924 era Tivoli Movie Theatre; Fitz’s, a vintage 1930’s root beer and soda restaurant and bottling company; a plaza dedicated to Chuck Berry, and the installation of a fixed-track vintage Trolley that moves visitors/residents from Forest Park through The Delmar Loop to the historic Lions adjacent to the University City - City Hall. The Loop is also home to one of the first Farmer’s Markets created in the St. Louis area, providing the community with a local resource for fresh fruits and vegetables.

33 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

Façade Improvement Program Façade Improvement Programs are utilized by municipalities to encourage property owners to invest and upgrade the exteriors of properties to create an inviting, attractive appearance of commercial areas. The City of University City recognizes the positive impact that individual façade improvements can have on the overall appearance, quality and vitality of the City’s commercial districts. The University City Façade Improvement Program was designed as an economic development strategy that is consistent with the City’s 2005 Comprehensive Plan. To facilitate private investments the Façade Program offers financial assistance, in the form of a matching grant up to $15,000, to commercial property owners or business owners interested in rehabilitating commercial building facades and that meet the eligibility requirements as outlined in the application. Commercial properties located on Olive Boulevard must also comply with the Olive Boulevard Design Guidelines.

MARCH 2020


PROGRAMS Urban Redevelopment Corporation Under Chapter 353 RSMo

Land Clearance for Redevelopment Authority under Chapter 99 RSMo

Missouri’s Chapter 353 incentivizes redevelopment of blighted areas by allowing for tax abatement on property that is part of a redevelopment project. Under the statute, an urban redevelopment corporation may be created to operate a redevelopment project in a blighted area consistent with a city or county redevelopment plan. Frequently, the proposed developer will assume responsibility for preparing the redevelopment plan, which identifies the redevelopment area, projects to be undertaken, how the plan will eliminate blight and the estimated project costs. The city or county may approve a redevelopment plan that provides for tax abatement for up to 25 years. During the first ten years, the property owner pays real property taxes based on the amount in the year before the redevelopment corporation took title property taxes are abated on the land and any improvements. During the next 15 years, the incremental real property taxes are abated 50100%. The City may require payments in lieu of taxes that effectively reduce the abatement established by the statute.

Tax abatement for a redevelopment project may also be secured through the University City Land Clearance for Redevelopment Authority (LCRA). Created by local government under Chapter 99, of the Revised Statutes of Missouri, an LCRA serves as a redevelopment entity, authorized to designate areas as blighted, prepare redevelopment plans and solicit proposals from developers to undertake redevelopment within the plan area. It also has the ability to acquire property, including through eminent domain, issue bonds and undertake public improvements as well as demolish or renovate existing buildings or construct new ones.

Consistent with Urban Redevelopment Corporation, Chapter 353 Law, University City has established an Abatement process to encourage the redevelopment of blighted areas. The City is currently considering the utilization of Chapter 353 to facilitate the redevelopment of a 2.8-acre site for an Office Buildings, Senior Living Apartments and Parking Facilities.

Tax Increment Financing The Missouri Tax Increment Financing (TIF) law allows cities to adopt a redevelopment plan that provides for a redevelopment project or projects in an area designated as blighted, and to use TIF to fund a portion of the project costs. TIF funds are derived from the incremental increase in tax paid by property owners and from sales and utility taxes generated within the project area after development is completed. The increased incremental tax amounts typically are then used to pay off the costs of a portion of the development.

Consistent with the LCRA Law, University City’s LCRA has been used to facilitate the redevelopment of a five-acre site which housed the former Nathaniel Hawthorne Elementary School, located on N. Hanley Road. The project included the conversion of the school building into thirty-seven onebedroom apartments and the construction of ten new, two-bedroom townhomes on the site. The new development will be called the Hawthorne Apartments. The City also used the LCRA to assist with the construction of the Mansions on the Plaza, a luxury apartment complex located on Delmar Boulevard. The complex consists of one, two- and threebedroom apartments with high-end amenities including concierge services, an on-site Executive Business Center, a 19-seat Movie Theater, Dog Park, Fitness Center, a masseuse and a heated salt-water swimming pool.

34 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

MARCH 2020


PROGRAMS Existing TIF District: Olive Boulevard Commercial Corridor and Residential Conservation Redevelopment Plan (Olive & 1-170 TIF District) To facilitate and encourage reinvestment in the commercial and residential areas along Olive Boulevard the City approved a TIF redevelopment area that extends from the eastern to the western boundaries of the City. The geography was divided into three (3) distinct Redevelopment Project Areas (“RPA”):

RPA 3 – Retail/Commercial Corridor The area includes the north and south sides of Olive Boulevard east of McKnight Road and Woodson Road. Utilizing revenue generated by RPA 1 the City plans to implement a strategy to stimulate economic development consistent with the Master Plan for the corridor. The strategy will focus on the acquisition and renovation of commercial property, demolition activities, installation of public improvements, landscaping, park development and the construction of buildings for new commercial uses.

RPA 1 – Retail/Commercial Node of redevelopment Located at the intersection of Olive and I-170, this area is the site of a proposed new commercial development that will encompass both sides of Olive Boulevard west of McKnight Road and Woodson Road. The development will be anchored by a national tenant along with other retail and commercial businesses. This project is anticipated to generate a significant amount of revenue through increases in property and sales tax that will be targeted to incentivize investment in RPA’s 2 and 3. RPA 2 – Residential redevelopment A primarily residential area encompassing all of University City north of Olive Boulevard will be the focus of a strategic plan to increase residential property values, promote economic diversity, encourage homeownership, convert renters into homeowners and stabilize and invigorate the 3rd Ward.

35 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

Community Improvement Districts A Community Improvement District (CID) is a political subdivision with the power to impose a sales tax, a special assessment or a real property tax. A CID may also be a nonprofit corporation with the power to impose special assessments. CID generated taxes or special assessments may be used to pay for a broad variety of public, community improvements, including sidewalks, parking lots, lighting, utilities and so on. Property owners within the proposed CID area must submit a petition requesting that the governing municipality authorize the creation of the CID. Property owners seek to impose such additional taxes to help fund needed public improvements that enhance community amenities supporting their properties. In a development scenario, the developer is often the owner of property within the CID and uses the increased property tax or often more typically additional sales tax or special assessments to generate revenues that are used to pay off eligible, often extraordinary development costs. The City of University City and The Loop Special Business District are currently contemplating the creation of a CID within the footprint of The Loop.

MARCH 2020


PROGRAMS Transportation Development Districts

Industrial Development Authority

A transportation development district (“TDD”) may be created under state law to fund, promote, plan, design, construct, improve, maintain and operate one or more projects or to assist in such activity. A TDD is a separate political subdivision of the state and generates funds for such projects through an incremental sales tax on retail sales. Projects may include transportation related improvements, including bridges, streets, traffic signals, bus stops, etc.

The Missouri Revised Statute – Chapter 349 authorized the establishment of municipal or county Industrial Development Authorities to issue Bonds to assist in developing commercial, industrial and manufacturing facilities. Bonds issued through the program enjoy a tax-exempt status, providing low-interest-rate financing for qualifying businesses. Federal law limits the availability of bonds to manufacturers and 501(C)(3) corporations. In addition, low-interest taxable bond programs have been introduced.

Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) PACE is an innovative program that makes it possible for owners of commercial, multifamily and industrial properties to obtain low-cost, long-term financing for energyefficiency, water conservation and renewable energy Lighting, Building Controls, Windows, Insulation, Solar Applications and Kitchen Equipment. University City recently passed an ordinance enabling commercial property owners to take advantage of this financing.

University City created an Industrial Development Authority devoted to helping attract industrial development and economic expansion in the City. It is a quasi-independent group governed by Missouri Statutes and is empowered to sell industrial development or revenue bonds. The Authority consists of seven members appointed by the Mayor with concurrence by the City Council. The City does not actively use this Authority.

36 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

MARCH 2020


STAFFING Staffing The city of University City maintains a full-time Economic Development Director (ED Director) on staff. The position reports to the City Manager. The position has no direct reports. The ED Director’s key responsibilities are as follows: • Leading business retention and attraction efforts along with redevelopment activities (working with developers, identifying and promoting developable properties, managing incentives and redevelopment agreements etc.). • Interfacing with residents, businesses and real estate professionals in order to support economic growth in the City.

The ED Director is also responsible for managing the City’s parking garage and lots and has provided staffing for the Loop Special Business District (SBD). The City is in the process of hiring a part-time coordinator position to support the Loop SBD. The position will collaborate with the ED Director on Loop specific business attraction and retention and development efforts. In addition to the ED Director, the City also employs a Director of Planning and Development. With responsibility for implementation of the city’s comprehensive plan and development code, including zoning and permitting, the Director of Planning and Development’s responsibilities bear upon economic development. The Planning & Development Director is responsible for a staff of 17, which includes building inspectors, code enforcement and support staff.

The bifurcation of economic development and planning and community development is a relatively new staffing structure for University City. Previously, economic development and associated staffing was part of the Planning and Development Department. Both directors are new to the City having been hired in 2019. The two directors work together to ensure alignment between their two areas of responsibility and until a recent budget induced change in staffing structure, a planning staff member was made available to assist the ED Director on discrete projects or activities.

• Representing the City to local and regional economic development organizations. • Spearheading the City’s marketing efforts.

37 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

MARCH 2020


This page intentionally left blank.


CHAPTER 4: MACROECONOMIC TRENDS National and regional economic trends and shifts in demographics, employment, technology and so on influence what happens in local economies. While University City’s economy has its own unique characteristics and not all broader trends are relevant to economic activity and business growth in the city, understanding these trends and how they may influence or can be leveraged to the city’s advantage are an important part of shaping a strategy for growth.

39 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

MARCH 2020


MACRO-ECONOMIC TRENDS Retail Markets Shifts The technological changes that gave rise to online shopping have dramatically changed consumer spending habits. All generations from Baby Boomers (54-72) to Gen Z (18-21) are doing significant shopping online; a 2019 study of 3,000 consumers’ spending habits found that at the high end only about a third of any generation reported buying items in a physical store, with less than 10% of Gen Z reporting shopping at a brick and mortar outlet1. Significantly, Gen Z are influencing their parents’ and grandparents’ shopping habits as well. That being said, US consumers are evenly divided 50/50 on whether they prefer online or in-store shopping. Indeed, the three top buying destinations are Amazon, branded e-commerce websites and physical stores. As a result, while online commerce has hurt traditional models of retail shopping, brick and mortar remains an important part of the equation. Although expected to slow in 2020, more retail stores have been opening in the last year than closing. A continuing consumer preference for shopping local and handmade or unique products is good news for communities with a base of small, non-chain retailers. The notion of buying local also aligns with concerns about social responsibility. Consumers are also looking for engaging experiences in the stores where they shop. A preference for experiential retail

means not only that the look and feel of stores is critical but that retailers offer opportunities to participate in events, workshops or other experiences that engage them beyond the purely transactional. With an increase in expenditures on health, well-being and selfcare, outlets providing goods and services that cater to these consumer interests are also on the rise. Mixed-Use & Outparcel Development Mixed-use developments – combining residential, office and/or retail with a strong focus on placemaking – have enjoyed a renaissance over the last twenty-plus years. Mixed-use development responds to people’s desire for walkable neighborhoods that create a sense of place and community character through complementary uses and public gathering and greenspace. They are vibrant communities where people can live, work and play. The typically compact developments are more dense and create economic efficiencies through shared infrastructure and parking, resulting in reduced impacts on the environment. Additionally, mixed-use developments are typically amenity rich with stores and services that are geared to local tastes rather than major chains. Retail outlets typically include restaurants, entertainment and personal services (e.g. dry cleaners), with office and/or residential uses, creating a built-in customer base that helps to ensure long term viability.

While local, small scale retail is more typical, some traditional big box retailers are also down-sizing their traditional footprint to fit into mixed-use development. Mixed-use developments may be vertical, commercial on the first floor and residential on upper floors, or horizontal, a mix of single use buildings that are clustered together or a combination of both. While rooted in urban redevelopment, more recently mixeduse strategies have emerged as a trend for addressing languishing suburban retail centers. The evolving retail landscape also has given rise to changes in thinking about use, design and layout of suburban shopping centers. Historic parking requirements for retail centers were often over-stated with the result that shopping centers (and malls) typically contain a sea of parking, usually between the street and the shopping center buildings. Particularly for locations that are experiencing vacancies, a large swath of unused parking only contributes to an image of decline. One development trend that addresses the aesthetics and increases density is outparcel development. Locating new shops on existing developments closer to the street with parking behind or in the center provides traffic calming and eliminates the visual of a sea of parking.

“The 2019 Omni-Channel Retail Report: Generational Consumer Shopping Behavior Comes Into Focus,” BigCommerce (https://www.bigcommerce.com/blog/omni-channel-retail/#developing-your-omni-channel-strategy) 1

40 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

MARCH 2020


MACRO-ECONOMIC TRENDS Balancing Economic Diversification with Specialization Traditionally, economic development best practices endorse a diverse economy, i.e., one that includes a variety of industries or sectors. Ensuring that a community is not over-reliant on a single industry creates a more stable and resilient economy; downturns in a particular industry will not have the same effect on a community that has a diverse base of businesses.

Often the challenge for communities in deploying strategies that support diversification is ensuring that they have selected focus areas that are differentiators and that target more narrowly on a small number of clear strategic strengths, rather than broadly supporting multiple industry sectors that represent a majority of the local economy. Tailoring support to key strengths is important for an effective strategy that is more impactful on the local economy. Employment

While in general the principle of diversification is sound, it is typically more relevant to larger cities or regions. Moreover, recent consideration of economic development practices also underscores the importance for a community to identify and support specific types of firms and/or talent that are grounded in local strengths and that help to differentiate a community from its neighbors. By identifying a target industry, a community makes a commitment to either protecting an existing strength or increasing investments to grow an emerging industry. Targeting specific industries means investing in capacities that sustains the attractiveness of a community to both capital and workers in those areas and creates growth that builds upon itself. Growth based on more specialized strengths often gives rise to a base of expertise that positions a community for growth in a new, related area.

Despite low unemployment rates and workforce shortages, there are some concerns that the economy may be slowing which will affect job seekers and employers and raise the potential for slower growth in the labor market. At least in the short run to address workforce needs, employers are looking at ways to attract and retain workers by focusing on creating a positive company culture or workplace environment that focuses on employee well-being and offers employees flexibility and a work-life balance. Part of this focus on culture also means that employees increasingly value organizations that place a priority on corporate social responsibility. Gen Z is entering the workforce and as a group, they tend to value diversity and inclusiveness, expect companies to have a positive social impact and value a positive workplace culture. Current employment

trends reflect the desire to adapt to this new cohort of workers. Additionally, the self-employment or free-lancing – the so-called gig economy – continues to increase. While retention strategies are part of the workplace equation, employers are increasingly getting comfortable with relying on contractors as a means of reducing the costs of turnover and allowing them to easily adjust their workforce for project related work. While the flexibility of gig work may be appealing for both employer and employee, oftentimes gig work does not include health benefit coverage and requires the worker to maintain a diverse base of work opportunities, creating different challenges. Real Estate Trends in the broader real estate market have a general bearing on local economies. Key trends in residential, commercial, industrial and hospitality are noted below.2 Residential • Housing production remains flat with prices trending upwards as a result of labor and available land shortages plus rising lumber prices. • Affordability is a continued challenge for first-time home buyers and in St. Louis, higher priced homes remain on the market longer.

Content on national trends in this section is derived in part from “Emerging Trends in Real Estate 2020,” prepared by PwC and the Urban Land Institute. Local data drawn in part from the SIOR 2020 Metro Market Forecast (Feb. 2020), St. Louis Retail Insights 2019, prepared by CBRE 2

41 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

MARCH 2020


MACRO-ECONOMIC TRENDS Residential (continued) • Homeownership nationwide is around 65%, which is the lowest rate since the mid-1960s. • Multi-family construction has shown significant growth over the last several years, although it slowed somewhat in the last year and continues to expand in the St. Louis area. Commercial • Work space that creates community and offers amenities that improve employees’ work experience by helping them to do their work better is an important trend for the commercial office sector. The types of amenities valued by workers often differs based on age (areas to socialize for younger employees with access to personal services being more relevant for workers with families). • The St. Louis office market is solid with vacancy rates in the area averaging 12% and asking rates an average for $25.82/SF for Class A space. • In St. Louis, the retail market continues to be healthy. Vacancy rates were at 4.5% at the end of 2019, with rental rates at an average of $13.14/SF for the metro area, with quoted rates significantly higher in mid-St. Louis County at $19.99/SF.

• Trends in the St. Louis retail real estate market include boutique fitness studios, experiential retail and urgent care operations. • Much of new retail development in St. Louis is focused on mixed use and “retailtainment” (e.g., Ballpark Village II, the Foundry and The District in Chesterfield). Industrial • Industrial property is experiencing alignment with increasing needs for logistics and distribution driven by the demands of e-commerce and the growing competition to improve speed of delivery.

• Consumers increasingly are favoring unique hotels in terms of look, offerings and experience (local food, design that reflects local culture etc.) rather than uniformity, which was historically the norm. • Environmental sustainability has emerged as an important trend, with travelers concerned with ensuring the hotels and restaurants they patronize act ethically when it comes to the environment. Impacts include locally sourced or vegetarian/vegan options at dining establishments to energy efficient lighting or cooling/heating in hotels.

• In the St. Louis region, there has been record new construction and absorption and low vacancy rates since 2014 with nearly 6 million square feet added in 2019. In the metro area, much of the growth in industrial development has been concentrated along the I-70 corridor and extends from St. Charles into Illinois. Hospitality • The hospitality industry has experienced strong demand from business travel, trade and conference attendance along with tourism, although after consistent growth for nearly a decade, it is expected to slow. Moreover, the long-term effects of the coronavirus on the travel and hospitality industry are unknown but may trigger a serious downturn.

42 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

MARCH 2020


MACRO-ECONOMIC TRENDS Senior Living and Growth Trends As has been widely reported the anticipated impact of Baby Boomers is becoming a reality with the initial group of the Baby Boomer generation turning 72 in 2018. The U.S. Census Bureau in 2014 estimated that the 65 plus population would almost double to 83.7 million and be more racially and ethnically diverse. It is anticipated that persons over 65 will make up over 20 percent of the U.S. population by the year 2030. The sheer magnitude of the growth of older adults is expected to present a tremendous opportunity for investment in stand-alone independent living, assisted living and nursing environments. However, the economic disparity among the senior population will present some additional complicating factors for communities. While the wealthiest members of the senior population will be able to afford a wide array of housing options and services, most of this population will face a less positive outlook. This group will generally have insufficient assets and be unprepared for the cost of retirement and aging. The resulting societal impact will potentially be a strain on safety net resources and governmental funds that support the aging and elderly population. Consumer research conducted by CLAconnect between 2014 and 2017 found that 77-80 % of the population surveyed planned to remain in their existing residences. This will require the development of services and support programs to allow seniors to live in their homes for a longer period of time.

These services will include elements such as transportation assistance, home health care, home delivery meal services and activities that will allow seniors to maintain social interactions while they remain in their homes. Although aging in place, at home, is the preferred option for a majority of seniors, there will also be a demand for alternative senior living options. The demand for Independent living, assisted living, skilled nursing and memory care facilities will also increase as the senior population continues to age. Many communities are experiencing the development of senior “complexes� that are designed to accommodate the entire continuum of living needs as seniors age and experience increasing health related needs. The aging of the population will have workforce implications as the demand for qualified workers to support the needs of a growing senior population increases. While most industries are experiencing shortages in the availability of qualified workers to replace the Baby Boomer generation, the senior living sector is anticipated to be more severely impacted. Recruitment and retention issues primarily impacted by pay levels, retirements and the number of individuals graduating from nursing schools will also present significant challenges for this sector.

in the senior service sector. Coupled with the propensity for younger workers to be constantly looking for their next employment opportunity, this dynamic can create disruptions in the provision of quality care. This younger workforce will probably be more ethnically diverse and will bring different expectations to their employers and work environment. They will probably expect more integrated technology to be used, and more flexibility in work hours to remain engaged in this sector. The retirement of Baby Boomers will likely have an impact on the workforce in general. Organizational leadership and boards are dominated by this older population. Businesses should begin to develop strategies to attract, train and retain talented employees to be in a position to backfill management level positions as seniors elect to retire from the day-to-day workforce. A competitive compensation schedule and working environment will be key to this effort.

Increases in the minimum wage, adoption of living wage thresholds and competition for qualified staff will continue to intensify pressure on wage rates, which are expected to outpace wage rate increases for employees

43 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

MARCH 2020


MACRO-ECONOMIC TRENDS Healthcare Services Healthcare has been at the forefront of public debate since the passage of Medicare and Medicaid in 1965. These debates were reignited with the passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act in 2010. All of the programs focus on the provision of health services to a broad segment of the population within the United States, the poor, elderly and uninsured. Despite these efforts to improve the delivery of healthcare services, the health industry sector has historically lagged other industry sectors when it comes to modernization to improve the delivery and outcomes of healthcare services. The industry has been consistently negatively impacted by complicated and outdated billing systems, complicated regulatory barriers and a delivery model based on face-to-face interactions that are time-consuming, costly and often unnecessary. Recent studies of the healthcare system by Price Waterhouse Cooper/HRI (pwc), Navigant Consulting, Inc. and other research entities have identified emerging trends that the industry believes will change the healthcare industry. The industry trends are based on changes in other industry sectors designed to increase efficiencies, improve

customer experience, foster transparency and encourage innovation. The industry believes that the long-term beneficiaries of these new models will be the individuals that depend on the industry to keep them well as long as possible or return them to wellness if they become sick. The availability of quality healthcare has a direct impact on the workforce and the ability of businesses to produce and/or market their products. Both of these elements have a direct impact on the economy.

3. Growth and expansion of Medicare Advantage programs to address the desire of baby boomers to the HMO-like programs that are not offered by traditional Medicare. These programs include gym memberships and/or reimbursements, coverage for dental and eye exams as well as capped out of pocket cost. Participation in Medicare Advantage programs was estimated to be 20 million beneficiaries in 2018 and is expected to reach 40 million by 2025.

The trends most recognized are: 1. Hospitals and health systems are acquiring physician practices and merging or acquiring other hospitals. Although these consolidations were promoted as ways to increase economies of scale, thus reducing healthcare cost there is some evidence that size does not correlate with profitably. It is suggested that this trend will continue; however, healthcare providers will focus on other benefits and value propositions. 2. Private equity firms are acquiring specialty practices such as dermatology, ophthalmology and orthopedics, consolidating them to create a better business model. This trend is allowing healthcare providers to sell non-core assets so they can focus on their core competencies. This trend can be been seen in the proliferation of Urgent Care facilities.

44 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

4. The healthcare industry is looking to integrate the use of technology to monitor patient health and provide therapies through apps and other devices. Life science companies have been very active in the development of digital therapeutic and connected devices that will allow physicians to monitor patient administration of drugs, their adherence to prescribed programs to address health related issues without requiring them to visit a doctor’s office. The new technology platforms being developed will augment or replace active drugs in the treatment of certain diseases by creating an integrated approach to healthcare services that can be responded to in real time.

MARCH 2020


CHAPTER 5: MARKET + INDUSTRY CLUSTER ANALYSIS

45 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

MARCH 2020


M A R K E T + I N D U S T R Y C L U S T E R A N A LY S I S Industry Classifications & Clusters Overview An industry cluster is generally considered to be a group or network of businesses and related organizations and institutions in a particular industry that are concentrated in a specific geographic area and which derive a productive advantage from their proximity. For example, firms in an industry cluster may have common or complementary markets, talent needs or may function as suppliers or service providers for each other. For communities, industry clusters function as one measure of concentrated economic activity and provide insight into the types of businesses that may attract similar companies, resulting in new jobs and creating wealth. Clusters often indicate areas for growth in the local economy; the presence of successful businesses may serve to reassure other prospective firms that they can be successful locating in a community. While there are different ways to determine whether an industry cluster exists in a region or community, a common methodology is to examine the number of employees in a particular industry in a given geography. An industry cluster exists if the concentration of employees exceeds the national average for the sector – called the location quotient. The number of total companies and/or the total revenue they generate annually also provide insight into a cluster analysis.

In addition to providing insight into areas of economic strength and growth, an industry cluster analysis for a particular community or region can help shape business attraction, expansion and retention policies, reveal industries that may have similar workforce needs, help prioritize groups of firms that have growth potential and help improve a community’s identity and marketing. Key Industries by Sector Industry cluster analyses are often derived from data collected through the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS), the standard used by the federal government for classifying businesses in order to collect and analyze statistical information on the US economy. NAICS establishes broad categories of industries and then further refines them into subclassifications. The US Bureau of Labor Statistics has further aggregated NAICS sectors into groups called Supersectors, which represent combined employment data for the NAICS sector groupings. These NAICS categories provide a framework for beginning to define the clusters in a community.

46 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

University City Supersectors The top NAICS Supersectors for University City based on employment include: • Education & Health Services (combined Educational Service and Health Care and Social Assistance Services). • Trade, Transportation and Utilities (combined Wholesale Trade, Retail Trade, Transportation and Warehousing and Utilities sectors). • Leisure and Hospitality (combined Arts, Entertainment and Recreation and Accommodations and Food Services sectors). In addition, companies in the Trade Transportation and Utilities Supersector represent by far the greatest revenue producers in the community, followed by Information (including information technology, telecommunications and publishing and broadcasting services), which displaces Leisure and Hospitality as a top supersector based on revenues. The most significant driver of revenues under the Information supersector is the St. Louis Archdiocesan Appeal, the address of which is the location of Our Lady of Lourdes church and school. Additionally, there appears to be one company that has multiple addresses that has skewed the data. As a result, Information would not be a focus for growth based on these factors.

MARCH 2020


M A R K E T + I N D U S T R Y C L U S T E R A N A LY S I S Industry Clusters While Supersectors represent the broad categories of business types in University City, greater sector specificity will assist in identifying the community’s strengths. The Location Quotient (LQ) is a tool used to analyze local economic strengths and weaknesses and provides a measure to evaluate concentrations in light of national averages. The national average concentration is set at 1.0. Anything in excess of this figure may be considered an industry cluster. It is also important to note that there may be instances where an industry that employs significant numbers does not constitute an industry cluster. For example, while health care may represent a significant employer in a given community, the concentration may not be sufficient to rise to the level of an industry cluster, i.e., the concentration is not above the average national concentration (LQ of 1.0). Breaking down the Supersectors to more specific industries and considering them in light of their LQ reveals that in University City, primary industry clusters include the following: • Accommodation and Food Services – LQ of 2.04 • Health Care and Social Assistance – LQ of 1.21 (not inclusive of the Gatesworth, which in the 63124 zip code area rather than 63130, which is University City’s primary zip code)

Educational Services with an LQ of 6.84 is actually far and away the most significant industry cluster in University City based, at least in part, on the large number of workers employed by University City School District along with other private institutions in the community. Given the largely public or non-profit nature of this sector, it does not represent a significant opportunity for economic growth. Similarly, other Services at an LQ of 1.83 demonstrates a significantly higher than national average LQ. This industry sector largely is comprised of local services like automotive and household goods repair, dry cleaning and religious, social, civic and business associations that have a local focus rather than broader potential for growth. Potential Emerging Sectors While there are industry clusters that clearly emerge as strengths for University City, there are other industry concentrations that bear discussion given their potential for growing the local economy, notwithstanding a lower than average LQ. It is notable that while Trade, Transportation and Utilities, which includes Retail Trade, is considered a top Supersector for University City, based on employment and revenues, the LQ for Retail Trade is somewhat below the national average (0.91) and the sector experienced an 8% decline in total number of jobs between 2014 and 2019. That being said, it appears possible that Retail Trade may still be a growth area for the community, particularly given the presence of strong retail and dining and entertainment districts and the opportunity with the retail

47 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

development at I-170 and Olive. Similarly, while Manufacturing does not rise to the level of an industry cluster based on its LQ of 0.47, which is less than half the national average, Manufacturing may be a growth area. Similarly, while the Professional and Business Service Supersector (combined Professional, Scientific, and Technical Service, Management of Companies and Enterprises and Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services sectors) does not emerge as a top Supersector for University City, the Professional, Scientific, and Technical Service sector within this Supersector has an LQ of 0.88, which likely reflects the growing tech sector businesses in the community. Two tech-related firms are among University City’s top ten employers in 2019. With annual average earnings per worker of $102,004, this sector offers an opportunity to grow high quality jobs in the community.

MARCH 2020


M A R K E T + I N D U S T R Y C L U S T E R A N A LY S I S Home-Based Businesses

Local Consumer Demand Profile

Although economic development typically focuses on growing and retaining wellestablished companies, how Americans work is evolving, characterized by growth in selfemployment and home-based businesses. As a result, understanding the needs of homebased businesses and how best to support them is an increasing focus for economic development. While the NAICS code analysis may capture some of these firms, these emerging businesses with localized impact represent a distinct opportunity to help grow wealth and jobs for residents.

An examination of consumer spending habits and consumer profiles provides insight into the types of businesses that are most likely to align with a community’s market. The dominant profile for University City is Family Foundations representing over 26% of consumers in the community. Members of the Family Foundations life mode group are characterized by the following:

In University City, financial activities businesses are the largest home-based business sector based on number of employees and number of firms. Financial Activities firms include accountants and insurance agents. Firms in the Construction sector generate 57.7% off the home-based businesses revenues in the City.

• Family, religion and character are cornerstones of many of these communities that are comprised of households of married couples, single parents, grandparents and children, both young and adult. • Owners of older, single-family houses in established, stable communities.

Representing nearly 18% of University City residents, the next largest consumer segment is Urban Chic. Characteristics of the Urban Chic segment are as follows: • Well-educated with over 65% holding bachelor’s degrees or higher and employed in white collar positions. • Spends between 67% and over 100% greater than the national average on all household budget categories. • Tech savvy and environmentally aware, maintaining a green lifestyle. • Travel extensively and visit museums, art galleries and movies for entertainment. • Shop at upscale establishments.

• Many work in the health care industry or in government. • Baby and children’s products are primary purchases. • Shop at discount stores (e.g., Marshall’s, Sam’s/Costco). • Style and clothing are important to these consumers.

48 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

MARCH 2020


M A R K E T + I N D U S T R Y C L U S T E R A N A LY S I S Cluster Analysis Accommodations & Food Services The tourism, leisure and hospitality industry are significant growth industries throughout the country that can serve as an economic engine for smaller communities. The tourism sector refers to the provision of transportation, accommodations, recreation, food and related services for leisure as well as business travelers. Fueled by a strong national economy and a population that is becoming increasingly more mobile, there are potential opportunities to attract retail, recreation and leisure tourist. In 2018 this industry sector represented 2.9% of the nation’s Gross Domestic Product, with spending totaling over $117 Billion. The top leisure travel activities for U.S. domestic travelers are: 1) visiting relatives; 2) shopping; 3) visiting friends; 4) fine dining: and 5) rural sightseeing. Given the amount of spending in this sector the leisure and hospitality industry are considered to be very competitive. There are constantly new hotel developments that compete with older facilities that do not offer the same amenities, services and locations. This is further impacted by individual brand preferences based on loyalty reward programs offered by most national hotel chains and the impact of the use of technology by travelers to make their travel accommodation decisions. The introduction of

substitute overnight accommodations such as Bed and Breakfast and AirBnB vacation rental facilities have created even more competition within this industry. Accommodations and food service are an industry cluster within the Leisure and Hospitality Supersector. This cluster generally includes hotels (overnight lodging) and restaurants (fast food and full service). This is the second largest industry cluster and source of employment in University City with a Location Quotient (LQ) of 2.04. In 2019, this cluster accounted for 1,660 jobs or 17.55% of all jobs in University City and represented a 347 job (16%) increase over the number of jobs in the City in 2013. Businesses within the Leisure and Hospitality Supersector generated over $150 Million in revenues in University City and represented 13.3% of the City firms’ total revenue. Supporting and enhancing the Loop as well as the International area are important in shoring up the City’s Accommodations and Food Service sector. Three proposed hotels are also an exciting new opportunity to grow this sector and leverage additional related investment.

development is a long-term commitment and the hotel projects are still in development, it will be important for the City to identify opportunities to build and reinvest in their existing retail and entertainment districts. The significance of the Accommodations and Food Service sector lies in its potential to generate special sales taxes for the City that go toward funding municipal operations and activities and offer an opportunity to invest in local businesses’ commercial activities. While University City is a pool city for purposes of general retail sales tax and therefore receives a proportionate share based on population, it imposes a number of municipal special retail sales taxes that help fund key investments in the community. These special retail sales taxes are generated based on point of sale in University City and include a park sales tax, fire services sales tax and an economic development sales tax. These taxes have generally experienced limited growth or have been flat in recent years.

The proposed new development at Olive and I-170 may also help strengthen this sector and provide resources to re-invest into disinvested sections of Olive. The City also has the opportunity to leverage this development to attract new development and reinvestment along Olive that will continue to grow its tax base. However because the I-170 and Olive

49 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

MARCH 2020


M A R K E T + I N D U S T R Y C L U S T E R A N A LY S I S Health Care and Social Assistance With the country’s population aging, the growth in senior living facilities for individuals requiring all levels of care, from independent living to skilled nursing facilities to specialized facilities for memory care, has been tremendous. For University City, the development and expansion of the Gatesworth Retirement Communities beginning in the 1980s appears to have been a driving force behind the high LQ (1.21) for the Health Care and Social Assistance sector, notwithstanding the fact that it is located outside of University City’s primary zip code and its employment data is not actually included in the calculation of the Health Care and Social Assistance sector’s LQ. It is quite possible that the City’s LQ for this sector would be even higher if it included the Gatesworth and its affiliated operations. The senior living facilities are not only significant employers but are among University City’s largest real property tax payers. In addition to senior living facilities, the City also has a significant base of home health care services businesses that cater to seniors. There are also a number of health care providers or other health-related professional services firms in the community. These services include dental and medical practices, dialysis facilities, chiropractors, physical, occupational and speech therapists as well as alternative medicine. Supporting the growth and ensuring the stability of businesses in this sector is important for the long term

economic health of the community and given the City’s aging population may also be a resource for residents and help to retain them in the community. As of 2019, the Health Care and Social Assistance sector employs 1,454 people in University City or 15.37% of the total jobs in the City. Healthcare support occupations (e.g, nursing aids, attendants, home health aides, dental assistants etc.) have shown a slight decline but in terms of concentration are still above the national average. Jobs in this sector align with entry- or mid-level positions at many of the employers present in University City (e.g., senior residential facilities and health care providers). Moreover, they pay a median wage of $13.11 per hour; above the living wage of $11.59 per hour for a single adult in St. Louis County, based on the MIT living wage calculator. Related professions in the Community and Social Service Occupations (health educators, therapists, social workers etc.) are a growing sector and pay significantly more (median wage of $20.61 per hour).

opportunity for home ownership etc.). Further with the concentration of employers in the Health Care and Social Assistance sector and the potential for growth in this industry based on an expanding senior population, working to ensure a stable pipeline of talent for these companies helps ensure their stability and may help attract other aligned businesses to the community. There may be opportunities to work with employers and the school district to create career pathways that would lead to higher wages, particularly if local firms employ University City residents. Within this cluster, Personal Care and Service jobs (e.g., barbers and hair stylists, manicurists, child care workers, fitness trainers) alone represent 9.32% of total jobs in 2019 an increase of 140% since 2014. The median wage for this sector is $11.39 per hour, which is below the living wage for a single adult in St. Louis county.

Jobs in the Health Care and Social Assistance sector represent accessible positions for entry and mid-level jobs for University City residents. With higher earning potential, the growing Community and Social Service sector occupations may offer opportunities for advancement. Higher wages in this industry translates into additional disposable income that could be spent at local businesses. To the extent these firms employ City residents, higher wages also contribute to a more economically stable community (greater

50 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

MARCH 2020


M A R K E T + I N D U S T R Y C L U S T E R A N A LY S I S Professional & Business Services Professional and business service providers are the primary office users in communities, large and small. The Professional and Business Service Supersector is an emerging area, employing 1,356 people or 8.49% of the total employees in the community. There are 168 companies representing 14.97% of the total companies in the City, generating over $232 Million in revenue or nearly 10% of the total company revenues. This Supersector includes Professional, Scientific and Technical Services cluster (LQ 0.88) has shown a 5.79% increase in jobs from 2014 to 2019. Of note is the earnings of workers in the jobs within these clusters, jobs in the Professional services earn an average of $102,004 annually significantly higher than jobs in the retail trade ($32,172) and Accommodations & Food Service ($21,918) clusters. The growing tech cluster in University City is likely helping to drive this emerging sector; two of the City’s top ten employers in 2019 fit under this cluster. Particularly in the tech sector, proximity to other tech businesses is very appealing. Opportunities to network and collaborate help to drive innovation in this sector and are highly valued. To continue to build on the base of these types of businesses in University City, an understanding of the real estate trends related to the availability of office products to accommodate these users is of value. The quality and availability of office space can highlight areas of opportunity for expansion of white-collar

office accommodations. Understanding the type of space, gross available area, class composition, median rent per square foot and the vacancy and absorption rates informs this analysis. University City has 54 office buildings containing 643,914 square feet of leasable space. 76.52% of commercial buildings built prior to 1980, with the largest percentage buildings having been constructed between 1941 and 1960 (29.28%). At the same time, based on interviews with office tenants, asking rates for office space are high, approaching the costs of space in neighboring Clayton. Higher rents, older buildings and a limited inventory all create an environment that may work against the attraction of businesses in this sector. As we conduct additional investigation into University City’s real estate landscape, opportunities for addressing this gap may emerge. Retail Trade The retail sector worldwide is evolving. Technology has dramatically changed and continues to change the way in which consumers shop. While on-line shopping has clearly impacted brick and mortar stores, and there is a general recognition in the industry that there is an excess of per capita retail space in the US, retailers are evolving their approach to better integrate the on-line and in-person consumer experience. Part of this equation is making purchasing easier and more convenient across multiple channels (digital and real life). Additionally, experiential retail is also a key trend that is attracting

51 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

consumers to physical locations as well as discount and off-price retailers that continue to appeal to cost conscious consumers. Thus, while brick and mortar locations have suffered, physical outlets remain an important part of the retail equation. Retail may be considered as a cluster in University City that has opportunity for growth, notwithstanding some contraction in the last five years. With an LQ of 0.91 (national average is 1.00), the retail sector is an important component of the community’s industry profile. This sector represents 934 jobs in University City or 9% of the jobs in the City. Oftentimes the value of an industry cluster within a particular community includes the employment opportunities it offers residents, the retail industry in University City appears to be an exception. With an overall highly educated, affluent population, it is not surprising that the retail sector (with average earnings per worker at only $32,172) does not appear to be a source of employment for University City residents. As described above in the Accommodations and Food Service section, with the significance of retail sales as a source of municipal tax revenues, supporting the City’s retail outlets is an important the City’s ability to invest in community services and resources. The City has some 155 retail properties representing the largest percent of commercial space in the community. Rental rates for retail space overall in the community are higher than those the average rate in St. Louis County and the St. Louis MSA while vacancy rates are slightly higher. MARCH 2020


M A R K E T + I N D U S T R Y C L U S T E R A N A LY S I S While some contraction in the last few years has left vacancies in once vibrant shopping areas, in particular the Loop and areas along the Olive corridor, the relatively high LQ suggests that the retail market in the City is still stable and there may be opportunity to shore up this sector to the benefit of existing retail districts, especially if the new retail development at I-170 moves forward. With a focus on retail outlets targeted at travelers and visitors to the St. Louis region, expanding the retail market also offers an opportunity to diversify retail offerings for residents. Additionally, retail outlets may offer an opportunity for self-employment for residents and appropriately targeted may be an opportunity to expand the offerings available to local residents.

Home-Based Businesses With financial activities and construction home-based businesses emerging as local strengths, support for these businesses represents an opportunity to support selfemployment and wealth generation for residents. It also creates an opportunity to grow high-paying jobs for the larger community. The presence of these businesses is an opportunity to backfill vacant commercial spaces in University City. Efforts to engage and identify and address the needs of these entrepreneurs could provide significant benefits for them and the community overall.

52 | University City Economic Development Strategy - ASSESSMENT AND MARKET ANALYSIS

MARCH 2020


PART 2: DATA


UNIVERSITY CITY

MARCH 2020

Economic Assessment/ Market Analysis


2

TABLE OF CONTENTS DEMOGRAPHICS

ACTIVITY HUBS

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS

Overview

3

Largest Industries

49

Historic Investment/Development

107

Population Trends & Key Indicators

6

Business Analysis

53

The Loop

108

Marketing Profile

7

Regional Comparison

70

Olive Blvd

109

Population by Age

8

Economic Drivers

72

Delmar/I-170

110

Household by Income

9

Small Tier

73

Cunningham Industrial Park

111

Race & Ethnicity

11

New Companies

75

Jackson Ave / Pershing Blvd

112

Block Group Analysis

12

Startups

76

Delmar Blvd / Hanley Rd

113

Municipality Comparison

22

Labor Comparison

78

Delmar Blvd / Midland Blvd

114

Region Comparison

26

COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE

Delmar Blvd / North & South Rd

115

TAPESTRY REPORTS

Inventory Makeup

79

Forsyth Blvd / Lindell Blvd

116

Retail Inventory

84

Delmar Blvd / Old Bonhomme Rd

117

University City

29

Multi Family Inventory

87

Midland Blvd / Vernon Ave

118

St. Louis MSA

33

Industrial & Flex Inventory

89

McKnight Blvd / Old Bonhomme Rd

119

Dominant LifeMode

34

Office Inventory

91

Olive Blvd / Woodson Rd

120

Dominant LifeMode – Zip Codes

36

Student Housing Inventory

93

Tapestry LifeMode – Breakdown

37

Specialty Inventory

95

Tapestry Overview

38

Health Care Inventory

96

Regional Comparison

97

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS

RESIDENTIAL REAL ESTATE University City

121

DEVELOPMENT NOTES Washington University

126

Job Trends

41

Buildings for Sale

98

Largest Occupations

43

Investment Activity

100

Tax Analysis

128

Commute Profile

44

Available Space for Rent

103

Operating Indicators

132

Largest Employers

45

Opportunity Zones

105

ADDENDUM

NAICS Supersector Breakdown

47

Promise Zones

106

The Opportunity Atlas

MARKET INDICATORS

Copyright © 2020 Colliers International. Information herein has been obtained from sources deemed reliable, however its accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The user is required to conduct their own due diligence and verification.

134


3

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS University City, MO

Overview

Census 2010

2019

2024

Population

35,312

36,183

36,639

Households

16,131

16,571

16,786

Families

8,469

8,505

8,549

Average Household Size

2.17

2.17

2.17

Median Age

37.2

39.2

40.2

TRENDS: 2019 – 2024 Annual Rate

Area

State

National

Population

0.25%

0.46%

0.77%

Households

0.26%

0.45%

0.75%

Families

0.10%

0.36%

0.68%

Owner Households

0.54%

0.64%

0.92%

Median Household Income

2.40%

2.42%

2.70%

RACE AND ETHNCITY

2010

2019

2024

2019

2024

White Alone

50.7%

46.0%

43.0%

Median Household Income

$58,476

$65,835

Black Alone

41.2%

44.0%

45.7%

Average Household Income

$94,874

$107,251

American Indian Alone

0.3%

0.2%

0.2%

Per Capita Income

$43,448

$49,133

Asian Alone

4.2%

5.4%

6.1%

Pacific Islander Alone

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

Some Other Race Alone

0.9%

1.0%

1.1%

Two or More Races

2.7%

3.4%

3.8%

Hispanic Origin (Any Race)

2.8%

3.3%

3.6%

POPULATION

HOUSEHOLDS

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2019 and 2024.


4

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS University City, MO

Overview 2019

Household by Income

2024

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

< $15,000

1,880

11.3%

1,497

8.9%

$15,000 - $24,999

1,462

8.8%

1,327

7.9%

$25,000 - $34,999

1,342

8.1%

1,194

7.1%

$35,000 - $49,999

2,398

14.5%

2,338

13.9%

$50,000 - $74,999

2,810

17.0%

2,858

17.0%

$75,000 - $99,999

2,042

12.3%

2,087

12.4%

$100,000 - $149,999

1,937

11.7%

2,271

13.5%

$150,000 - $199,999

1,060

6.4%

1,362

8.1%

$200,000+

1,640

9.9%

1,852

11.0%

University City, MO Population by Age

2010

2019

2024

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

0-4

2,124

6.0%

1,895

5.2%

1,922

5.2%

5 -9

1,907

5.4%

1,923

5.3%

1,893

5.2%

10 - 14

1,730

4.9%

2,016

5.6%

1,954

5.3%

15 - 19

1,776

5.0%

1,800

5.0%

1,893

5.2%

20 - 24

3,350

9.5%

2,770

7.7%

2,813

7.7%

25 - 34

5,758

16.3%

5,601

15.5%

5,331

14.6%

35 - 44

4,304

12.2%

4,616

12.8%

4,806

13.1%

45 - 54

4,337

12.3%

4,056

11.2%

4,189

11.4%

55 - 64

4,357

12.3%

4,297

11.9%

4,113

11.2%

65 - 74

2,872

8.1%

3,832

10.6%

3,888

10.6%

75 - 84

1,780

5.0%

2,164

6.0%

2,562

7.0%

85+

1,017

2.9%

1,212

3.3%

1,274

3.5%

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2019 and 2024.

Population by Age


5

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS

Overview

AT RISK POPULATION

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2019 and 2024.


6

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS

Population Trends and Key Indicators

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2019 and 2024; This infographic contains data provided by American Community Survey (ACS), Esri, Esri and Bureau of Labor Statistics. The vintage of the data is 2013-2017, 2019, 2024.


7

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2019 and 2024.

Marketing Profile


8

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS

Population by Age

Population by Age (2019) 6.0%

3.3%

Projected Change of Population by Age between 2019-2024 85+

5.2% 5.3%

75 - 84 5.6%

10.6%

0.1% 1.0%

65 - 74

0.0%

55 - 64

5.0%

-0.6%

7.7%

11.9%

0.2%

35 - 44 25 - 34

0.4% -0.9%

20 - 24

0.0%

15 - 19

15.5%

11.2%

Percent Population by Age

45 - 54

0.2%

10 - 14 12.8%

-0.2%

5 -9

-0.1%

0-4 0-4

5 -9

10 - 14

15 - 19

20 - 24

25 - 34

35 - 44

45 - 54

55 - 64

65 - 74

75 - 84

85+

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2019 and 2024.

-1.5%

0.0% -1.0%

-0.5%

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%


9

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS

Household by Income

Household by Income (2019) 9.9%

Projected Change of Household by Income Makeup between 2019-2024 11.3% $200,000+

6.4% $150,000 - $199,999

11.7% 8.1%

12.3%

14.5%

17.0%

Percent Population by Household Income

8.8%

$100,000 - $149,999 $75,000 - $99,999 $50,000 - $74,999 $35,000 - $49,999 $25,000 - $34,999 $15,000 - $24,999

< $15,000

$15,000 - $24,999

$25,000 - $34,999

$35,000 - $49,999

$50,000 - $74,999

$75,000 - $99,999

$100,000 - $149,999

$150,000 - $199,999

$200,000+

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2019 and 2024.

< $15,000 -3.0%

-2.0%

-1.0%

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%


10

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS

Household by Income Household Income by Race - University City, MO

% of total Black or African American Households

# of White Households

# of Total White Households

5,303

100.00%

9,052

100.00%

Less than $10,000

284

5.36%

578

6.39%

$10,000 to $14,999

485

9.15%

115

1.27%

$15,000 to $19,999

359

6.77%

246

2.72%

$20,000 to $24,999

299

5.64%

283

3.13%

$25,000 to $29,999

288

5.43%

258

2.85%

$30,000 to $34,999

429

8.09%

363

4.01%

$35,000 to $39,999

414

7.81%

400

4.42%

$40,000 to $44,999

376

7.09%

190

2.10%

$45,000 to $49,999

404

7.62%

261

2.88%

$50,000 to $59,999

574

10.82%

580

6.41%

$60,000 to $74,999

407

7.67%

779

8.61%

$75,000 to $99,999

469

8.84%

1,115

12.32%

Range Total:

$100,000 to $124,999

193

3.64%

630

6.96%

$125,000 to $149,999

104

1.96%

623

6.88%

$150,000 to $199,999

131

2.47%

919

10.15%

$200,000 or more

87

1.64%

1,712

18.91%

20% 18% 16% 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0%

(% of Total Households)

% of White Alone Households

% of Black or African American Alone Households

Household Income by Race - University City, MO (Change in the Percentage from 2010 to 2017)

8% Change in % of Total HH

# of Black or African American Households

% of Total Households

HOUSEHOLD INCOME IN THE PAST 12 MONTHS (2013-2017)

6% 4% 2% 0% -2% -4% -6% -8%

Change in % for White Alone Households Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2019 and 2024.

Change in % for Black or African American Alone Households


11

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS

Race & Ethnicity

Race & Ethnicity (2019) 0.0%

1.0%

3.4%

Projected Change of Race & Ethnicity between 2019-2024

3.3%

Hispanic Origin (Any Race)

0.3%

5.4% 0.2%

46.0%

Percent Change in Race & Ethnicity

Two or More Races

0.4%

Some Other Race Alone

0.1%

Pacific Islander Alone

0.0%

Asian Alone

0.7%

American Indian Alone

0.0%

44.0% Black Alone

White Alone

Black Alone

American Indian Alone

Asian Alone

Pacific Islander Alone

Some Other Race Alone

Two or More Races

Hispanic Origin (Any Race)

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2019 and 2024.

White Alone

1.7%

-3.0%

-4.0%

-3.0%

-2.0%

-1.0%

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%


12

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS

Block Group Analysis

291892157.001 291892157.002

291892159.001

291892157.004 291892157.003

291892159.002

291892159.007

291892159.003 291892157.005 291892159.004

291892157.006

291892160.001

291892159.006

291892158.004

291892158.003

291892159.005 291892160.002

291892158.005 291892162.007

291892162.001

291892158.006 291892158.001

291892161.003

291892162.006

291892158.002

291892162.008

291892162.005

291892161.002

291892162.002

291892161.004 291892162.003 291892162.004

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2019 and 2024.


13

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS

Block Group Analysis – Household Income

Median Household Income – 2019 Numbers 291892162.008

% Change 2019-2024 291892162.008

$108,221

291892162.007 291892162.006

291892162.003

291892162.003

$200,001

291892162.002

291892161.001

291892161.001

$200,001

291892159.007

$110,197

291892158.004

$92,494

$36,628

10.71% 9.27% 22.12%

291892157.004

6.19%

291892157.003

6.07%

291892157.002

$54,921

9.01%

291892157.001

$32,784 $50,000

14.92% 4.37%

291892157.005

$44,884 $39,497

$0

7.55%

291892157.006

$74,121

291892157.001

291892158.004

291892158.001

$53,833

291892157.002

7.29%

291892158.002

$48,218

291892157.003

16.87%

291892158.005 291892158.003

$43,296

291892157.004

6.16%

291892158.006

$130,934

291892158.005

291892157.005

15.50%

291892159.001

291892158.006

291892157.006

13.79%

291892159.002

$62,182 $51,724

291892158.001

12.53%

291892159.003

$45,688

291892158.002

23.90%

291892159.004

$43,337

291892158.003

13.86%

291892159.005

$39,895

291892159.001

5.83%

291892159.006

$70,598

291892159.002

15.86% 10.89%

291892159.007

$61,727

291892159.003

25.30% 0.00%

291892160.001

291892159.006 291892159.004

5.79%

291892160.002

$47,717 $41,288

291892159.005

29.24%

291892161.002

$30,383

291892160.001

15.71%

291892161.003

$26,257

291892160.002

2.92%

291892161.004

$88,980

291892161.002

0.00%

291892162.001

$67,876

291892161.003

9.76%

291892162.002

$172,932

291892161.004

9.20%

291892162.004

$88,648

291892162.001

13.06%

291892162.005

$101,015

291892162.004

17.81%

291892162.006

$106,550

291892162.005

4.69%

291892162.007

$81,545

$100,000

$150,000

Median HH Income (2019) Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2019 and 2024.

$200,000

$250,000

0.00%

13.23% 5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

Median HH Income (% Change 2019-2024)

30.00%

35.00%


14

UNIVERSITY CITY

291892162.008 291892162.007 291892162.006 291892162.005 291892162.004 291892162.003 291892162.002 291892162.001 291892161.004 291892161.003 291892161.002 291892161.001 291892160.002 291892160.001 291892159.007 291892159.006 291892159.005 291892159.004 291892159.003

Median Household Income Owners HHs Population

291892159.002 291892159.001

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2019 and 2024.

291892158.006 291892158.005 291892158.004 291892158.003 291892158.002 291892158.001 291892157.006 291892157.005 291892157.004 291892157.003 291892157.002 291892157.001

-1%

Block Group Analysis – Trends

DEMOGRAPHICS

Annual Rate - 2019-2024 6%

5%

4%

3%

2%

1%

0%


15

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2019 and 2024.

Block Group Analysis


16

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2019 and 2024.

Block Group Analysis


17

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2019 and 2024.

Block Group Analysis


18

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2019 and 2024.

Block Group Analysis


19

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2019 and 2024.

Block Group Analysis


20

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2019 and 2024.

Block Group Analysis


21

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2019 and 2024.

Block Group Analysis


22

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS

Municipality Comparison 2019 Forecast

City

% Population Change (2000 – 2019)

Owner Occupied Renter Occupied Average Housing Units Housing Units Household Size

Median Age

Population Change

Population

Household

Families

University City

36,183

16,571

8,505

2.17

8,095

8,476

39

University City

-3.33%

Clayton

16,889

5,738

3,091

2.12

3,056

2,682

32

Clayton

31.69%

Maplewood

8,072

4,264

1,729

1.89

1,584

2,680

38

Maplewood

-12.53%

Kirkwood Olivette

City

28,207

12,119

7,450

2.31

8,879

3,240

44

Kirkwood

3.23%

7,973

3,114

2,236

2.54

2,121

993

42

Olivette

7.19% 0.39% 6.53%

Webster Groves

23,320

9,201

5,928

2.45

7,095

2,106

43

Webster Groves

Maryland Heights

27,437

12,129

6,832

2.23

6,932

5,197

38

Maryland Heights

Florissant

52,291

21,221

13,537

2.43

14,941

6,280

40

Florissant

3.55%

38 36

Hazelwood

-2.47%

St. Louis City

-10.91%

Hazelwood St. Louis City

25,558 310,204

10,840 138,946

6,368 64,668

2.35 2.15

5,972 60,277

4,868 78,669

2024 Forecast City

% Population Change (2000 – 2019)

Owner Occupied Renter Occupied Average Housing Units Housing Units Household Size

Median Age

Population

Household

Families

University City

36,639

16,786

8,549

2.17

8,318

8,468

40

Clayton

17,677

6,119

3,276

2.12

3,143

2,976

34

Maplewood

8,235

4,340

1,748

1.90

1,609

2,731

38

Kirkwood

28,555

12,240

7,483

2.31

9,035

3,205

45

Olivette

8,066

3,140

2,248

2.55

2,169

971

43

Webster Groves

23,492

9,245

5,930

2.46

7,205

2,040

44

Maryland Heights

27,498

12,143

6,794

2.24

7,011

5,132

39

Florissant

52,469

21,268

13,506

2.43

15,145

6,124

40

Hazelwood

25,602 305,204

10,836 136,933

6,326 63,258

2.35 2.14

6,059 59,690

4,777 77,243

39 37

St. Louis City

-20% University City

20%

Clayton

31.7%

Maplewood -12.5% Kirkwood

3.2%

Olivette

7.2%

Webster Groves

0.4% 6.5%

Florissant Hazelwood

40%

-3.3%

Maryland Heights

3.6% -2.5%

St. Louis City -10.9%

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2019 and 2024; U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 Summary File 1.

0%


23

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS

Municipality Comparison

St. Louis MSA Demographic Comparison (2019 Forecast) 60,000

16,000 14,000

50,000

12,000 40,000

10,000

30,000

8,000 6,000

20,000

4,000 10,000

2,000

0 Clayton

Maplewood

Kirkwood

Population

Olivette

Webster Groves

Maryland Heights

Households

Florissant

0

Hazelwood

University City

Families

Clayton

Maplewood

Kirkwood

Owner Occupied Housing Units

Olivette

2.54

40

2.17

2.31

2.43 2.23

2.12

2.35

2.43 2.17

Florissant

2.47

2.15

2.50 2.00

30 1.50

25 20

1.00

15 10 5 0

0.50 39

32

38

44

42

43

38

40

38

University City

Clayton

Maplewood

Kirkwood

Olivette

Webster Groves

Maryland Heights

Florissant

Hazelwood

Median Age Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2019 and 2024.

Average Household Size

39

36

University City St. Louis City

Hazelwood

3.00

1.89

35 Median Age

2.64 2.45

Maryland Heights

Renter Occupied Housing Units

50 45

Webster Groves

41

38

40

St. Louis County

St. Charles County

St. Louis MSA

0.00

Average Household Size

University City


24

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS

Municipality Comparison Household Trends: 2019 - 2024 Annual Rate

Population Trends: 2019 - 2024 Annual Rate Hazelwood

Hazelwood -0.01%

0.03%

Maryland Heights

Maryland Heights

0.04%

Florissant

Florissant

0.07%

Webster Groves

Webster Groves

0.15%

Olivette

Olivette

0.23%

Kirkwood

0.25%

Kirkwood

University City

0.25%

University City

Maplewood

Maplewood

0.40%

Clayton 0.20%

0.40%

0.60%

0.80%

1.00%

3.92% 3.36%

Maplewood Maryland Heights

3.07%

Olivette

2.83%

Kirkwood

2.72%

Webster Groves

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2019 and 2024.

2.63%

2.57%

Florissant Hazelwood

0.10% 0.17% 0.20% 0.26% 0.35%

-0.20% 0.00% 0.20% 0.40% 0.60% 0.80% 1.00%

Median HH Income Trends: 2019 - 2024 Annual Rate 4.50% 4.00% 3.50% 3.00% 2.50% 2.00% 1.50% 1.00% 0.50% 0.00%

0.04%

Clayton

0.92%

0.00%

0.02%

2.53%

2.40%

Clayton

University City

1.29% 1.20%

1.40%


25

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS

Municipality Comparison

Household by Income (Forecast 2019) $200,000

$180,000

$173,357

$160,000 $138,860

$140,000

$134,704

$125,249 $120,000 $106,611 $100,000 $86,581 $87,418

$94,874

$92,422

$83,564

$80,000

$60,000

$64,245

$58,476

$59,490

$59,344

$45,100

$53,218 $53,918 $53,409

$43,448

$40,000

$36,528

$31,350

$20,000

$0 Median Household Income University City

Clayton

Average Household Income Maplewood

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2019 and 2024.

Kirkwood

Per Capita Income Olivette

Webster Groves

Maryland Heights


26

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS

Region Comparison

2019 Forecast Population

Household

Families

Average Household Size

Owner Occupied Housing Units

Renter Occupied Housing Units

Median Age

University City

36,183

16,571

8,505

2.17

8,095

8,476

39

St. Louis City

310,204

138,946

64,668

2.15

60,277

78,669

36

St. Louis County

1,012,817

408,504

263,005

2.43

276,750

131,754

41

St. Charles County

412,019

153,972

110,744

2.64

127,096

26,876

38

2,864,359

1,139,551

738,213

2.47

783,105

356,446

40

Region

St. Louis MSA

2024 Forecast Population

Household

Families

Average Household Size

Owner Occupied Housing Units

Renter Occupied Housing Units

Median Age

University City

36,639

16,786

8,549

2.17

8,318

8,468

40

St. Louis City

305,204

136,933

63,258

2.14

59,690

77,243

37

St. Louis County

1,022,307

411,622

263,800

2.44

277,528

134,094

42

443,277

165,890

118,846

2.64

138,250

27,640

39

2,907,331

1,155,861

746,637

2.47

804,571

351,290

41

Region

St. Charles County St. Louis MSA

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2019 and 2024.


27

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS

Region Comparison Household Trends: 2019 - 2024 Annual Rate

Population Trends: 2019 - 2024 Annual Rate St. Louis City-0.32%

St. Louis City-0.29%

St. Louis County

0.19%

University City

St. Louis County

0.25%

St. Louis MSA

0.30%

Missouri

0.26%

St. Louis MSA

0.28%

Missouri 0.77%

St. Charles County -0.50%

University City

0.46%

National

0.50%

1.00%

1.50%

2.00%

-0.50%

3.60%

3.50%

2.88%

3.00%

2.82%

2.70%

2.50%

2.42%

2.40%

2.09%

2.00% 1.50% 1.00% 0.50% 0.00% St. Louis City

St. Louis County

St. Louis MSA

National

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2019 and 2024.

Missouri

0.75%

St. Charles County

Median HH Income Trends: 2019 - 2024 Annual Rate 4.00%

0.45%

National 1.47%

0.00%

0.15%

University City St. Charles County

1.50%

0.00%

0.50%

1.00%

1.50%

2.00%


28

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS

Region Comparison

Household by Income (Forecast 2019) $120,000 $103,443 $100,000

$94,874

$96,821 $86,579

$83,322 $80,000

$75,326 $65,250

$60,000

$87,398

$58,476

$62,139

$65,024 $60,548

$54,440

$43,875

$43,448

$39,442$38,706 $34,507 $33,028 $29,924 $29,277

$40,000

$20,000

$0 Median Household Income University City

St. Louis City

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2019 and 2024.

Average Household Income St. Louis County

St. Charles County

Per Capita Income St. Louis MSA

Missouri

National


29

UNIVERSITY CITY

TAPESTRY REPORTS

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2019 and 2024.

University City


30

UNIVERSITY CITY

TAPESTRY REPORTS

University City Makeup of University City Tapestry Segmentation

TAPESTRY SEGMENTATION 2019 Households Rank Tapestry Segment

2.9%

% of University City Households

% of U.S. Households

1

Family Foundations (12A)

26.9%

1.0%

2

Urban Chic (2A)

17.7%

1.3%

3

Emerald City (8B)

11.4%

1.4%

4

Retirement Communities (9E)

8.4%

1.2%

5

College Towns (14B)

8.2%

1.0%

6

Laptops and Lattes (3A)

6.4%

1.1%

7

Social Security Set (9F)

5.8%

0.8%

8

In Style (5B)

3.5%

2.2%

9

Young and Restless (11B)

2.9%

1.7%

10

Exurbanites (1E)

2.9%

1.9%

11

Modest Income Homes (12D)

2.2%

1.3%

12

Midlife Constants (5E)

1.9%

2.5%

13

Top Tier (1A)

1.8%

1.7%

TOTAL

100%

19.1%

Family Foundations (12A)

1.8% 2.2% 1.9%

Urban Chic (2A)

2.9% 3.5%

26.9%

Retirement Communities (9E)

5.8%

College Towns (14B) Laptops and Lattes (3A)

6.4%

Social Security Set (9F) In Style (5B) Young and Restless (11B)

8.2%

Exurbanites (1E) 17.7% 8.4%

Modest Income Homes (12D) Midlife Constants (5E) Top Tier (1A)

11.4%

Tapestry Segmentation Comparison 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0%

26.9% 17.7% 11.4%

1.0%

1.3%

1.4%

8.4% 1.2%

8.2%

6.4%

1.0%

Percent University City Source: ESRI

Emerald City (8B)

1.1%

5.8% 0.8%

3.5% 2.9% 2.2% 1.7%

2.2% 2.9% 1.9% 1.3%

Percent U.S. Households

1.9% 2.5%

1.8% 1.7%


31

UNIVERSITY CITY

TAPESTRY REPORTS

University City

TOP TAPESTRY SEGMENTATION PROFILES 26.9%

FAMILY FOUNDATIONS

Family and faith are the cornerstones of life in these communities. Older children, still living at home, working toward financial independence, are common within these households. Neighborhoods are stable: little household growth has occurred for more than a decade. Many residents work in the health care industry or public administration across all levels of government. Style is important to these consumers, who spend on clothing for themselves and their children, as well as on smartphones.

Source: ESRI

17.7%

URBAN CHIC

11.4%

EMERALD CITY

Urban Chic residents are professionals that live a sophisticated, exclusive lifestyle. Half of all households are occupied by married-couple families and about 30% are singles. These are busy, well-connected, and well-educated consumers—avid readers and moviegoers, environmentally active, and financially stable.

Emerald City’s denizens live in lower-density neighborhoods of urban areas throughout the country. Young and mobile, they are more likely to rent. Well educated and well employed, half have a college degree and a professional occupation. Incomes close to the US median come primarily from wages, investments, and self-employment.

This market is a bit older, with a median age of 43 years, and growing slowly, but steadily.

This group is highly connected, using the Internet for entertainment and making environmentally friendly purchases. Long hours on the Internet are balanced with time at the gym. Many embrace the “foodie” culture and enjoy cooking adventurous meals using local and organic foods. Music and art are major sources of enjoyment. They travel frequently, both abroad and domestically


32

UNIVERSITY CITY

TAPESTRY REPORTS

University City

TOP TAPESTRY SEGMENTATION PROFILES 8.4%

RETIREMENT COMMUNITIES

Retirement Communities neighborhoods are evenly distributed across the country. They combine single-family homes and independent living with apartments, assisted living, and continuous care nursing facilities. Over half of the housing units are in multiunit structures, and the majority of residents have a lease. This group enjoys watching cable TV and stays up-to-date with newspapers and magazines. Residents take pride in fiscal responsibility and keep a close eye on their finances. Although income and net worth are well below national averages, residents enjoy going to the movies, fishing, and taking vacations. While some residents enjoy cooking, many have paid their dues in the kitchen and would rather dine out. Source: ESRI

8.2%

COLLEGE TOWNS

About half the residents of College Towns are enrolled in college, while the rest work for a college or the services that support it. Students have busy schedules but make time between studying and part-time jobs for socializing and sports. Students that are new to managing their own finances tend to make impulse buys and splurge on the latest fashions. This digitally engaged group uses computers and cell phones for all aspects of life including shopping, schoolwork, news, social media, and entertainment. College Towns are all about new experiences, and residents seek out variety and adventure in their lives.

6.4%

LAPTOPS & LATTES

Laptops and Lattes residents are predominantly single, well-educated professionals in business, finance, legal, computer, and entertainment occupations. They are affluent and partial to city living—and its amenities. Neighborhoods are densely populated, primarily located in the cities of large metropolitan areas. Many residents walk, bike, or use public transportation to get to work; a number work from home. Although single householders technically outnumber couples, this market includes a higher proportion of partner households, including the highest proportion of same-sex couples. Residents are more interested in the stock market than the housing market. Laptops and Lattes residents are cosmopolitan and connected— technologically savvy consumers. They are active and health conscious, and care about the environment.


33

UNIVERSITY CITY

TAPESTRY REPORTS

University City Tapestry LifeMode* L1: Affluent Estates L2: Upscale Avenues L3: Uptown Individuals L4: Family Landscapes L5: GenXurban L6: Cozy Country L7: Ethnic Enclaves L8: Middle Ground L9: Senior Styles L10: Rustic Outposts L11: Midtown Singles L12: Hometown L13: Next Wave L14: Scholars and Patriots *LifeMode groups represent markets that share a common experience—born in the same generation or immigration from another country—or a significant demographic trait, like affluence.

Source: ESRI


34

UNIVERSITY CITY

TAPESTRY REPORTS

St. Louis MSA Tapestry LifeMode* L1: Affluent Estates L2: Upscale Avenues L3: Uptown Individuals L4: Family Landscapes L5: GenXurban L6: Cozy Country L7: Ethnic Enclaves L8: Middle Ground L9: Senior Styles L10: Rustic Outposts L11: Midtown Singles L12: Hometown L13: Next Wave L14: Scholars and Patriots *LifeMode groups represent markets that share a common experience—born in the same generation or immigration from another country—or a significant demographic trait, like affluence.

Source: ESRI


35

UNIVERSITY CITY

TAPESTRY REPORTS

Source: Colliers GIS Department, Data Source may include: CoStar, InfoUSA, Pitney Bowes, ESRI, MPSI, ReGIS, OpenStreetMap, CC-BY-5A, TeleAtlas, FDIC, USDA, USGS, and others.

Dominant Life Mode


36

UNIVERSITY CITY

TAPESTRY REPORTS

Dominant Life Mode

*LifeMode groups represent markets that share a common experience—born in the same generation or immigration from another country—or a significant demographic trait, like affluence.

Source: Colliers GIS Department, Data Source may include: CoStar, InfoUSA, Pitney Bowes, ESRI, MPSI, ReGIS, OpenStreetMap, CC-BY-5A, TeleAtlas, FDIC, USDA, USGS, and others.


37

UNIVERSITY CITY

TAPESTRY REPORTS

Dominant Life Mode – Zip Codes

*LifeMode groups represent markets that share a common experience—born in the same generation or immigration from another country—or a significant demographic trait, like affluence.

Source: Colliers GIS Department, Data Source may include: CoStar, InfoUSA, Pitney Bowes, ESRI, MPSI, ReGIS, OpenStreetMap, CC-BY-5A, TeleAtlas, FDIC, USDA, USGS, and others.


38

UNIVERSITY CITY

TAPESTRY REPORTS L1: Affluent Estates • • • • • • •

Established wealth—educated, welltraveled married couples Accustomed to "more": less than 10% of all households, with 20% of household income Homeowners (almost 90%), with mortgages (65.2%) Married couple families with children ranging from grade school to college Expect quality; invest in time-saving services Participate actively in their communities Active in sports and enthusiastic travelers

L2: Upscale Avenues • • • • • • • •

L6: Cozy Country • • • • • • • •

Empty nesters in bucolic settings Largest Tapestry group, almost half of households located in the Midwest Homeowners with pets, residing in single-family dwellings in rural areas; almost 30% have 3 or more vehicles and, therefore, auto loans Politically conservative and believe in the importance of buying American Own domestic trucks, motorcycles, and ATVs/UTVs Prefer to eat at home, shop at discount retail stores (especially Walmart), bank in person, and spend little time online Own every tool and piece of equipment imaginable to maintain their homes, vehicles, vegetable gardens, and lawns Listen to country music, watch auto racing on TV, and play the lottery; enjoy outdoor activities, such as fishing, hunting, camping, boating, and even bird watching

Prosperous married couples living in older suburban enclaves Ambitious and hard-working Homeowners (70%) prefer denser, more urban settings with older homes and a large share of townhomes A more diverse population, primarily married couples, many with older children Financially responsible, but still indulge in casino gambling and lotto tickets Serious shoppers, from Nordstrom's to Marshalls or DSW, that appreciate quality, and bargains Active in fitness pursuits like bicycling, jogging, yoga, and hiking Subscribe to premium movie channels like HBO and Starz

L7: Ethnic Enclaves • • • • •

• •

Established diversity—young, Hispanic homeowners with families Multilingual and multigenerational households feature children that represent second-, third- or fourth-generation Hispanic families Neighborhoods feature single-family, owneroccupied homes built at city's edge, primarily built after 1980 Hard-working and optimistic, most residents aged 25 years or older have a high school diploma or some college education Shopping and leisure also focus on their children—baby and children's products from shoes to toys and games and trips to theme parks, water parks or the zoo Residents favor Hispanic programs on radio or television; children enjoy playing video games on personal computers, handheld or console devices Many households have dogs for domestic pets

Tapestry LifeMode - Breakdown L3: Uptown Individuals • •

• • • •

Young, successful singles in the city Intelligent (best educated market), hard-working (highest rate of labor force participation) and averse to traditional commitments of marriage and home ownership Urban denizens, partial to city life, high-rise apartments and uptown neighborhoods Prefer credit cards over debit cards, while paying down student loans Green and generous to environmental, cultural and political organizations Internet dependent, from social connections to shopping for fashion, tracking investments, making travel arrangements, and watching television and movies Adventurous and open to new experiences and places

L8: Middle Ground • • • • •

Lifestyles of thirtysomethings Millennials in the middle: single/married, renters/homeowners, middle class/working class Urban market mix of single-family, townhome, and multi-unit dwellings Majority of residents attended college or attained a college degree Householders have ditched their landlines for cell phones, which they use to listen to music (generally contemporary hits), read the news, and get the latest sports updates of their favorite teams Online all the time: use the Internet for entertainment (downloading music, watching YouTube, finding dates), social media (Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn), search for employment Leisure includes night life (clubbing, movies), going to the beach, some travel and hiking

L4: Family Landscapes • • • • • • • •

Successful young families in their first homes Non-diverse, prosperous married-couple families, residing in suburban or semirural areas with a low vacancy rate (second lowest) Homeowners (79%) with mortgages (second highest %), living in newer single-family homes, with median home value slightly higher than the U.S. Two workers in the family, contributing to the second highest labor force participation rate, as well as low unemployment Do-it-yourselfers, who work on home improvement projects, as well as their lawns and gardens Sports enthusiasts, typically owning newer sedans or SUVs, dogs, and savings accounts/plans, comfortable with the latest technology Eat out frequently at fast food or family restaurants to accommodate their busy lifestyle Especially enjoy bowling, swimming, playing golf, playing video games, watching movies rented via Redbox, and taking trips to a zoo or theme park

L9: Senior Styles • •

• • • • •

Senior lifestyles reveal the effects of saving

for retirement Households are commonly married empty nesters or singles living alone; homes are single-family (including seasonal getaways), retirement communities, or high-rise apartments More affluent seniors travel and relocate to warmer climates; less affluent, settled seniors are still working toward retirement Cell phones are popular, but so are landlines Many still prefer print to digital media: Avid readers of newspapers, to stay current Subscribe to cable television to watch channels like Fox News, CNN, and The Weather Channel Residents prefer vitamins to increase their mileage and a regular exercise regimen

L11: Midtown Singles

L12: Hometown

L13: Next Wave

L14: Scholars and Patriots

• • • • • • •

• • • • •

Millennials on the move—single, diverse, urban Millennials seeking affordable rents in apartment buildings Work in service and unskilled positions, usually close to home or public transportation Single parents depend on their paycheck to buy supplies for their very young children Midtown Singles embrace the Internet, for social networking and downloading content From music and movies to soaps and sports, radio and television fill their lives Brand savvy shoppers select budget friendly stores

Source: ESRI

• • • • •

Growing up and staying close to home; single householders Close knit urban communities of young singles (many with children) Owners of old, single-family houses, or renters in small multi-unit buildings Religion is the cornerstone of many of these communities Visit discount stores and clip coupons, frequently play the lottery at convenience stores Canned, packaged and frozen foods help to make ends meet Purchase used vehicles to get them to and from nearby jobs

• • • • • • •

Urban denizens, young, diverse, hard-working families Extremely diverse with a Hispanic majority, the highest among LifeMode groups A large share are foreign born and speak only their native language Young, or multigenerational, families with children are typical Most are renters in older multi-unit structures, built in the 1960s or earlier Hard-working with long commutes to jobs, often utilizing public transit to commute to work Spending reflects the youth of these consumers, focus on children (top market for children's apparel) and personal appearance Also a top market for movie goers (second only to college students) and fast food Partial to soccer and basketball

• • •

L5: GenXurban • • • • • • • •

Gen X in middle age; families with fewer kids and a mortgage Second largest Tapestry group, comprised of Gen X married couples, and a growing population of retirees About a fifth of residents are 65 or older; about a fourth of households have retirement income Own older single-family homes in urban areas, with 1 or 2 vehicles Live and work in the same county, creating shorter commute times Invest wisely, well-insured, comfortable banking online or in person News junkies (read a daily newspaper, watch news on TV, and go online for news) Enjoy reading, renting movies, playing board games and cards, doing crossword puzzles, going to museums and rock concerts, dining out, and walking for exercise

L10: Rustic Outposts • • • • • • •

Country life with older families in older homes Rustic Outposts depend on manufacturing, retail and healthcare, with pockets of mining and agricultural jobs Low labor force participation in skilled and service occupations Own affordable, older single-family or mobile homes; vehicle ownership, a must Residents live within their means, shop at discount stores and maintain their own vehicles (purchased used) and homes Outdoor enthusiasts, who grow their own vegetables, love their pets and enjoy hunting and fishing Technology is cost prohibitive and complicated. Pay bills in person, use the yellow pages, read newspapers, magazines, and mail-order books

College and military populations that share many traits due to the transitional nature of this LifeMode Group Highly mobile, recently moved to attend school or serve in military The youngest market group, with a majority in the 15 to 24 year old range Renters with roommates in nonfamily households For many, no vehicle is necessary as they live close to campus, military base or jobs Fast-growing group with most living in apartments Part-time jobs help to supplement active lifestyles Millennials are tethered to their phones and electronic devices, typically spending over 5 hours online every day tweeting, blogging, and consuming media Purchases aimed at fitness, fashion, technology and the necessities of moving Highly social, free time is spent enjoying music, being out with friends, seeing movies Try to eat healthy, but often succumb to fast food


39

UNIVERSITY CITY

TAPESTRY REPORTS

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2019 and 2024.

Tapestry Overview


40

UNIVERSITY CITY

TAPESTRY REPORTS

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2019 and 2024.

Tapestry Overview


41

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS

Job Trends – University City

EMSI Analysis – Zip Code Based 63130 Zip Analysis 9,550 9,500 9,450 9,400 9,350 9,300 9,250 9,200 9,150 9,100 9,050

2.0% 1.5% 1.0% 0.5% 0.0% -0.5% 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Jobs

-1.0%

Job Growth (% Change)

From 2014 to 2019, jobs increased by 2.7% in Saint Louis, MO (in St. Louis county) (ZIP 63130) from 9,221 to 9,467

The growth rate fell short of the national growth rate of 7.3% by 4.6%.

Source: EMSI Q1 2020 Data Set

NOTES: •

Due to a lack of source data at the ZIP code level, Emsi's ZIP-level estimates can be less accurate when looking at a small number of ZIP codes.

Major employer The Gatesworth is located in the 63124 zip code which includes all of Ladue • Did not include in University City due to the large impact of the Ladue numbers


42

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS

Job Trends – University City

University City*

Clayton*

Maplewood*

Kirkwood*

Olivette*

Webster Groves*

Maryland Heights*

Florissant*

Hazelwood*

St. Louis MSA

102.9

102.9

102.9

102.9

102.9

102.9

102.9

102.9

102.9

97.3

COL Adjusted Current Average Earnings

$64,873

$77,286

$60,688

$56,401

$73,606

$52,454

$82,738

$50,336

$63,083

$66,318

Gross Regional Product (GRP) (In $ Billions)

$4.62*

$5.71

$2.52

$2.12

$2.90

$1.80

$13.58

$2.24

$3.63

$174.40

$110,616.07

$140,055.68

$100,160.81

$100,966.03

$118,945.58

$95,292.11

$148,201.97

$89,433.14

$120,036.27

$117,836.80

$24.88

$27.72

$24.29

$23.19

$26.26

$23.18

$27.41

$21.82

$23.63

$24.36

$18.79

$20.86

$18.23

$17.55

$20.21

$17.17

$21.33

$16.42

$17.91

$18.61

City/Region COL Index

GRP per 2019 Jobs

Hourly Earnings Average Hourly Earnings Median Hourly Earnings

Hourly Earnings – Regional Comparison $30.00 $25.00 $20.00 $15.00 $10.00 $5.00 $0.00 University City

Clayton

Average Hourly Earnings Maplewood Kirkwood

Olivette

Webster Groves

Maryland Heights

Median Hourly Earnings Florissant Hazelwood

St. Louis MSA

Term

Definition

COL Index

The Cost of Living Index (COLI) comes quarterly from Council for Community and Economic Research (C2ER) and provides a baseline for understanding how regional costs of living compare to the nation and to each other. The index is comprised of six major categories: grocery items, housing, utilities, transportation, health care, and miscellaneous goods and services. For example, an index below 100 means the region has a lower cost of living, whereas above 100 means it is more expensive to live.

Source: :EMSI Q1 2020 Data Set – Economy Overview

*Due to a lack of source data at the ZIP code level, Emsi's ZIP-level estimates can be less accurate when looking at a small number of ZIP codes.


43

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS

Largest Occupations

Workers Analysis – 63130 2014 Jobs

2019 Jobs

% of Total (2019)

% Change in Jobs

2019 LQ

2018 Median Hourly Earnings

Food Preparation and Serving Related

1,620

1,670

17.65%

50

2.12

$10.17

Office and Administrative Support

1,357

1,335

14.11%

(22)

0.99

$17.25

Personal Care and Service

742

882

9.32%

140

2.10*

$11.39

Education, Training, and Library

832

835

8.82%

3

1.56

$22.96

Sales and Related

748

713

7.53%

(35)

0.76

$13.49

Production

421

413

4.37%

(8)

0.75

$15.97

Healthcare Practitioners and Technical

351

360

3.80%

9

0.68*

$27.99

Management

342

359

3.80%

17

0.66

$46.09

Building and Grounds Cleaning and Maintenance

367

356

3.76%

(11)

1.04

$12.06

Computer and Mathematical

345

353

3.73%

8

1.28

$38.35

Business and Financial Operations

296

333

3.52%

37

0.67

$32.32

Healthcare Support

344

330

3.49%

(14)

1.30

$13.11

Transportation and Material Moving

275

298

3.15%

23

0.46

$15.94

Community and Social Service

215

237

2.50%

22

1.49

$20.61

Arts, Design, Entertainment, Sports, and Media

210

220

2.32%

10

1.28

$19.32

Protective Service

222

218

2.30%

(4)

1.03

$23.09

Installation, Maintenance, and Repair

207

206

2.17%

(1)

0.56

$20.44

Construction and Extraction

153

167

1.77%

14

0.38

$27.60

Architecture and Engineering

64

68

0.72%

4

0.43

$37.31

Life, Physical, and Social Science

59

59

0.63%

0

0.78

$25.55

Legal

48

50

0.53%

2

0.64

$35.54

9,218

9,462

AVERAGE

$23.17

WEIGHTED AVERAGE

$18.87

Occupation

TOTAL

*Doesn’t include The Gatesworth or other 63124 University City businesses

Source: EMSI Q1 2020 Data Set – Economy Overview, University City (63130)

2.65%


44

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET FACTORS Transportation & Workers

Commute Profile

Place of Work* Where Talent Works Zip: 63130

2019 Employment

9,467

Where Talent Lives Zip: 63130

2019 Workers

Travel Time to Work

Source: Esri; This infographic contains date provided by American Community Survey (ACS). The vintage of the data is 2013-2017; *Emsi

13,565


45

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS

Largest Employers

2019 Employer

Employees Note

% Change From 2018

The Gatesworth

589

Includes The Gatesworth & McKnight Place

University City School District

588

-28.12%

City of University City

305

-35.11%

Wiese

225

125.00%

Winco Window Company LLC

190

18.75%

Cintas

167

19.29%

Schnucks

150

Not in 2018 List

Blueberry Hill

70

Not in 2018 List

Capacity

70

Integrity

40

Business owner previously Answers

51.03%

Not in 2018 List Not in 2018 List

2018 Employer

Employees Type of Business

% of Total Employment

University City School District

818

School District

City of University City

470

Local Government

7.15%

Gatesworth Community

240

Retirement/Independent Living/Nursing Community

3.65%

Victor's Home Care LLC

200

Home Care Services

3.04%

Winco Window Company LLC

160

Winco Window Company LLC

2.43%

Aging Well Healthcare LLC

155

Medical/Non-Medical Services

2.36%

McKnight Place Extended Care

150

Retirement/Independent Living/Nursing Community

2.28%

Cintas

140

Uniform Supply

2.13%

Answer Corporation

137

Technological Services

2.08%

Wiese USA Inc

100

Industrial Truck Sales and Leasing

1.52%

Source: University City Records

12.44%


46

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS

Largest Employers

2018 Rank Employer

Employees Type of Business

% of Total Employment

Change from 2009 # of Employees

% of Total City Employment

University City School District

55.22%

38.53%

3.65%

City of University City

17.79%

5.15%

Home Care Services

3.04%

Gatesworth Community

3.90%

-7.36%

160

Winco Window Company LLC

2.43%

Victor's Home Care LLC

Aging Well Healthcare LLC

155

Medical/Non-Medical Services

2.36%

Winco Window Company LLC

7

McKnight Place Extended Care

150

Retirement/Independent Living/Nursing Community

2.28%

Aging Well Healthcare LLC

NEW TO TOP TEN

8

Cintas

140

Uniform Supply

2.13%

McKnight Place Extended Care

NEW TO TOP TEN

9

Answer Corporation

137

Technological Services

2.08%

Cintas

10

Wiese USA Inc

100

Industrial Truck Sales and Leasing

1.52%

Answer Corporation

1

University City School District

818

School District

12.44%

2

City of University City

470

Local Government

7.15%

3

Gatesworth Community

240

Retirement/Independent Living/Nursing Community

4

Victor's Home Care LLC

200

5

Winco Window Company LLC

6

Wiese USA Inc

2009 Rank Employer

Employees Type of Business

% of Total Employment

1

University City School District

527

School District

8.98%

2

City of University City

399

Local Government

6.80%

3

Gatesworth Community

231

Retirement/Independent Living/Nursing Community

3.94%

4

Winco Window Company LLC

160

Manufacturer - Commercial Aluminum Windows

2.73%

5

Schnucks Supermarket*

125

Supermarket/Grocer

2.13%

6

Cintas

105

Uniform Supply

1.79%

7

Wiese Planning & Engineering

105

Industrial Truck 7Sales & Leasing

1.79%

8

U City Forest Manor LLC*

90

Nursing Facility

1.53%

9

Fitz's Bottling Company*

75

Restaurant

1.28%

10

Shur Sav Markets*

73

Supermarket/Grocer

1.24%

*Not on 2018 Top Ten Source: University City Records

Employer

NEW TO TOP TEN 0.00%

33.33%

-10.99%

18.99%

NEW TO TOP TEN -4.76%

-15.08%


47

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS NAICS SUPERSECTOR CODE BREAKDOWN

NAICS Supersector Breakdown

NAICS SUPERSECTOR CODE BREAKDOWN

NAICS SUPERSECTOR CODE BREAKDOWN

Code

NAICS Supersector – Overview

Code

NAICS Supersector – Overview

Code

NAICS Supersector – Overview

06

Goods-Producing Industries

07

Service-Providing Industries

07

Service-Providing Industries

10

Natural Resources & Mining

40

Trade, Transportation, and Utilities

65

Education and Health Services

20 30

Sector 11 – Logging

Sectors 42 – Wholesale Trade

Sector 61 – Educational Services

Sector 21 – Mining

Sectors 44, 45 – Retail Trade

Sector 62 – Health Care and Social Assistance

Construction

Sectors 48, 49 – Transportation & Warehousing

Sector 23 – Construction

Sector 22 – Utilities

Sector 71 – Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation

Information

Sector 72 – Accommodation and Food Services

Manufacturing

50

Sectors 31, 32, 33 – Manufacturing

Sector 51 – Information 55

Sector 53 – Real Estate and Rental and Leasing Professional and Business Services Sector 54 – Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services Sector 55 – Management of Companies and Enterprises Sector 56 – Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services

Industry = NAICS Classification for Each Company North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Current Employment Statistics – CES (National)

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics – NAICS Supersectors for CES Program

80

Leisure and Hospitality

Other Services Sector 81 – Other Services, except Public Administration

Financial Activities Sector 52 – Finance and Insurance

60

70

90

Government Sector 91 – Federal Government Sector 92 – State Government Sector 93 – Local Government


48

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS GOODS-PRODUCING INDUSTRIES Natural Resources and Mining

Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting (NAICS 11) Crop Production (NAICS 111) Animal Production (NAICS 112) Forestry and Logging (NAICS 113) Fishing, Hunting and Trapping (NAICS 114) Support Activities for Agriculture and Forestry (NAICS 115) Mining, Quarrying, and Oil and Gas Extraction (NAICS 21) Oil and Gas Extraction (NAICS 211) Mining (except Oil and Gas) (NAICS 212) Support Activities for Mining (NAICS 213)

Construction

Construction (NAICS 23) Construction of Buildings (NAICS 236) Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction (NAICS 237) Specialty Trade Contractors (NAICS 238)

Manufacturing

Manufacturing (NAICS 31-33) Food Manufacturing (NAICS 311) Beverage and Tobacco Product Manufacturing (NAICS 312) Textile Mills (NAICS 313) Textile Product Mills (NAICS 314) Apparel Manufacturing (NAICS 315) Leather and Allied Product Manufacturing (NAICS 316) Wood Product Manufacturing (NAICS 321) Paper Manufacturing (NAICS 322) Printing and Related Support Activities (NAICS 323) Petroleum and Coal Products Manufacturing (NAICS 324) Chemical Manufacturing (NAICS 325) Plastics and Rubber Products Manufacturing (NAICS 326) Nonmetallic Mineral Product Manufacturing (NAICS 327) Primary Metal Manufacturing (NAICS 331) Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing (NAICS 332) Machinery Manufacturing (NAICS 333) Computer and Electronic Product Manufacturing (NAICS 334) Electrical Equipment, Appliance, and Component Manufacturing (NAICS 335) Transportation Equipment Manufacturing (NAICS 336) Furniture and Related Product Manufacturing (NAICS 337) Miscellaneous Manufacturing (NAICS 339)

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

SERVICE-PROVIDING INDUSTRIES Trade, Transportation, and Utilities

Wholesale Trade (NAICS 42) Merchant Wholesalers, Durable Goods (NAICS 423) Merchant Wholesalers, Nondurable Goods (NAICS 424) Wholesale Electronic Markets and Agents and Brokers (NAICS 425) Retail Trade (NAICS 44-45) Motor Vehicle and Parts Dealers (NAICS 441) Furniture and Home Furnishings Stores (NAICS 442) Electronics and Appliance Stores (NAICS 443) Building Material and Garden Equipment and Supplies Dealers (NAICS 444) Food and Beverage Stores (NAICS 445) Health and Personal Care Stores (NAICS 446) Gasoline Stations (NAICS 447) Clothing and Clothing Accessories Stores (NAICS 448) Sporting Goods, Hobby, Book, and Music Stores (NAICS 451) General Merchandise Stores (NAICS 452) Miscellaneous Store Retailers (NAICS 453) Nonstore Retailers (NAICS 454) Transportation and Warehousing (NAICS 48-49) Air Transportation (NAICS 481) Rail Transportation (NAICS 482) Water Transportation (NAICS 483) Truck Transportation (NAICS 484) Transit and Ground Passenger Transportation (NAICS 485) Pipeline Transportation (NAICS 486) Scenic and Sightseeing Transportation (NAICS 487) Support Activities for Transportation (NAICS 488) Postal Service (NAICS 491) Couriers and Messengers (NAICS 492) Warehousing and Storage (NAICS 493) Utilities (NAICS 22)

Information

Information (NAICS 51) Publishing Industries (except Internet) (NAICS 511) Motion Picture and Sound Recording Industries (NAICS 512) Broadcasting (except Internet) (NAICS 515) Internet Publishing and Broadcasting (NAICS 516) Telecommunications (NAICS 517) Data Processing, Hosting, and Related Services (NAICS 518) Other Information Services (NAICS 519)

NAICS Detailed Breakdown SERVICE-PROVIDING INDUSTRIES Financial Activities

Finance and Insurance (NAICS 52) Monetary Authorities - Central Bank (NAICS 521) Credit Intermediation and Related Activities (NAICS 522) Securities, Commodity Contracts, and Other Financial Investments and Related Activities (NAICS 523) Insurance Carriers and Related Activities (NAICS 524) Funds, Trusts, and Other Financial Vehicles (NAICS 525) Real Estate and Rental and Leasing (NAICS 53) Real Estate (NAICS 531) Rental and Leasing Services (NAICS 532) Lessors of Nonfinancial Intangible Assets (except Copyrighted Works) (NAICS 533)

Professional and Business Services

Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services (NAICS 54) Management of Companies and Enterprises (NAICS 55) Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services (NAICS 56) Administrative and Support Services (NAICS 561) Waste Management and Remediation Services (NAICS 562)

Education and Health Services

Educational Services (NAICS 61) Health Care and Social Assistance (NAICS 62) Ambulatory Health Care Services (NAICS 621) Hospitals (NAICS 622) Nursing and Residential Care Facilities (NAICS 623) Social Assistance (NAICS 624)

Leisure and Hospitality

Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation (NAICS 71) Performing Arts, Spectator Sports, and Related Industries (NAICS 711) Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions (NAICS 712) Amusement, Gambling, and Recreation Industries (NAICS 713) Accommodation and Food Services (NAICS 72) Accommodation (NAICS 721) Food Services and Drinking Places (NAICS 722)

Other Services (except Public Administration)

Other Services (except Public Administration) (NAICS 81) Repair and Maintenance (NAICS 811) Personal and Laundry Services (NAICS 812) Religious, Grantmaking, Civic, Professional, and Similar Organizations (NAICS 813) Private Households (NAICS 814)


49

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS

Largest Industries

Location Quotients - 63130 2014 Jobs

2019 Jobs

% of Total (2019)

% Change in Jobs

2019 LQ

2019 Earnings Per Worker

Educational Services

1,667

1,668

17.64%

0%

6.84

$37,060

Accommodation and Food Services

1,582

1,660

17.55%

5%

2.04

$21,918

Health Care and Social Assistance

1,283

1,454

15.37%

13%

1.21*

$36,747

Government

1,160

1,128

11.92%

(3%)

0.80

$74,609

Retail Trade

934

858

9.07%

(8%)

0.91

$32,172

Other Services (except Public Administration)

828

818

8.65%

(1%)

1.83

$31,966

Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services

530

547

5.79%

3%

0.88

$102,004

Manufacturing

341

354

3.74%

4%

0.47

$62,429

Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services

249

255

2.70%

2%

0.43

$59,068

Wholesale Trade

156

193

2.04%

24%

0.56

$83,625

Construction

105

119

1.26%

13%

0.22

$77,549

Finance and Insurance

109

116

1.23%

6%

0.31

$108,961

Information

71

88

0.93%

24%

0.51

$73,965

Real Estate and Rental and Leasing

70

74

0.78%

6%

0.46

$58,940

Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation

73

67

0.71%

(8%)

0.40

$33,223

Management of Companies and Enterprises

57

59

0.63%

4%

0.44

$157,045

9,215

9,458

2.64%

TOTAL

$1,051,283

AVERAGE

$65,705

WEIGHTED AVERAGE

$46,836

Industry

TOTAL

**Doesn’t include The Gatesworth or other 63124 University City businesses

Industry = NAICS Classification for Each Company North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Source: EMSI Q1 2020 Data Set – Economy Overview, University City (Boundary Lines)


50

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS

Largest Industries

University City – Top Industries by NAICS Supersector University City NAICS Supersector

# of % of Total # of % of Total Companies Companies Employees Employees

Total Revenue

% of Total Revenue

35% 30%

Construction

55

4.90%

693

4.34%

$204,637,578

8.75%

Education and Health Services

226

20.14%

5,128

32.12%

$263,018,939

11.25%

Financial Activities

137

12.21%

855

5.36%

$200,128,679

8.56%

Government

10

0.89%

607

3.80%

$0

0.00%

Information

23

2.05%

1,120

7.02%

$346,008,746

14.79%

Leisure and Hospitality

132

11.76%

2,380

14.91%

$150,167,453

6.42%

Manufacturing

17

1.52%

268

1.68%

$142,580,314

6.10%

Natural Resources and Mining

2

0.18%

9

0.06%

$587,153

0.03%

165

14.71%

1,092

6.84%

$44,085,884

1.89%

168

14.97%

1,356

8.49%

$232,750,242

9.95%

161

14.35%

2,452

15.36%

$754,468,802

32.26%

26

2.32%

4

0.03%

$283,264

0.01%

Other Services Professional and Business Services Trade, Transportation, and Utilities Unclassified Establishments TOTAL

Source: DataVu (Database USA) - 2017 - 2017

1,122

15,964

University City - NAICS Supersectors

$2.4B

25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0%

% of Total Companies

% of Total Employees

% of Total Revenue


51

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS

Largest Industries

University City – Top Industries by NAICS Supersector # of Employees

# of Companies NAICS Supersector

% of Companies

NAICS Supersector

Revenue % of Companies

NAICS Supersector

% of Companies

Education and Health Services

20.14%

Education and Health Services

32.12%

Trade, Transportation, and Utilities

32.26%

Professional and Business Services

14.97%

Trade, Transportation, and Utilities

15.36%

Information

14.79%

Other Services

14.71%

Leisure and Hospitality

14.91%

Education and Health Services

11.25%

Trade, Transportation, and Utilities

14.35%

Professional and Business Services

8.49%

Professional and Business Services

9.95%

Financial Activities

12.21%

Information

7.02%

Construction

8.75%

Leisure and Hospitality

11.76%

Other Services

6.84%

Financial Activities

8.56%

Construction

4.90%

Financial Activities

5.36%

Leisure and Hospitality

6.42%

Unclassified Establishments

2.32%

Construction

4.34%

Manufacturing

6.10%

Information

2.05%

Government

3.80%

Other Services

1.89%

Manufacturing

1.52%

Manufacturing

1.68%

Natural Resources and Mining

0.03%

Government

0.89%

Natural Resources and Mining

0.06%

Unclassified Establishments

0.01%

Natural Resources and Mining

0.18%

Unclassified Establishments

0.03%

Government

0.00%

Source: DataVu (Database USA) - 2017 - 2017


52

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS

Largest Industries

University City – Top Five Industries by NAICS Supersector Revenue

# of Companies 9%

12% 20% Education and Health Services

Trade, Transportation, and Utilities

10% 32%

Professional and Business Services 14%

Other Services

Information Education and Health Services

11%

Trade, Transportation, and Utilities

Professional and Business Services

15% Financial Activities

Construction

15%

15%

# Employees 7% 8%

Education and Health Services 32%

Trade, Transportation, and Utilities Leisure and Hospitality

15%

Professional and Business Services Information 15%

Source: DataVu (Database USA) - 2017 - 2017


53

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS University City – Companies by NAICS Supersector

Business Analysis MAP KEY Construction Education and Health Services Financial Activities Information Leisure and Hospitality Manufacturing Other Services Professional and Business Services Trade, Transportation, and Utilities Unclassified Establishments

Source: DataVu (Database USA) - 2017 - 2017


54

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS Construction by Location Employee Size

Source: DataVu (Database USA) - 2017 - 2017

Business Analysis


55

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS Construction by Annual Revenue

Source: DataVu (Database USA) - 2017 - 2017

Business Analysis


56

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS Education & Health Services by Location Employee Size

Source: DataVu (Database USA) - 2017 - 2017

Business Analysis


57

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS Education & Health Services by Annual Revenue

Source: DataVu (Database USA) - 2017 - 2017

Business Analysis


58

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS Financial Activities by Location Employee Size

Source: DataVu (Database USA) - 2017 - 2017

Business Analysis


59

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS Financial Activities by Annual Revenue

Source: DataVu (Database USA) - 2017 - 2017

Business Analysis


60

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS Information by Location Employee Size

Source: DataVu (Database USA) - 2017 - 2017

Business Analysis


61

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS Information by Annual Revenue

Source: DataVu (Database USA) - 2017 - 2017

Business Analysis


62

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS Leisure & Hospitality by Location Employee Size

Source: DataVu (Database USA) - 2017 - 2017

Business Analysis


63

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS Leisure & Hospitality by Annual Revenue

Source: DataVu (Database USA) - 2017 - 2017

Business Analysis


64

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS Other Services by Location Employee Size

Source: DataVu (Database USA) - 2017 - 2017

Business Analysis


65

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS Other Services by Annual Revenue

Source: DataVu (Database USA) - 2017 - 2017

Business Analysis


66

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS Professional & Business Services by Location Employee Size

Source: DataVu (Database USA) - 2017 - 2017

Business Analysis


67

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS Professional & Business Services by Annual Revenue

Source: DataVu (Database USA) - 2017 - 2017

Business Analysis


68

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS Trade, Transportation, & Utilities by Location Employee Size

Source: DataVu (Database USA) - 2017 - 2017

Business Analysis


69

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS Trade, Transportation, & Utilities by Annual Revenue

Source: DataVu (Database USA) - 2017 - 2017

Business Analysis


70

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS Top Supersector Regional Comparison

Regional Comparison

(# of Companies)

University City

St. Louis MSA 11.2%

12.2% 20.1%

23.9%

Education and Health Services

Education and Health Services Trade, Transportation, and Utilities

Professional and Business Services

11.8% Professional and Business Services

14.3%

Other Services Financial Activities Trade, Transportation, and Utilities

15.0% Financial Activities

Other Services

14.9%

15.6%

14.7%

St. Louis County

Missouri 10.1%

9.7%

25.9%

Education and Health Services Professional and Business Services

12.7%

10.7%

31.5%

Professional and Business Services Education and Health Services

Trade, Transportation, and Utilities Trade, Transportation, and Utilities Financial Activities

15.3%

Other Services

Other Services

15.2% 16.4%

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics – NAICS Supersectors for CES Program

Financial Activities

20.2%


71

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS Top Supersector Regional Comparison

Regional Comparison

(# of Companies)

14.3% 15.2%

Trade, Transportation, and Utilities

15.6% 15.3%

15.0% 16.4%

Professional and Business Services

14.9% 31.5%

14.7% 9.7%

Other Services

11.2% 10.7%

12.2% 12.7%

Financial Activities

11.8% 10.1%

20.1% 25.9%

Education and Health Services

23.9% 20.2%

0.0% University City Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics – NAICS Supersectors for CES Program

5.0%

10.0% St. Louis County

15.0%

20.0% St. Louis MSA

25.0%

30.0% Missouri

35.0%


72

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS

Economic Drivers

Fortune 1000 – St. Louis Region Locations 4 1

14

5

6 St. Louis Region – Fortune 1000 1.

Express Scripts Holding Company

2.

Centene Corporation

3.

Edward Jones

4.

Emerson Electric Company

5.

Bayer (Monsanto Company)

6.

Reinsurance Group-America Inc

7.

Olin Corporation

8.

Ameren Corporation

9.

Peabody Energy Corporation

10. Post Holdings Inc 11.

Stifel Financial Corporation

12. Caleres (Brown Shoe Company) 13. Belden Inc 14. Arch Coal Inc 15. Energizer Holdings Inc 16. Graybar Electric Co Inc Source: DataVu (Database USA) - 2017

12 16 2 13 7

15

8

10 3

12 13

16 2 7

9

11


73

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS Coworking Locations

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39.

The Lodge Peer 151 Regus - Chesterfield AMG Corporate Offices - Chesterfield Hive44 Exit 11 (Located Off Map in Washington, MO) STL Fusion T-Rex Covo Regus - Downtown WeWork Brennan's Work & Leisure Riefling South City Office Evolution Regus - Pierre Laclede Regus - Sevens Building ThriveCo Cambridge Innovation Center (CIC) - CET Spaces - Regus TechArtista The BHIVE Cambridge Innovation Center (CIC) - 4220 Cambridge Innovation Center (CIC) - 4240 TechArtista - Studios Nebula Nebula - Schoolhouse Nexcore Rise Collaborative Workspace Regus - Sunset Hills U-City Coworking AMG Corporate Offices - Des Peres ITE: Innovative Technology Enterprises AMG Corporate Offices - Creve Coeur Regus - CityPlace Maplework Regus - Westport OPO Startups Apiary @ the Park (opening Fall 2020) Serendipity Labs (opening Summer 2020)

Source: Colliers International

Small Tier


74

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS

Small Tier

Coworking Locations – University City

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39.

The Lodge Peer 151 Regus - Chesterfield AMG Corporate Offices - Chesterfield Hive44 Exit 11 (Located Off Map in Washington, MO) STL Fusion T-Rex Covo Regus - Downtown WeWork Brennan's Work & Leisure Riefling South City Office Evolution Regus - Pierre Laclede Regus - Sevens Building ThriveCo Cambridge Innovation Center (CIC) - CET Spaces - Regus TechArtista The BHIVE Cambridge Innovation Center (CIC) - 4220 Cambridge Innovation Center (CIC) - 4240 TechArtista - Studios Nebula Nebula - Schoolhouse Nexcore Rise Collaborative Workspace Regus - Sunset Hills U-City Coworking AMG Corporate Offices - Des Peres ITE: Innovative Technology Enterprises AMG Corporate Offices - Creve Coeur Regus - CityPlace Maplework Regus - Westport OPO Startups Apiary @ the Park (opening Fall 2020) Serendipity Labs (opening Summer 2020)

Source: Colliers International

30 28

39 15 17

14

16


75

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS

New Companies

Companies Established since 2015

Distribution of Local Employees

Established Year

# of Companies

% of New Companies

# of Local Employees

# of New Employees

2015

36

28.13%

408

33.04%

14%

2015

33%

2016

11

8.59%

83

6.72%

2017

29

22.66%

364

29.47%

2018

29

22.66%

208

16.84%

2018

2019

23

17.97%

172

13.93%

2019

TOTAL

128

2016 17%

2017

7%

1,235 29%

Supersector

# of Companies

% of New Companies

# of Local Employees

# of New Employees

18

14.06%

339

27.45%

Leisure and Hospitality Trade, Transportation, and Utilities Education and Health Services

21

16.41%

311

25.18%

15

11.72%

282

22.83%

Other Services

20

15.63%

96

7.77%

Financial Activities

14

10.94%

89

7.21%

Professional and Business Services

13

10.16%

86

6.96%

Construction

3

2.34%

21

1.70%

Information

1

0.78%

7

0.57%

Unclassified Establishments

23

17.97%

4

0.32%

TOTAL

128

Source: DataVu (Database USA) - 2017 - 2017

1,235

7% 7%

2% 1% 0%

Leisure and Hospitality

27%

Trade, Transportation, and Utilities Education and Health Services

8%

Other Services Financial Activities Professional and Business Services Construction

23% 25%

Information Unclassified Establishments


76

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS

Startups

Startup Ecosystem

MAP KEY* Funders Accelerators Facilities Civic Community STL Venture Works

Talent & Training Competitions Local University Programs

Regional Business Council

Rise Collaborative

St. Louis Economic Development Partnership

Missouri Civic Partnership Rivervest Venture Partners

*Some map spots have multiple sites with more than one descriptor Source: EQSTL, https://eqstl.com/ecosystem-map/ / ITEN Catylist for Tech Innovation; https://www.itenstl.org/ecosystem-map/

• • • •

Washington University: Farmplicity Idea Labs Olin Entrepreneurship Platform Idea Bounce


77

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS Startup Ecosystem

Startups MAP KEY* Funders Accelerators

Term

Definition

Competitions Business plan contests that help entrepreneurs hone

Accelerators

interview skills, give them access to peer and professional feedback and provide potential payoffs, including business plan validation, connections to mentors, cash prizes or other perks.

Civic

Accelerators (short term) and incubators (long term) assist startup businesses by providing money or operational resources such as discounted or free rent and technical, administrative and networking support to increase a company's chance of success. Most local universities have centers to accelerate student entrepreneurship.

Talent & Training

Civic

Entities that promote the growth of business, real estate and community development through a variety of programs and initiatives, frequently providing enhanced services to businesses that contribute to the well-being and vitality of the region.

Community

Beyond funding, entrepreneurs need support through shared experiences, whether it's women's startup groups, or niche industry organizations or meetup groups. Community is the main goal, where feedback is given, and challenges are addressed.

Talent and Training

Several local organizations offer help with pitching to investors, business plan development, access to investors or coding education, to name a few, while others may be designed to attract talent to the area through competitions or opportunity.

Facilities

Facilities

Facilities meant for startups - which maybe for general fields or industry-specific - can offer a wide range of benefits, including reduced rent, shared services, proximity to other entrepreneurs and community events.

Can include venture capital firms, private investors, grant organizations and government entities. Funds can also come from accelerator programs that invest in the companies they induct into their mentoring programs in forwith equity. *Some map spots have exchange multiple sites more than one descriptor

Funders

Source: EQSTL, https://eqstl.com/ecosystem-map/ / ITEN Catylist for Tech Innovation; https://www.itenstl.org/ecosystem-map/

Community

Competitions Local University Programs


78

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET & INDUSTRY CLUSTERS

Labor Comparison

St. Louis Region November 2019 Region Super Regions United States Illinois Missouri St. Louis, MO-IL

November 2018

Labor Force

Employment

Unemployment Number Rate

164,386,000 6,447,310 3,128,004 1,496,955

158,945,000 6,229,051 3,034,409 1,452,722

5,441,000 218,259 93,595 44,233

3.3% 3.4% 3.0% 3.0%

1,577 3,399 817 5,368 15,233 476 5,499

2.9% 2.8% 2.9% 2.3% 2.8% 2.6% 3.5%

52,011 115,386 27,226 221,089 522,270 17,480 152,492

50,753 112,608 26,519 216,597 509,633 17,098 147,902

311 377 620 402 871 437 341 384 1,117 935 5,499 813 540 280 514 451

2.6% 2.2% 2.4% 4.0% 3.0% 3.1% 2.1% 2.3% 2.3% 2.3% 3.5% 2.3% 2.8% 2.2% 2.3% 2.3%

11,388 16,736 24,654 9,602 27,610 13,532 15,698 15,898 48,863 38,688 152,492 33,803 18,461 12,509 21,139 18,786

11,127 16,432 24,174 9,235 26,855 13,164 15,410 15,560 47,904 37,812 147,902 33,126 17,997 12,296 20,720 18,433

Labor Force 162,665,000 6,468,774 3,039,341 1,452,805

Employment

Unemployment Number Rate

157,015,000 6,209,756 2,963,748 1,410,287

5,650,000 259,018 75,593 42,518

% Employment Growth

3.5% 4.0% 2.5% 2.9%

1.23% 0.31% 2.38% 3.01%

1,258 2,778 707 4,492 12,637 382 4,590

2.4% 2.4% 2.6% 2.0% 2.4% 2.2% 3.0%

3.09% 3.51% 2.82% 3.16% 3.39% 2.91% 3.38%

261 304 480 367 755 368 288 338 959 876 4,590 677 464 213 419 353

2.3% 1.8% 1.9% 3.8% 2.7% 2.7% 1.8% 2.1% 2.0% 2.3% 3.0% 2.0% 2.5% 1.7% 2.0% 1.9%

3.51% 3.40% 3.40% 3.40% 3.40% 3.40% 3.39% 3.39% 3.16% 3.16% 3.38% 3.15% 3.40% 3.39% 3.15% 3.39%

Missouri Counties in St. Louis, MO-IL Franklin Jefferson Lincoln St. Charles St. Louis County Warren St. Louis City

53,899 119,963 28,084 228,799 542,163 18,072 158,393

52,322 116,564 27,267 223,431 526,930 17,596 152,894

Missouri Cities of 20,000 or more in St. Louis, MO-IL Arnold Ballwin Chesterfield Ferguson Florissant Hazelwood Kirkwood Maryland Heights O'Fallon St. Charles St. Louis St. Peters University City Webster Groves Wentzville Wildwood

11,829 17,367 25,615 9,951 28,638 14,048 16,274 16,472 50,593 39,940 158,393 34,984 19,148 12,993 21,887 19,509

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, November 2019

11,518 16,990 24,995 9,549 27,767 13,611 15,933 16,088 49,416 39,005 152,894 34,171 18,608 12,713 21,373 19,058


79

UNIVERSITY CITY

COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE

Inventory Makeup

Building Inventory (Building SF)

Retail

Total SF

% of Total SF

50%

180

45%

160

144

4,474,097

43.92%

40%

14.98%

35%

155

Industrial

1,525,775

71

1,322,803

12.98%

120

30%

100

25%

Health Care

6

1,094,028

10.74%

Office

54

643,914

6.32%

Student Housing

41

592,546

5.82%

10%

Specialty

15

534,018

5.24%

5%

486

10,187,181

100%

0%

TOTAL

140

80

20%

60

15%

40 20 0 Multi-Family

Retail

Industrial Health Care

% of Total Inventory

6%

Multi-Family

5%

Retail

6%

Industrial 44%

11%

Health Care Office Student Housing

13%

Specialty 15%

Source: CoStar

Office

Student Housing # of Buildings

Specialty

# of Buildings

Multi-Family

# of Buildings

% of Total Inventory SF

General Property Type


80

UNIVERSITY CITY

COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE

Inventory Makeup

Building Inventory (Building SF) – Age Analysis Decade Built

% of Total SF

1900 - 1920

9.29%

1921-1940

15.02%

1941-1960

29.28%

1961-1980

22.93%

1981-2000

12.24%

2001-2010

2.50%

2011-2020

8.74%

8.74%

9.29%

2.50% 1900 - 1920

15.02%

12.24%

1921-1940 1941-1960 1961-1980 1981-2000 2001-2010 2011-2020

22.93% 29.28%

3,500,000 3,000,000

Total Building SF

2,500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 500,000 0 1900 - 1920

1921-1940 Healthcare

Source: CoStar

1941-1960 Industrial

Multi-Family

1961-1980 Office

Retail

1981-2000 Specialty

Student Housing

2001-2010

2011-2020


81

UNIVERSITY CITY

COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE

Inventory Makeup

Building Inventory – Built since 2000 Year Built

% of Total SF

2000

0.19%

2001

0.17%

2002

2.97%

2003

0.92%

2004

15.25%

250,000

2005

0.63%

200,000

2006

2.11%

2007

0.13%

2013

32.82%

2014

21.30%

50,000

2018

8.35%

0

2020

15.15%

Year Breakdown – By Building SF 400,000

361,844

350,000 300,000 234,820 168,100

167,000

150,000 92,070

100,000 32,791 2,100

1,872

2000

2001

2002

10,140 2003

7,000 2004

2005

23,210

2006

1,440 2007

2013

2014

2018

2020

Property Type Breakdown – By Building SF Property Type

Total SF

% of Total SF

800,000

Flex

27,791

2.52%

700,000

Health Care

80,000

7.26%

600,000

Industrial

13,000

1.18%

Multi-Family

823,914

74.74%

Office

75,000

6.80%

200,000

Retail

70,682

6.41%

100,000

Specialty

12,000

1.09%

0

900,000

823,914

500,000 400,000 300,000 27,791 Flex

Source: CoStar

80,000

Health Care

13,000 Industrial

Multi-Family

75,000

70,682

Office

Retail

12,000 Specialty


82

UNIVERSITY CITY

COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE

Inventory Makeup

Building Inventory (Land AC) Total Land AC

% of Land Area

30%

Retail

155

114.6071

26.56%

25%

Industrial

71

100.2485

23.23%

Multi-Family

144

97.8721

22.68%

Land

25

35.802

8.30%

Specialty

15

29.0078

6.72%

Office

54

25.0188

5.80%

Student Housing

41

18.3832

4.26%

Health Care

6

10.5912

2.45%

511

431.53 AC

100%

TOTAL

180 160 140

20%

120 100

15%

80 60

10%

# of Buildings

# of Properties

% of Total Inventory SF

General Property Type*

40

5%

20 0

0%

*Analysis based on “General Property Type� on CoStar and not on city zoning regulations

% of Land Area (AC)

Retail

4% 2% 6% 27%

7%

# of Properties

Industrial Multi-Family Land

8%

Specialty

Health Care Buildings in CoStar Include the Following Secondary Property Types:

Assisted Living, Congregate Senior Housing, Continuing Care Retirement Community, Hospital, Rehabilitation Center, Skilled Nursing Facility

Office 23%

23%

Student Housing Health Care

Source: CoStar

Specialty Buildings in CoStar Include the Following Secondary Property Types:

Airplane Hangar, Airport, Auto Salvage Facility, Car Wash, Cement/Gravel Plant, Cemetery/Mausoleum, Chemical/Oil Refinery, Contractor Storage Yard, Correctional Facility, Drive-In Movie, Landfill, Lodge/Meeting Hall, Lumberyard, Marina, Movie/Radio/TV Studio, Parking Garage, Parking Lot, Police/Fire Station, Post Office, Public Library, Radio/TV Transmission Facilities, Railroad Yard, Recycling Center, Residential Income, Schools, Self-Storage, Shelter, Shipyard, Sorority/Fraternity House, Trailer/Camper Park, Utility Sub-Station, Water Retention Facility, Water Treatment Facility, Winery/Vineyard


83

UNIVERSITY CITY

COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE Property Type

MAP KEY Retail Multi Family Industrial Office Student Housing Land Specialty Health Care Source: CoStar

Inventory Makeup


84

UNIVERSITY CITY

COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE Retail Heat Map (Building SF)

Source: CoStar

Retail Inventory


85

UNIVERSITY CITY

COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE

Retail Inventory

Retail – University City Secondary Building Type (By Building SF)

Decade Built (By Building SF)

Auto Repair

1% 1% 1% 1% 1%

4% 1%

Bank

22%

Convenience Store

14%

16%

1900 - 1920

Drug Store

29%

9%

Fast Food Freestanding

1%

1941-1960

Health Club

1961-1980

Restaurant

10%

17%

2% 3% 0% 11%

1921-1940

Service Station

1981-2000

Storefront

2001-2010

Storefront Retail/Office Storefront Retail/Residential

28%

28%

2011-2020

Supermarket General Retail

Retail Analysis by Space Use (vs. Building Type) $40.00

30.0%

$35.00

25.0%

$30.00

20.0%

$25.00 $20.00

15.0%

$15.00

10.0%

$10.00

5.0%

$5.00 $0.00

0.0%

Vacant Percent % Total Source: CoStar

Total Available Percent % Direct

NNN Rent Overall


86

UNIVERSITY CITY

COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE

Retail Inventory

Retail – Market Indicators Under Construction*

16.0%

1,600,000

14.0%

1,400,000

12.0%

1,200,000

10.0%

Square Feet

Vacant Percent % Total

Vacancy Rate

8.0% 6.0% 4.0%

1,000,000 800,000 600,000 400,000

2.0%

200,000

University City

St. Louis County

2020 Q1

2019 Q3

2019 Q1

2018 Q3

2018 Q1

2017 Q3

2017 Q1

2016 Q3

2016 Q1

2015 Q3

2015 Q1

2014 Q3

2014 Q1

2013 Q3

2013 Q1

2012 Q3

2012 Q1

2011 Q3

2011 Q1

2010 Q3

2010 Q1

0.0%

0

2010

2011

University City

St. Louis MSA

Source: CoStar

2020 Q1

2019 Q3

Square Feet St. Louis MSA

2019 Q1

2018 Q3

2018 Q1

2017 Q3

2017 Q1

2016 Q3

2016 Q1

2015 Q3

2015 Q1

2014 Q3

2014 Q1

2013 Q1

2012 Q3

2012 Q1

2011 Q3

2011 Q1

2010 Q3

2013 Q3

St. Louis County

2013

2014

2015

St. Louis County

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

St. Louis MSA

Construction Deliveries

$25.00 $23.00 $21.00 $19.00 $17.00 $15.00 $13.00 $11.00 $9.00 $7.00 $5.00 2010 Q1

Rent Per Square Foot ($/SF)

NNN Rent Overall

University City

2012

2,000,000 1,800,000 1,600,000 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 800,000 600,000 400,000 200,000 0

2010

2011

2012

University City

2013

2014

2015

St. Louis County

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

St. Louis MSA

*Under construction figure pulled from single quarter in year (in order to avoid duplication)


87

UNIVERSITY CITY

COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE Multi Family Heat Map (Building SF)

Source: CoStar

Multi Family Inventory


88

UNIVERSITY CITY

COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE

Multi Family Inventory

Multi Family – Market Indicators Under Construction

Vacancy Rate 18,000

16.0%

16,000

14.0%

14,000

12.0%

12,000

8.0%

10,000

Units

10.0% 6.0%

8,000

4.0%

6,000

2.0%

4,000

0.0%

2,000 0

University City

St. Louis County

2010

2011

2013

University City

St. Louis MSA

Effective Rent per Unit

2014

2015

St. Louis County

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

2019

2020

St. Louis MSA

Construction Deliveries

$1,300

3,000

$1,200

2,500

$1,100

2,000

Units

$1,000 $900 $800

1,500 1,000

$700

500

$600

0 University City

Source: CoStar

2012

St. Louis County

St. Louis MSA

2010

2011

2012

2013

University City

2014

2015

St. Louis County

2016

2017

2018

St. Louis MSA


89

UNIVERSITY CITY

COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE Industrial & Flex Heat Map (Building SF)

Source: CoStar

Industrial & Flex Inventory


90

UNIVERSITY CITY

COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE

Industrial & Flex Inventory

Industrial & Flex – Market Indicators Under Construction*

12.0%

6,000,000

10.0%

5,000,000

8.0%

4,000,000

Square Feet

Vacant Percent % Total

Vacancy Rate

6.0% 4.0% 2.0%

3,000,000 2,000,000 1,000,000

University City

St. Louis County

0

2020 Q1

2019 Q3

2019 Q1

2018 Q3

2018 Q1

2017 Q3

2017 Q1

2016 Q3

2016 Q1

2015 Q3

2015 Q1

2014 Q3

2014 Q1

2013 Q3

2013 Q1

2012 Q3

2012 Q1

2011 Q3

2011 Q1

2010 Q3

2010 Q1

0.0%

2010

2011

2012

University City

St. Louis MSA

2013

2014

2015

St. Louis County

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

St. Louis MSA

• No industrial/flex construction activity in University City since 2006

Construction Deliveries

$14.00

8,000,000

$12.00

7,000,000

$10.00

6,000,000

Square Feet

$8.00 $6.00 $4.00 $2.00

St. Louis County

St. Louis MSA

2020 Q1

2019 Q3

2019 Q1

2018 Q3

2018 Q1

2017 Q3

2017 Q1

2016 Q3

2016 Q1

2015 Q3

2015 Q1

2014 Q3

2014 Q1

2013 Q3

2013 Q1

2012 Q3

2012 Q1

2011 Q3

2011 Q1

2010 Q3

University City

Source: CoStar

5,000,000 4,000,000 3,000,000 2,000,000

$0.00 2010 Q1

Rent Per Square Foot ($/SF)

NNN Rent Overall

1,000,000 0

2010

2011

2012

University City

2013

2014

2015

St. Louis County

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

St. Louis MSA

*Under construction figure pulled from single quarter in year (in order to avoid duplication)


91

UNIVERSITY CITY

COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE Office Heat Map (Building SF)

Source: CoStar

Office Inventory


92

UNIVERSITY CITY

COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE

Office Inventory

Office – Market Indicators Under Construction*

12.0%

3,500,000

10.0%

3,000,000

8.0%

2,500,000

Square Feet

Vacant Percent % Total

Vacancy Rate

6.0% 4.0% 2.0%

2,000,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 500,000

University City

St. Louis County

2020 Q1

2019 Q3

2019 Q1

2018 Q3

2018 Q1

2017 Q3

2017 Q1

2016 Q3

2016 Q1

2015 Q3

2015 Q1

2014 Q3

2014 Q1

2013 Q3

2013 Q1

2012 Q3

2012 Q1

2011 Q3

2011 Q1

2010 Q3

2010 Q1

0.0%

0

2010

2011

University City

St. Louis MSA

2013

2014

2015

St. Louis County

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

2018

2019

2020

St. Louis MSA

Construction Deliveries

$25.00

1,200,000

$20.00

1,000,000

$15.00

800,000

Square Feet

Rent Per Square Foot ($/SF)

Office Gross Rent Overall

$10.00 $5.00

600,000 400,000 200,000

$0.00

0 University City

Source: CoStar

2012

St. Louis County

St. Louis MSA

2010

2011

2012

University City

2013

2014

2015

St. Louis County

2016

2017

St. Louis MSA

*Under construction figure pulled from single quarter in year (in order to avoid duplication)


93

UNIVERSITY CITY

COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE Student Housing Heat Map (Building SF)

Source: CoStar

Student Housing Inventory


94

UNIVERSITY CITY

COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE

Student Housing Inventory

Student Housing – Market Indicators Construction Activity

Vacancy Rate 1,800

15.0% 14.0% 13.0% 12.0% 11.0% 10.0% 9.0% 8.0% 7.0% 6.0% 5.0%

1,600 1,400

Units

1,200 1,000 800 600 400 200 0 University City

St. Louis County

St. Louis MSA

Effective Rent per Unit

2011

2012

2013

2014

St. Louis MSA - Under Construction

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

St. Louis MSA - Deliveries

• No recorded construction/deliveries in University City or St. Louis County

$1,800 $1,700 $1,600 $1,500 $1,400 $1,300 $1,200 $1,100 $1,000 $900 $800

• The Lofts at Washington University (6241 Delmar Blvd) was built in 2014 with 164 Units (220,000 RBA) but is listed as Multi Family

University City

Source: CoStar

2010

St. Louis County

St. Louis MSA


95

UNIVERSITY CITY

COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE Specialty Heat Map (Building SF)

Specialty Buildings in CoStar Include the Following Secondary Property Types:

Airplane Hangar, Airport, Auto Salvage Facility, Car Wash, Cement/Gravel Plant, Cemetery/Mausoleum, Chemical/Oil Refinery, Contractor Storage Yard, Correctional Facility, Drive-In Movie, Landfill, Lodge/Meeting Hall, Lumberyard, Marina, Movie/Radio/TV Studio, Parking Garage, Parking Lot, Police/Fire Station, Post Office, Public Library, Radio/TV Transmission Facilities, Railroad Yard, Recycling Center, Residential Income, Schools, Self-Storage, Shelter, Shipyard, Sorority/Fraternity House, Trailer/Camper Park, Utility Sub-Station, Water Retention Facility, Water Treatment Facility, Winery/Vineyard

Source: CoStar

Specialty Inventory


96

UNIVERSITY CITY

COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE Health Care Heat Map (Building SF)

Health Care Buildings in CoStar Include the Following Secondary Property Types:

Assisted Living, Congregate Senior Housing, Continuing Care Retirement Community, Hospital, Rehabilitation Center, Skilled Nursing Facility

Source: CoStar

Health Care Inventory


97

UNIVERSITY CITY

COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE

Regional Comparison

Inventory Makeup per Market (by General Property Type SF) % of Inventory of Each Market by Property Type

50% 45%

44%

40%

36%

35%

32%

32%

31%

30% 24%

25%

21%

20% 19%

20%

15%

15%

13%

19%

19%

17%

18% 18% 14%

11%

10%

9%

6% 6% 5%

5%

4%

4% 3%

0%

University City

3%

St. Louis County

Multi-Family

Retail

5%

St. Louis City

Industrial

4%

3%

2%

1%

1%

0%

11%

10%

0%

St. Charles County

Health Care

Hospitality

7% 6%

3% 3%

Office

St. Louis MSA Student Housing

Specialty

% of Inventory of Each Market by Property Type

50% 45%

44%

40%

36%

35%

32% 31%

32%

30% 24%

25% 20%

20%

21%

19%

19%

18%

18%

15%

15%

17%

14%

13%

11%

11%

9%

10%

4% 3%

5%

2% 3%

0% Multi-Family

Retail University City

Source: CoStar

19%

Industrial St. Louis County

3%

5%

6%

6%

3% 3%

Hospitality St. Louis City

5% 4%

4%

1% 1% 0%

0%

Health Care

10% 7%

Office St. Charles County

Student Housing St. Louis MSA

Specialty

6%


98

UNIVERSITY CITY

COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE Buildings for Sale – Actively Marketed on CoStar

MAP KEY Industrial Multi Family Retail Office Healthcare Land Source: CoStar, Buildings Listed for Sale

Buildings for Sale Sale Price PSF


99

UNIVERSITY CITY

COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE

Buildings for Sale

Buildings for Sale – Actively Marketed on CoStar

University City Only Property Type

Sales Analysis per Property Type

Total #

Total SF

Average SF

Combine Sale Price

Average Price

Average Price PSF

40,000

Industrial

5

44,390

8,878

$3,204,000

$640,800

$65.88

35,000

Multi-Family

5

177,040

35,408

$12,413,000

$2,482,600

$96.92

30,000

Retail

4

28,132

7,033

$1,793,900

$448,475

$73.02

Office

2

15,190

7,595

$2,399,000

$1,199,500

$162.37

Land

1

11 AC (479,160 SF)

479,160

$1,197,900

$1,197,900

$2.50

Health Care

1

26,517

26,517

$1,200,000

$1,200,000

$45.25

TOTAL

18

770,429

42,802

$22,207,800 $1,233,767

$200.00 $150.00

25,000 20,000

$100.00

15,000 10,000

$50.00

5,000 0

$0.00 Industrial

$82.14

Multi-Family Average SF

Retail

Office

Health Care

Average Price PSF ($/SF)

St. Louis County – Comparison Property Type

Total #

Total SF

Average SF

Retail

178

2,939,239

16,513

$218,829,505 $1,468,654

$131.94

120,000

Office

124

2,158,265

17,405

$123,830,755 $1,289,904

$89.70

100,000

Industrial

112

3,514,694

31,381

$172,498,240 $1,674,740

$94.67

80,000

Multi-Family

22

926,180

42,099

$44,254,500 $2,458,583

$63.53

Flex

21

527,326

25,111

$32,393,000 $2,024,563

$59.01

Specialty

19

167,169

8,798

$20,619,500

$1,145,528

$154.91

Hospitality

4

399,248

99,812

$9,750,000

$4,875,000

$31.69

Health Care

2

63,617

31,809

$1,750,000

$875,000

$30.04

482

10,695,738

22,190

TOTAL

Combine Sale Price

Average Price

$623,925,500 $1,544,370

Average Price PSF

Sales Analysis per Property Type $180.00 $160.00 $140.00 $120.00 $100.00 $80.00 $60.00 $40.00 $20.00 $0.00

60,000 40,000 20,000 0

$105.77 Average SF

Source: CoStar, Buildings Listed for Sale

Average Price PSF ($/SF)


100

UNIVERSITY CITY

COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE Market Trends Recorded Cap Rates in University City Map Key – Property Type Retail Multi-Family Dwellings Apartment Office Student

Cap Rate

Source: RCA, CoStar, Colliers International

Investment Activity


101

UNIVERSITY CITY

COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE

Investment Activity

Market Trends Recorded Cap Rates the St. Louis Region by County & Property Type Average Sale Price per SF County - Property Type St. Charles Flex

2015

Average Cap Rate 2016

2017

2018

County - Property Type

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

St. Charles

7.52%

7.89%

7.02%

8.09%

8.21%

7.00%

9.60%

8.80%

8.65%

8.65%

$227.28

$100.84

$62.45

Flex

$56.94

$56.94

Hospitality

$59.54

Industrial

7.92%

$113.95 $273.15

$124.27

Multi-Family

5.90%

$94.85

$148.56

Office

$180.54

$180.54

Post Office

$254.49 $206.63 $255.21 $462.18 $339.14

$304.12

Retail

$300.93

Schools

$55.17

Multi-Family

$88.44

Office

$50.24 $64.59 $67.71 $63.33

$191.14

$50.29

Post Office Schools Flex

TOTAL

$36.28

Industrial

St. Louis

2020

$142.19 $190.97 $207.59 $276.12 $291.97

Hospitality

Retail

2019

$76.20 $229.16

$300.93 $137.85

$80.10

$109.91

7.39%

7.63% 6.09%

7.99%

10.07%

7.55%

8.07%

6.13%

6.90%

6.18%

7.60%

7.97%

9.40%

9.40%

8.41%

7.74%

6.80%

7.08%

9.20%

8.20%

6.89%

7.66%

$101.80

Flex

7.90%

7.71%

TOTAL 7.76%

8.00%

St. Louis

$277.88 $200.70 $209.82 $195.23 $231.30 $149.31 $216.55 $63.15

9.80%

2020

8.00% 7.62%

7.86%

8.18%

8.12%

7.88%

7.80%

8.75%

8.12%

8.13%

$49.47

$123.32 $113.85

$91.89

Hospitality

8.10%

7.71%

6.77%

7.68%

Industrial

$58.60

$85.85

$61.60

$65.25

$66.94

$69.34

Industrial

8.41%

8.79%

8.12%

8.15%

8.25%

8.35%

Multi-Family

$75.02

$94.15

$64.56

$69.54

$56.21

$76.58

$71.65

Multi-Family

8.25%

7.45%

7.55%

8.76%

9.74%

7.33%

8.39%

Office

$163.09 $236.49 $157.84 $128.14 $103.05

$94.51

$162.56

Office

7.28%

7.24%

7.99%

8.31%

10.08%

10.30%

8.11%

Retail

$523.03 $346.24 $322.51 $328.04 $416.50 $349.59 $372.72

Retail

7.58%

7.42%

7.32%

7.28%

7.26%

7.51%

7.34%

$16.31

Self-Storage

8.45%

8.37%

Hospitality

Self-Storage St. Louis City

$105.62

$75.85

13.56%

$120.93 $105.69 $253.64 $120.39 $181.12

$156.93

St. Louis City

$271.17

$271.17

Hospitality

$27.63

$142.76

Industrial

9.50%

$84.68

$74.19

Multi-Family

8.74%

Hospitality Industrial

$41.62

Multi-Family

$64.12

$250.88 $67.45

$76.62

$78.22

8.61%

7.09% 8.75%

9.24% 8.82%

9.00%

9.00%

7.05% 8.48%

9.75%

11.69%

8.82%

8.78%

7.47%

8.56%

8.05%

10.95%

9.40%

$118.13

Office

Parking Lot

$46.80

$46.80

Parking Lot

8.07%

Retail

$287.12 $125.96 $428.26 $177.78 $424.21

$284.41

Retail

8.22%

8.36%

7.39%

9.13%

9.57%

8.05%

7.89%

7.63%

8.02%

8.30%

Office

TOTAL

$155.00

$181.91

$35.91

$205.47 $180.52 $215.91 $199.73 $232.47 $149.31 $208.01

Source: CoStar Sales Comps with disclosed Sale Prices and Cap Rates, Excluding Bulk Portfolio Sales

TOTAL

8.61%

9.00%

8.07% 8.48% 8.12%

7.98%


102

UNIVERSITY CITY

COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE

Investment Activity

Market Trends Recorded Cap Rates in Select Mid County Cities (Multi Family, Office, Retail Buildings)

7.43%

$145.76

6.60%

Multi-Family

4

$127.45

6.39%

Office

1

$184.06

7.95%

Retail

1

$180.69

6.05%

7

$178.27

6.89%

Office

6

$137.58

7.15%

Retail

1

$422.39

5.30%

4

$80.54

9.74%

Creve Coeur

Hazelwood

4

$80.54

9.74%

Kirkwood

2

$937.08

6.51%

Retail

2

$937.08

6.51%

2

$39.46

7.53%

2

$39.46

7.53%

Olivette

1

$108.43

8.00%

Office

1

$108.43

8.00%

Overland

2

$49.23

11.03%

2

$49.23

11.03%

36

$169.00

8.33%

Multi-Family

Maplewood Multi-Family

Multi-Family Saint Louis Multi-Family

18

$65.72

8.66%

Office

5

$115.13

9.16%

Retail

13

$332.73

7.54%

Webster Groves

5

$117.79

8.44%

Multi-Family

2

$83.68

7.92%

Office

1

$58.74

9.23%

Retail

2

$181.42

8.57%

71

$174.95

8.08%

Grand Total

8.00% $300.00 7.00% $250.00

6.00% 5.00%

$200.00

4.00%

$150.00

3.00% $100.00

Source: CoStar Sales Comps with disclosed Sale Prices and Cap Rates, Excluding Bulk Portfolio Sales

2.00% $50.00

1.00% 0.00%

$0.00

Clayton

Saint Louis Average of Price PSF

University City

Webster Groves

Average of Actual Cap Rate

(blank)

$202.43

6

Retail

3

Office

Retail Clayton

9.00%

$350.00

Multi-Family

7.50%

Retail

Office

$358.55

Office

8.50%

1

Multi-Family

7.80%

$88.91

Retail

$190.61

2

Office

6

Multi-Family

Multi-Family

University City

10.00%

$400.00

Retail

Average Cap Rate

Office

Average Price PSF

Multi-Family

# of Transactions

City

(blank)


103

UNIVERSITY CITY

COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE

Available Space for Rent

Actively Marketed on CoStar

13

14 15

2 - 12

16

17 18

1 19

MAP KEY Existing Proposed Source: CoStar, Over 1 SF Available for Lease

20 22 23 25 21 24 26


104

UNIVERSITY CITY

COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE

Available Space for Rent

Actively Marketed on CoStar Map #

Building Name

Address

Property Type

Lease Type

Status

Asking Rent

Total Available SF

1

Brentmoor

8600 Delmar Blvd

Multi-Family

Retail Suite

Existing

Withheld

5,250

2

Market at Olive

8780 Olive Blvd

Office

Retail/Office/Mixed-Use

Proposed

Withheld

50,000

3

Market at Olive

8710 Olive Blvd

Retail

Retail/Office/Mixed-Use

Proposed

Withheld

4,300

4

Market at Olive

8725 Olive Blvd

Retail

Retail/Office/Mixed-Use

Proposed

Withheld

10,500

5

Market at Olive

8770 Olive Blvd

Retail

Retail/Office/Mixed-Use

Proposed

Withheld

12,000

6

Market at Olive

8745 Olive Blvd

Retail

Retail/Office/Mixed-Use

Proposed

Withheld

22,500

7

Market at Olive

8755 Olive Blvd

Retail

Retail/Office/Mixed-Use

Proposed

Withheld

8,500

8

Market at Olive

8705 Olive Blvd

Retail

Retail/Office/Mixed-Use

Proposed

Withheld

3,600

9

Market at Olive

8735 Olive Blvd

Retail

Retail/Office/Mixed-Use

Proposed

Withheld

8,500

10

Market at Olive

8750 Olive Blvd

Retail

Retail/Office/Mixed-Use

Proposed

Withheld

12,000

11

Market at Olive

8720 Olive Blvd

Retail

Retail/Office/Mixed-Use

Proposed

Withheld

20,000

12

Market at Olive

8780A Olive Blvd

Retail

Retail/Office/Mixed-Use

Proposed

Withheld

14,000

13

AccuHealth Urgent Care

8612 Olive Blvd

Retail (Neighborhood Center)

Retail Suite

Existing

$15.00/SF, NNN

17,756

14

8366 Olive Blvd

Industrial

Office/Retail Suite

Existing

$16.00/SF, NNN

5,400

15

8322 Olive Blvd

Retail

Retail Suites

Existing

$6.00-$12.00/SF, NNN

18,400

6900 Olive Blvd

Retail (Neighborhood Center)

Retail Suites

Existing

Withheld

5,080

17

6841 Olive Blvd

Retail (Strip Center)

Retail Suite

Existing

$17.00/SF, NNN

837

18

6721 Vernon Ave

Retail

Office/Retail Suite

Existing

$6.11/SF, NNN

1,365

16

University City Square

19

White & Borgognoni

7171 Delmar Blvd

Office

Office/Medical Suite

Existing

$16.67-$17.33/SF, MG

3,600

20

Former Cicero’s Space

6687 Delmar Blvd

Retail

Retail Suite

Existing

$30.00/SF, NNN

7,000

21

Which Which Building

6662 Delmar Blvd

Retail (Strip Center)

Retail Suites

Existing

Withheld ($30/NNN*)

4,080

22

Louis London

6665 Delmar Blvd

Retail

Retail Suite

Existing

$35.00/SF, NNN

2,106

6633 Delmar Blvd

Retail

Office Suites

Existing

$14.50/SF, FS

11,122

23

(exlc. Janitorial)

24

Commerce Bank

6630 Delmar Blvd

Retail

Retail Suite

Existing

$25.00/SF, NNN

4,800

25

Good Works Building

6319 Delmar Blvd

Specialty

Retail Suite

Existing

Withheld ($25/NNN*)

6,600

26

Chipotle Building

6310 Delmar Blvd

Retail

Retail Suite

Existing

$30.00/SF, NNN

1,400

Source: CoStar, Over 1 SF Available for Lease

*Historic Asking Rent from CoStar; MG = Modified Gross; NNN = Triple Net; FS = Full Service


105

UNIVERSITY CITY

COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE

Opportunity Zones


106

UNIVERSITY CITY

COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE

Promise Zones


107

UNIVERSITY CITY

ACTIVITY HUBS

Source: University City, 1999 Comprehensive Plan Update

Historic Investment/Development


108

UNIVERSITY CITY

ACTIVITY HUBS

The Loop

Aerial Map – Availabilities Only

1

3

4 6

2 5

8 7

MAP KEY Retail Office Parking Garage

Source: CoStar, spaces being actively marketed on CoStar

N


109

UNIVERSITY CITY

ACTIVITY HUBS

Olive Blvd

Aerial Map – Availabilities Only

Olive Blvd

1

2

3 5 4 6

MAP KEY Lease Sale Retail Industrial Source: CoStar, Google, In-Person Driving

N


110

UNIVERSITY CITY

ACTIVITY HUBS

Delmar/I-170

Aerial Map

• • • • • •

8631 Delmar – appears vacant (formerly Lutheran Family and Children’s Services) Owner: Freeman Webb Companies 25,278 SF Medical Office Building

Master Cleaners Half Price Books Decker Tailoring Salons Jilly’s Cupcake Bar & Café House of India

Feet For Life Delmar Blvd

Craft Central

Multi-Tenant Office Building 5,250 SF Retail Vacant Space & Marketed by Pace

Brentmoor Retirement Community

Little Sunshine's Playhouse & Preschool

• • •

Source: CoStar, Google, In-Person Driving

Global Village Language Center Birthday Joy Multi-Tenant Office Building

N


111

UNIVERSITY CITY

ACTIVITY HUBS

Cunningham Industrial Park

Aerial Map

Warrior Building Products / Cameron Ashley Building Products

American Water Treatment

Universal Sewing Supplies • • •

Architectural Glass Products Architectural Metals Inc. Express Employment Professionals

• • •

Winco Architectural Glass Products Architectural Metals Inc.

N

Source: CoStar, Google, In-Person Driving


112

UNIVERSITY CITY

ACTIVITY HUBS

Jackson Ave / Pershing Blvd

Aerial Map

• • • • •

Taco Buddha Cursed Bikes Edward Jones Stephen Robinson Tyler Fine Arts

Kuhlmann Leavitt Aslin Alice PhD

• • • •

Operation Shower Schonbrun Realtors Tryfonas Chiropractors Cleantech Biofuels

N

Source: CoStar, Google, In-Person Driving


113

UNIVERSITY CITY

ACTIVITY HUBS

Delmar Blvd / Hanley Rd

Aerial Map

Jordan Auto Services Multi-Tenant Office Building

Klamen Real Estate Group

Marquard’s Cleaners

N

Source: CoStar, Google, In-Person Driving


114

UNIVERSITY CITY

ACTIVITY HUBS

Delmar Blvd / Midland Blvd

Aerial Map

Space For Lease Owner: Ziegler Enterprises 3,510 SF Office Building Not on CoStar

Multi-Tenant Office Buildings

Lupton Chapel

Office / Retail Space For Lease Owner: Hammond Sheet Metal Company 3,600 SF for Lease Listed by Hilliker Occupied by Multiple Office Tenants

Winslow’s Table

First Presbyterian Church of St. Louis

• Multiple Office Tenants • StateFarm • William K. Meehan

N

Source: CoStar, Google, In-Person Driving


115

UNIVERSITY CITY

ACTIVITY HUBS

Delmar Blvd / North & South Rd

Aerial Map

U. City Shul

Torah Prep School

• Pedal Pedal • Stretch

PURE Home Design

• • • • • • •

The Center for Mind, Body, Spirit The Only Facial Big River Running Company Eppley’s Boxing & Kickboxing Frida’s Essentials Alterations & Tailoring Diego’s Mexican Restaurant

PAPERDOLLS BARBER SHOP

Clayton Cleaners

N

Source: CoStar, Google, In-Person Driving


116

UNIVERSITY CITY

ACTIVITY HUBS

Forsyth Blvd / Lindell Blvd

Aerial Map

Vacant Fitness Center North of Map (Not Pictured) 30,814 SF Building Not Marketed on CoStar Owned by Washington University No sign marketing the vacant space and not advertised on Costar. Building owned by STL City Wide, LLC

• Salon B • Poco Hair Co • VACANT SPACE

• Original J’s Tex-Mex BBQ • evolv

Woodard’s Forsyth BP

Colleen’s Cookies

• Amhurst Corporation • VACANT SPACE

Sign up for Retail/Office space at $1,100/Month. Owned & listed by Barron Realty but not advertised on CoStar.

Source: CoStar, Google, In-Person Driving

Krueger’s

N


117

UNIVERSITY CITY

ACTIVITY HUBS

Delmar Blvd / Old Bonhomme Rd

Aerial Map • • • • • • •

Rosette Beauty Studio TLC Grooming The Perfect Fit Edible Arrangements Stein Framing Alice C. Lang, PCA Home Instead • RT Thomas Insurance • Berger Chiropractic

La Pizza

Agudas Israel Synagogue Delta Exteriors

Regal Cleaners

University Gardens

Catalyst Strength

Chabad of Greater St. Louis

N

Source: CoStar, Google, In-Person Driving


118

UNIVERSITY CITY

ACTIVITY HUBS

Midland Blvd / Vernon Ave

Aerial Map

Heman Park Dr. J’s Family Weight Loss Program/Pediatrics

AW Healthcare

AW Healthcare

Miller Brothers Auto Service

Classic Coin Laundry

Kismet Pharmacy & General Store

Source: CoStar, Google, In-Person Driving

N


119

UNIVERSITY CITY

ACTIVITY HUBS

McKnight Blvd / Old Bonhomme Rd

Aerial Map

McKnight Blvd

H.F. Epstein Hebrew Academy

Old Bonhomme Rd

Ruth Park Golf Course

Groby Rd

Alliance Francaise de St. Louis School Multi-Tenant Retail/Office Building • Tangerine Salon • Pilates • Dentist • Joni Realty Co. • Bernstein Real Estate • Lake Consulting Firm • Essential Health • McCarthy & Company

Source: CoStar, Google, In-Person Driving

N


120

UNIVERSITY CITY

ACTIVITY HUBS

Olive Blvd / Woodson Rd

Aerial Map • • •

Global Industries Long Term Care Rx St. Louis Staffing

Mind’s Eye Group Wiese

Wiese

Market at Olive

Wiese

Torah Prep School for Girls

Intertek Herman Auto Tops

Olive Blvd Source: CoStar, Google, In-Person Driving

St. Andrew Kim Korean Catholic Church

City Lights Church

Woodson Rd

Public Storage • •

Proposed Development 50 AC Retail-Oriented MixedUse Development

• • • • • • • • • • • • •

Allstar Tattoo Infinity Styles Metro PCS Kim Long Jewelers St. Louis Fish & Chicken Grill East Seoul Oriental Grocery St. Louis Smoke Shop Beijing Herbs & Arts Pho Long Restaurant De Palm Tree Restaurant H&R Block American Cleaners Nobu’s Japanese Restaurant

N


121

UNIVERSITY CITY

RESIDENTIAL REAL ESTATE

University City

Transactions Analysis – Last 60 Months Property Type

# of Transactions

Total Value

Average Value

Single Family Sales (Per Year)

56

$13,945,330

$249,024

93

$108,482,207

$1,166,475

1

$220,100

$220,100

18 1142

$273,839 $219,335,004

$15,213 $192,062

Condominium Unit (Residential) Multi-Family Dwellings Planned Unit Development (Pud) (Residential) Residential-Vacant Land Single Family Residential

Single Family Residential - Breakdown

# of Transactions

Total Value

Average Value

2015

98

$5,148,616

$52,536.90

2016

139

$7,581,431

$54,542.67

2017

94

$5,098,985

$54,244.52

2018

151

$16,812,428

$111,340.58

2019

660

$184,693,544

$279,838.70

TOTAL

1,142

$219,335,004

$192,062.18

Price Per Building SF

Transferred Value per Building SF ($/SF)

$800.00 $700.00 $600.00 $500.00 $400.00 $300.00 $200.00 $100.00 $0.00 6/10/2014

12/27/2014

7/15/2015

1/31/2016

Source: LandVision; Residential Property Types, Transactions with Values over $1

8/18/2016

3/6/2017

9/22/2017

4/10/2018

10/27/2018

5/15/2019

12/1/2019

6/18/2020


122

UNIVERSITY CITY

RESIDENTIAL REAL ESTATE Transactions Analysis – Last 60 Months

Sale Price per Building SF

Map Key – Property Type Single Family Residential Multi-Family Dwellings Condominium Unit Residential (Vacant Land) Planned Unit Development (PUD) Source: LandVision; Residential Property Types, Transactions with Values over $1

University City


123

UNIVERSITY CITY

RESIDENTIAL REAL ESTATE Zillow – On the Market

Source: Zillow

University City


124

UNIVERSITY CITY

RESIDENTIAL REAL ESTATE Zillow – Home Value Index

Source: Zillow

University City


125

UNIVERSITY CITY

RESIDENTIAL REAL ESTATE Zillow – Rentals Analysis

Source: Zillow

University City


126

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEVELOPMENT NOTES

Washington University

Overall Impact on the Region – 2018 Numbers SOURCE: Washington University, • Direct Spending = $2.5 Billion Economic and Community Impact FY2018 Report & Annual • Supported 46,000 jobs in the MSA Highlights 2018-2019 • Employs 15,500 • $1.4 Billion in Salaries • Local spending by out-of-town students = $166.8 Million • Purchasing and Construction = $518 Million • $229 Million in Construction • $289 Million in local purchasing of Goods and Services • $167 Million in Student Spending in the Region • 15,937 Total Student Enrollment (Fall 2018) • 90% of undergraduates are from out of state • 65% come from more than 500 miles away • 24.7% Alumni live and work in St. Louis Source: Washington University, Economic and Community Impact FY2018 Report & Annual Highlights 2018-2019


127

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEVELOPMENT NOTES

Washington University

Medical & Educational Impact on the Region – 2018 Numbers Washington University, • Washington University School of Medicine / SOURCE: Economic and Community Impact FY2018 Report & Annual • Alvin J. Siteman Cancer Center Highlights 2018-2019 • 1,600,382 total patient visits • 1,164,502 outpatient • 495,880 inpatient • $3.5 Million Washington University investment in Metro passes • 500 Teacher participants in STEMpact Teacher Quality Institute • 3,200 Teachers who participated in Institute for School Partnership Programs • 100,000 K-8 students learning the MySci curriculum • 55 Faculty outreach programs in local schools • 4,915 College Advising Corps advising sessions with high school students

Source: Washington University, Economic and Community Impact FY2018 Report & Annual Highlights 2018-2019


128

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET INDICATORS

Tax Analysis

Principal Property Taxpayers – 2019* Rank

Taxpayer

Taxable Assessed Value (in thousands)

% of Total Taxable Assessed Value

1

Gatesworth LLC (senior living)

$8,074

1.24%

2

The District St. Louis (apartments)

$4,999

0.77%

3

Mansions on the Plaza LP (apartments)

$4,275

0.66%

4

Mansions on the Plaza II LLP (apartments)

$4,085

0.63%

5

Wyncrest St. Louis LP (apartments)

$4,042

0.62%

6

Missouri American Water Co.

$4,015

0.62%

7

MPAL Real Estate LLC (Gatesworth)

$2,864

0.44%

8

Brentmoor Holdings (senior living)

$2,582

0.40%

9

1800 Highland CDC LLC (6665 & 6667 Delmar-Louis London Bldg.-Club Fitness & Capacity)

$1,991

0.31%

10

MCW Rd. University City Square LLC (Schnucks Plaza)

$1,894

0.29%

$38,821

5.96%

TOTAL *Based on University City Records, 2019 Financial Statement

Source: University City Records; St. Louis County Assessor


129

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET INDICATORS

Tax Analysis

Total Direct Tax Rate Residential

Commercial

Personal Property

Agricultural

2009

0.922%

1.069%

1.229%

0%

1.4

2010

0.987%

1.114%

1.211%

0%

1.2

2011

0.761%

0.866%

0.923%

0%

2012

0.753%

0.892%

0.909%

0%

2013

0.753%

0.776%

0.909%

0%

2014

0.753%

0.776%

0.909%

0%

2015

0.753%

0.731%

0.879%

0%

2016

0.734%

0.694%

0.875%

0%

2017

0.690%

0.647%

0.875%

0%

0.2

2018

0.690%

0.647%

0.875%

0%

0.0

2019

0.689%

0.662%

0.875%

0%

Tax Rate Percentage

Total Direct Tax Rate

1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4

2009

Sales Tax Collections

(Ended June 30)

City Direct Rate

St. Louis County

State of Missouri

Total Sales Tax Rate

2009

1.5%

2.1%

4.225%

7.825%

9,543

2010

1.5%

2.7%

4.225%

8.425%

9,095

2011

1.5%

2.7%

4.225%

8.425%

9,332

2012

1.5%

2.7%

4.225%

8.425%

9,518

2013

1.5%

2.7%

4.225%

8.425%

9,236

2014

1.5%

2.888%

4.225%

8.613%

9,779

2015

1.5%

2.888%

4.225%

8.613%

10,006

2016

1.5%

2.888%

4.225%

8.613%

10,303

2017

1.5%

2.888%

4.225%

8.613%

10,716

2018

1.5%

3.388%

4.225%

9.113%

12,308

2019

1.5%

3.513%

4.225%

9.238%

12,707

Source: University City Records; St. Louis County Assessor

2011

2012

Residential

Sales Tax Rates, Direct and Overlapping

2013

2014

2015

Commercial

2016

2017

2018

2019

Personal Property

Sales Tax Collections

(in thousands)

Expressed in Thousands

Fiscal Year

2010

14,000

20%

12,000

15%

10,000

10%

8,000

5%

6,000

0%

4,000

-5%

2,000

Percent Change Year-over-Year

Fiscal Year

(Ended June 30)

-10%

0 2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

Sales Tax

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

% Change

Notes: The City levies a sales tax of one-half percent (0.50%) for the purpose of parks and storm water, one-half percent (0.50%) for the purpose of capital improvements, one-quarter (0.25%) for the purpose of fire services, and one-quarter (0.25%) for the purpose of economic development. Additionally, the City receives a portion of 1% sales tax (included in the rates shown above) levied by St. Louis County. The City participates in the county-wide sales tax sharing pool, which is generally distributed based on population.


130

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET INDICATORS

Tax Analysis

Property Tax Rates – Direct & Overlapping Governments (Select) Rates States per $100 of Assessed Valuation

1.4

1.2

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0 City of University City

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

0.9220

0.9870

0.7610

0.7530

0.7530

0.7530

0.7530

0.7340

0.7340

0.6900

0.6890 0.4890

St. Louis County

0.5580

0.5230

0.5230

0.5230

0.5230

0.5230

0.5230

0.5150

0.5150

0.4890

Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District

0.0000

0.0000

0.0790

0.0818

0.0635

0.0874

0.0879

0.0876

0.1196

0.1159

0.1170

Metropolitan Zoological Park and Museum District

0.2344

0.2493

0.2546

0.2671

0.2684

0.2797

0.2797

0.2777

0.2795

0.2694

0.2724

St. Louis Community College

0.2013

0.2136

0.2179

0.2200

0.2200

0.2200

0.2200

0.2176

0.2185

0.2112

0.2129

Sheltered Workshop

0.6900

0.0740

0.0790

0.0840

0.0840

0.0890

0.0900

0.0880

0.0880

0.0840

0.0840

Special School District

0.9184

0.9384

0.9950

1.0125

1.0123

1.2400

1.2609

1.2348

1.2409

1.1912

1.1980

Roads and Bridges

0.0000

0.0000

0.1050

0.1050

0.1050

0.1050

0.1050

0.1030

0.1030

0.0980

0.0980

University City Library

0.0000

0.0000

0.2380

0.2410

0.2480

0.2660

0.2660

0.2590

0.2590

0.2460

0.1920

University City School District Rates States per $100 of Assessed Valuation

5.5 5.0 4.5 4.0 3.5 2009 Source: University City Records; St. Louis County Assessor

2010

2011

2012

Note: Rates listed above are for residential property.

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019


131

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET INDICATORS

Tax Analysis

Assessed Value and Estimated Actual Value of Taxable Property Fiscal Year

Total Assessed Estimated Actual Value Taxable Value

Assessed Value As a % Of Estimated Actual Taxable Value

(Ended June 30)

Real Property

Personal Property

Railroad & Utilities

2009

$534,918

$60,788

$8,324

$604,030

$3,059,619

19.74%

2010

$537,172

$52,639

$8,474

$598,285

$2,911,594

20.55%

2011

$537,029

$53,033

$8,474

$598,536

$2,885,607

20.74%

2012

$532,495

$53,577

$9,129

$595,201

$2,886,720

20.62%

2013

$530,263

$57,676

$8,993

$596,932

$2,887,085

20.68%

2014

$497,822

$57,629

$9,332

$564,783

$2,718,366

20.78%

2015

$500,437

$59,837

$9,608

$569,882

$2,734,643

20.84%

2016

$519,947

$60,764

$10,616

$591,327

$3,087,680

19.15%

2017

$523,841

$62,139

$9,770

$595,750

$3,189,787

18.68%

2018

$575,383

$61,830

$9,658

$646,871

$3,112,448

20.78%

2019

$580,505

$63,547

$7,549

$651,601

$3,145,473

20.72%

Percent Change (Year-over-Year) 2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

Percent Change Year-over-Year Fiscal Year

(Ended June 30)

Real Property

Personal Property

Railroad & Utilities

2010

0.42%

-13.41%

1.80%

-0.95%

-4.84%

2011

-0.03%

0.75%

0.00%

0.04%

-0.89%

2012

-0.84%

1.03%

7.73%

-0.56%

0.04%

2013

-0.42%

7.65%

-1.49%

0.29%

0.01%

2014

-6.12%

-0.08%

3.77%

-5.39%

-5.84%

2015

0.53%

3.83%

2.96%

0.90%

0.60%

2016

3.90%

1.55%

10.49%

3.76%

12.91%

2017

0.75%

2.26%

-7.97%

0.75%

3.31%

2018

9.84%

-0.50%

-1.15%

8.58%

-2.42%

2019

0.89%

2.78%

-21.84%

0.73%

1.06%

Change from 2009 to 2018

7.56%

1.71%

16.03%

7.09%

2.81%

Source: University City Records; St. Louis County Assessor

2015

Total Assessed Estimated Actual Value Taxable Value

2016

Real Property 2017 Personal Property 2018

Railroad & Utilities Total Taxable Assessed Value Estimated Actual -30.00% Taxable Value

2019

-20.00%

-10.00%

0.00%

10.00%

Notes: Assessments are based on January 1st valuations. Assessed valuations are determined and certified by the Assessor of St. Louis County. Railroad and Utilities are State Assessed. Locally assessed are included in Real and Personal. Laclede Gas Company and St. Louis County Water Company are included with personal assessments as they are local concerns.

20.00%


132

UNIVERSITY CITY

MARKET INDICATORS

Operating Indicators

Finance & Community Development Function/ Program

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

Business licenses issued

855

850

635

652

825

750

674

748

701

707

763

Zoning applications processed

30

24

34

29

46

41

39

19

28

53

13

Construction permits issued

4,905

4,614

3,760

4,299

5,097

5,118

9,998

4,266

N/A

3,716

3,941

Occupancy permits issued

2,789

2,983

3,410

3,847

3,806

3,812

8,389

3,236

N/A

2,864

3,371

Property inspections (existing structures)

9,745

10,129

15,844

6,698

10,764

7,066

14,856

6,483

13,000

5,684

5,754

Construction inspections

10,384

9,630

9,405

8,141

7,100

10,498

24,756

9,000

9,000

8,943

10,197

Environmental inspections

5,083

8,133

8,330

3,806

2,847

2,658

538

4,524

N/A

4,917

4,671

Vacant buildings registered

140

279

155

134

142

1,747

118

189

150

55

54

2012

2013

Percent Change Year-over-Year Function/ Program Business licenses issued

2010

2011

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

% Change from 2009-2019

-0.58%

-25.29%

2.68%

26.53%

-9.09%

-10.13%

10.98%

-6.28%

0.86%

7.92%

-10.76%

-20.00%

41.67%

-14.71%

58.62%

-10.87%

-4.88%

-51.28%

47.37%

89.29%

-75.47%

-56.67%

Construction permits issued

-5.93%

-18.51%

14.34%

18.56%

0.41%

95.35%

-57.33%

-100.00%

N/A

6.05%

-19.65%

Occupancy permits issued

6.96%

14.31%

12.82%

-1.07%

0.16%

120.07%

-61.43%

-100.00%

N/A

17.70%

20.87%

Property inspections (existing structures)

3.94%

56.42%

-57.73%

60.70%

-34.36%

110.25%

-56.36%

100.52%

-56.28%

1.23%

-40.95%

Construction inspections

-7.26%

-2.34%

-13.44%

-12.79%

47.86%

135.82%

-63.65%

0.00%

-0.63%

14.02%

-1.80%

Environmental inspections

60.00%

2.42%

-54.31%

-25.20%

-6.64%

-79.76%

740.89%

N/A

N/A

-5.00%

-8.11%

Vacant buildings registered

99.29%

-44.44%

-13.55%

5.97%

1130.28%

-93.25%

60.17%

-20.63%

-63.33%

-1.82%

-61.43%

Zoning applications processed

40% Percent Change from 2009 to 2019

2014

20.87%

20% 0% -20%

-1.80%

-10.76%

-19.65%

-40%

-8.11%

-40.95%

-60%

-56.67%

-80% Business licenses issued

Zoning applications Construction permits issued Occupancy permits issued processed Source: City of University City Annual Administrative Reports and Budget Reports, 2009 - 2019

-61.43% Property inspections (existing structures)

Construction inspections

Environmental inspections Vacant buildings registered


133

UNIVERSITY CITY

Addendum


134

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS

“The Opportunity Atlas”

What is The Opportunity Atlas? This study attempts to answer the question “which neighborhoods in America offer children the best chance to rise out of poverty?” The Opportunity Atlas answers this question using anonymous data following 20 million Americans from childhood to their mid-30s. The objective of the Opportunity Atlas is to measure the average outcomes (e.g., earnings) of children who grow up in each neighborhood in America, by demographic subgroup (race, gender, and parental income). The site puts focus on the neighborhoods where people grew up rather than where they live as adults because recent studies have established that the neighborhood in which a child grows up has substantial causal effects on his or her prospects of upward mobility, whereas where one lives as an adult has smaller effects.

Source/Disclosure: The Opportunity Atlas is an initial release of social mobility data, the result of a collaboration between researchers at the Census Bureau, Harvard University, and Brown University. While the estimates in the Opportunity Atlas are not provisional, we are still testing aspects of the research product, including census.gov integration, planned annual data refreshes, and variable additions. Any opinions and conclusions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Census Bureau. All results have been reviewed to ensure that no confidential information is disclosed. The statistical summaries reported in this paper have been cleared by the Census Bureau's Disclosure Review Board release authorization number CBDRB-FY18-319. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Opportunity Insights, https://www.opportunityatlas.org/


135

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS

“The Opportunity Atlas”

Children’s Outcome in Adulthood by Neighborhood Where They Grew Up – Household Income

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Opportunity Insights, https://www.opportunityatlas.org/

Average annual household income in 2014-2015 for children (not in their mid-30s) who grew up in this area. (Source: Federal income tax records)


136

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS

“The Opportunity Atlas”

Children’s Outcome in Adulthood by Neighborhood Where They Grew Up – Household Income

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Opportunity Insights, https://www.opportunityatlas.org/

Average annual household income in 2014-2015 for children (not in their mid-30s) who grew up in this area. (Source: Federal income tax records)


137

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS

“The Opportunity Atlas”

Children’s Outcome in Adulthood by Neighborhood Where They Grew Up – Household Income

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Opportunity Insights, https://www.opportunityatlas.org/

Average annual household income in 2014-2015 for children (not in their mid-30s) who grew up in this area. (Source: Federal income tax records)


138

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS

“The Opportunity Atlas”

Children’s Outcome in Adulthood by Neighborhood Where They Grew Up – Household Income

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Opportunity Insights, https://www.opportunityatlas.org/

Average annual household income in 2014-2015 for children (not in their mid-30s) who grew up in this area. (Source: Federal income tax records)


139

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS

“The Opportunity Atlas”

Children’s Outcome in Adulthood by Neighborhood Where They Grew Up – Household Income

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Opportunity Insights, https://www.opportunityatlas.org/

Average annual household income in 2014-2015 for children (not in their mid-30s) who grew up in this area. (Source: Federal income tax records)


140

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS

“The Opportunity Atlas”

Children’s Outcome in Adulthood by Neighborhood Where They Grew Up – Household Income

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Opportunity Insights, https://www.opportunityatlas.org/

Average annual household income in 2014-2015 for children (not in their mid-30s) who grew up in this area. (Source: Federal income tax records)


141

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS

“The Opportunity Atlas”

Children’s Outcome in Adulthood by Neighborhood Where They Grew Up – Incarceration Rate

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Opportunity Insights, https://www.opportunityatlas.org/

Fraction of children who grew up in this area who were in prison or jail on April 1, 2010. (Source: 2010 Decennial Census)


142

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS

“The Opportunity Atlas”

Children’s Outcome in Adulthood by Neighborhood Where They Grew Up – Incarceration Rate

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Opportunity Insights, https://www.opportunityatlas.org/

Fraction of children who grew up in this area who were in prison or jail on April 1, 2010. (Source: 2010 Decennial Census)


143

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS

“The Opportunity Atlas”

Children’s Outcome in Adulthood by Neighborhood Where They Grew Up – Incarceration Rate

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Opportunity Insights, https://www.opportunityatlas.org/

Fraction of children who grew up in this area who were in prison or jail on April 1, 2010. (Source: 2010 Decennial Census)


144

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS

“The Opportunity Atlas”

Children’s Outcome in Adulthood by Neighborhood Where They Grew Up – Incarceration Rate

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Opportunity Insights, https://www.opportunityatlas.org/

Fraction of children who grew up in this area who were in prison or jail on April 1, 2010. (Source: 2010 Decennial Census)


145

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS

“The Opportunity Atlas”

Children’s Outcome in Adulthood by Neighborhood Where They Grew Up – Incarceration Rate

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Opportunity Insights, https://www.opportunityatlas.org/

Fraction of children who grew up in this area who were in prison or jail on April 1, 2010. (Source: 2010 Decennial Census)


146

UNIVERSITY CITY

DEMOGRAPHICS

“The Opportunity Atlas”

Children’s Outcome in Adulthood by Neighborhood Where They Grew Up – Incarceration Rate

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Opportunity Insights, https://www.opportunityatlas.org/

Fraction of children who grew up in this area who were in prison or jail on April 1, 2010. (Source: 2010 Decennial Census)


UNIVERSITY CITY

March 2020 PREPARED BY Allison Gray Senior Director of Research and Marketing Colliers International

Copyright Š 2020 Colliers International. Information herein has been obtained from sources deemed reliable, however its accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The user is required to conduct their own due diligence and verification.


This page intentionally left blank.



Turn static files into dynamic content formats.

Create a flipbook
Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.