CTEDD|IUS Portfolio

T E EN NVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITEINVITEINVITE EN T M EM NT MIMPLEME ET PLEMEN IMPLEME E EN NT T PL L PL M M P M IINVITE E E INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE I EN M IM TNT PL M IMPLEME T I IMPLEME NT IM IMPLEME NT EN T LE TE EN TE E INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITEAINVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE N P M E T A E M E AT IG IM EN M T T TIG TE IG LE PL NT MIMPLEME IMPLEME TNT IMPLEME ST S E A T N N NT IMPLEME E P E L S ENT IG EINVITEPINVITE E V VITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE V INVITE TE INVITE INVITE INVITEIMINVITE EINVITE EN IM M M IN INVITE ES IN ST PL M M T GA NV E E V E I I I E T E E T V T T IM IMPLEME PL IN AT EN IMPLEME PL IN E NTINVITE N ES EN GA NT PL IMPLEME IINVITE T INVITE NVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITEEINVITE IG IMPLEME VINVITE M EINVITE EINVITE ENT AT E IM IM MNT IN ST IM M ST AT IG AT EN AT LE T VE PL VE IG ST M LE TIG E IMPLEME IG T P N N T N E I E I E T T S P T T S E INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE V INVITE T NT IMPLEME E M A INVITE INVITE S INVITE NT IMPLEME NT IIMPLEME E INVITE AT INVITE E INVITE N EN NT IMPLEME VE IN M IM PL VE VE ENT EN IG T TIG AT EN AT IN E EM IN IN IM N M M LE IG M ST ES AT INVITE T L TIG INVITE INVITE E E E E P E V E T G TE TE INVITEAINVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE S S T E I IMPLEME V PE IN A N T IMPLEME NT E PL NT PL NT IM IN PL AT VE VE EM NT IMPLEME ST ENT IMPLEME IG IM T IMPLEME AT TIG T IN IG IN AT IM IM E EN M VE IM ST PL N IG INVITE E E INVITE ST INVITE E INVITE IN AT INVITE TIG INVITE T EN NVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITEME VE LE IM EEM ST IMPLEME AT INVITE AT IG AT N VE ES P IN L T E T G G G N T NT I V T E E I IMPLEME I E A I V EMNT NT S P IMPLEME MNT T T T T N T IMPLEME L N G I N N L E I M I E I S A S S M N V P E P E E AT E STI INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE VE IN VE E EINVITE VE TIG AT IM IM E IN PL IN T IN EM VE IMPLEME ATEM E TIG ES EM AT TIG IN NTNT IMPLEME IGPL E AT TE NT PL ES T EN NTIM IMPLEME NV NT T PL IMPLEME ES AT INVITE E E ST IMINVITE TIG M GAINVITE IINVITE T M INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE E VINVITE TIGINVITE NV INVITE T I I N E G S E I M I EN T M A S N T I E V I E T A E T S AT VE EN IN VE M IG PLE N TIG PL ES EM AT IG IN TE E VE M T IMPLEME S E IN V T E NT A L IMPLEME G T N NT S M IMPLEME I E E I NT IMPLEME S INVITE I A E PNT IN INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE INVITE IG INVITE T V IM ATE EM PL VE E ST IG VE AT PL IN E ST IM E IN L AT IM IN EN VE ST AT T IM T TIG VE AT TIG MP IG IN VE N IN INVITE IMPLEME EM ES INVITE NT IMPLEME IE TNT IMPLEME TIG INVITE INVITEINVITE INVITE ST ES E TE TE EN TIG INVITE IN ENT T V L S A T A E V N S T E E N A V P I A IN IG E VE EM AT EN VE EM IG TIG IN AT IG M IM IN ST IN IG E ST E ES PL ST PL TIG INVITE EM E VE LE IMPLEME ST EINVITEVEINVITEATINVITE AT IMPLEME NV VE IM NTIM IN PNT ES AT TE IG TE AT PL VE IG IN IN A T A M T IG G N NV I I I M S G I T S I E I IG E ST E VE ES AT VE ST ST AT E E IN AT VE IN NV VE AT VE E TIG AT TIG IG IN IN IG IN AT ES TE E ST ES TIG G V A T ST E V I S E A N E G E T V I I IN E V S VE AT IG IN AT ST IN AT E IN IG VE E ST IG E VE AT IN ST E TIG AT ST VE INFE IN AT AT IN TIG T OR NVE ES E VE IG TIG G S V T I E I S IN INF IGA E A M T T ST IN E V E A G S E T V I O T N V S RM TE I IG A IN VE ST IN E VE E E ININ ST IN I TIG VE FO GA I AT E AT AT N VE IN N RMSTI ESF IG AT IN TIG TIG TEFOR INV ORTM E IN TE IG ST S E S A NF V A M E T E E E FO S IG V OR IN A V V IG AT IN IG IN M IN VE ST RM TE ST ININFO STIG AI E E ST E IVE VE AT AT INNFO TIG NFOE FO VE ER AT IN TE IG IG RSM IN RM T RM INV M TIG A T T E A S S IG S G I E E E T I E N E INFINV I T E FO V V V S AT AT OR ES NFOR AT N IN IN OR IR VE IG IG M E E IN E M NV IN STIGM ST IM ST INF AT AT ATF FVO E VE VE GIN OR IG IG I O N E R I T T N T R N I T FO M S M E S S AM RM INFI EI E AT VE VE TIG AT OR INV NFEO IN IN SR E TIG INF M E E M STIG AT ES OR INFINV INF AT AT IG V E T M G G I I OR NV IN OR S MI M ST ST INF VE VE IN VE OR INF IN IN M OR M

center for transportation, equity, decisions & dollars institute of urban studies

ABOUT

03

COMPREHENSIVE STUDY

TRANSPORTATION EQUITY IN DALLAS

DOES LOCATION MATTER? AFFORDABILITY STUDY

DALLAS LOVE FIELD

HIGHEST & BEST USE STUDY

VICKERY MEADOW

STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN

GRANBURY ISD

HIGHEST & BEST USE STUDY

DALLAS EXECUTIVE AIRPORT LAND USE STUDY

CITY OF KEENE

COMPREHENSIVE PLAN

PLAN4HEALTH

FOOD DESERT STUDY

NORTH TEXAS COMMISSION

DEVELOPMENT DASHBOARD

DOWNTOWN DALLAS WALKABILITY STUDY

07 11 15 19 23 27 31 35 39 43

IN

VIT

E

As the a n e rep Insti utral t r ut br e pu bli sent e co oker no n a c , top npro , bu tive ven es s s f ics it ine f rom cit rel sec s ie tor s, a a nd s a on s. G ted ide vary athe to im roun r nti p i d fy ng th ings rovi u n mu wh pon f em g oc t at go us e als ually s a it n wi d ag ll t , as ak we reed e ll the t m. o ac as hie ve

IN Th

VE

ST

IG

e I n all stit ute n e d ec emo cess team g o a wa nom raph ry d gat he ics a ter ics rs an , , g ta o d e qual equ row n ity ity va , a , a th, lig luat es nd s ir an ht co o mm of ga the d for d the ata th un ity r in inp ed ut.

AT

E

ABOUT

AREAS OF FOCUS URBAN EQ U IT Y PLAN NING HOUS ING TRANS P O RTAT IO N ECONO M IC DE V E LO P M E NT POLIC Y A NA LYS IS PUBLIC H EA LT H SUSTA INA B LE GROWT H BIG DATA SMART CIT IES

IN

FO

RM

Th on e In lin s e a titu te r t co ntr vide icles prod o i u , w s b aw eb ces are ute t , etc s . t o r ite ne th h s, im e di ss a aisin at sc p n g r d vit o u ali ving ssio elev publ ic ty a the n a of to rou ting h t g he e ac en nd cit alth ref tion era y a t ine e nd an in pla d d infor ord ev m nn ed er ing elo p sc en and ari os .

IN

VE

ST

IGA

Th e pla Inst itu ns wi tha te th th ma t e na ass n pr ist ac o gin the vide g g an hiev ro cit s su d en ing y eq wth sta vir an ui re o i d inf vita nabi nme ty l nta t h r r a s t r l i z a t i t y, urb l ion ou uc gh tur a , g e, s re n an d o cena and en the rio mo bu r m r ild e ea ing ns .

TE

5

SHIMA HAMIDI PhD e shima.hamidi@uta.edu t 817-272-2139 @hamidi_shima

DAVID WEINREICH PhD e

david.weinreich@uta.edu t 817-272-9145

KOKO DILLON PhD e harya.dillon@uta.edu t 817-272-9145

AABIYA NOMAN BAQAI e aabiyanoman.baqai@ uta.edu

t 817-272-5138 @aabiyabagai

e IUS@.uta.edu t 817-272-2139

AHOURA ZANDIATASHBAR e ahoura.zandiatashbar@ uta.edu

t 817-272-2139 @ahoura_z

DIRECTOR

ABOUT CONTACT

POSTDOCTORAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATE

University of Texas at Arlington CAPPA Building Suite 103 601 West Nedderman Drive Arlington, TX 76019 POSTDOCTORAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATE

PROGRAM MANAGER

w w w . c t e d d . u t a . e d u

SPECIAL PROGRAM COORDINATOR

COMMUNICATIONS

t 817.272.2139 e C-TEDD@uta.edu

www.uta.edu/cappa/research/ius/

t 817.272.2139 e IUS@uta.edu

7

COMPREHENSIVE STUDY

TRANSPORTATION EQUITY IN DALLAS LOCATION: DALLAS, TX COMPLETION: 2017

9

Dallas is the 9th most populous city in the U.S. and the largest city in the Dallas FortWorth metropolitan area. Dallas, as one of the pilot cities for the 100 Resilient Cities network, has its own resilience challenges.

Two of the resiliency factors that need to be addressed in this city are economic disparity and transportation.

Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) is a regional transit agency serving thirteen cities including Dallas with rail, bus, paratransit, and ride share services. Also, it provides services to DFW International Airport and Fort Worth via the Trinity Railway Express (TRE) in collaboration with the Fort Worth Transportation Authority (The T). Hence, more than 50% of DART users are Dallas residents. Despite all of these facts, DART ranks 23 out of 39 large and medium sized transit agencies in the U.S. in terms of bus passenger miles per capita (APTA, 2014).

A comparison of DART to other top transit agencies demonstrates that DART’s overall ridership relative to its size is below the average (among the lowest). What could be the reason? Is it because transit is not affordable in Dallas? Is it because of the quality and hours of transit service, or perhaps is it due to the spatial distribution of the DART transit system? How many of the transit dependent areas in Dallas are covered by DART? This study seeks to address these questions by quantifying various components of the transit system.

In order to address these challenges, the first step is identifying the transit dependent population as the key users of transit.

Quantifying and identifying the transit dependent core where the majority of the transit dependent population lives along with employment centers would be critical for a better understanding of potential spatial mismatch for disadvantaged populations in Dallas.

11

D O E S L O C AT I O N M AT T E R ?

AFFORDABILITY STUDY LOCATION: DALLAS, TX COMPLETION: 2017

13

Income inequality has emerged as one of the most important issues of our time (Ewing, et al., 2016). Lower intergenerational mobility has been prevalent in the United States over Europe and Canada (DeParle 2012; Pistolesi, 2009; Neckerman 2007; Isaacs et al., 2008). Moreover, 39% of children born to parents in the top fifth income distribution will continue to remain in the top fifth, while 42% of children born to parents in the bottom fifth income distribution tend to remain in that income distribution (Isaacs et al., 2008).

This has raised the attention of policy makers in an effort to provide improved access to opportunity for residents.

It is widely known that transportation plays an important role in shaping residential location and economic outcomes especially for lowincome households as they have limited transportation mobility and inadequate access to job opportunities (Chapple, 2001; Grengs, 2010; Ong & Miller, 2005). During the past few decades, increasing attention has been drawn to the neighborhoods in which families live as they shape their quality of life (de Souza Briggs, 2006; Osypuk, 2010). Neighborhoods should offer enough access to opportunity to sustain residents.

Therefore, it is of high importance for policy makers to understand what neighborhoods offer and lack. This report seeks to identify areas of opportunities and accessibilities for all census blocks in the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan region.

Accessibility refers to the ease of reaching goods, services, activities, and destinations, which together are called opportunities (Litman, 2015) and it involves access to social, economic, educational, and health amenities. It measures access to low- and moderate-wage jobs, services, retail and restaurants, educational facilities, and recreation considering proximity, density, and transit time sheds (Walter & Wang, 2016).

This report generates maps of opportunity that show locations for quality affordable housing in neighborhoods with access to health, education, services, healthy food, and employment opportunities. These maps exhibit “Catalyst Areas� to represent areas with adequate access to major destinations by different modes including walking, public transit, and driving.

15

DALLAS LOVE FIELD HIGHEST & BEST USE STUDY & MARKET ANALYSIS LOCATION: DALLAS, TX COMPLETION: 2017

17

Figure 3.5: Current Trip Scenarios

by Private Vehicle (source: DART and Transit)Transit) Figure 3.5: Current Trip Scenarios

by Private Vehicle (source: DARTGoogle and Google

distance moving, etc.

motel shuttle, and 2.1 percent used an airport shuttle. Only a small share of passengers used a charter bus, DART light rail/bus, or other transportation mode.

The City of Dallas Department of Aviation was considering constructing an entrance off of Loop 12/Northwest Highway into Dallas Love Field Airport and requested an evaluation of the highest and best uses for property neighboring the new access road. The Institute of Urban Studies (IUS) was engaged to provide recommendations for TRANSPORTATION MODE TO DAL AND REASONS potential uses for acquired properties within OF MODE CHOICE the study area and to identify preferred for DAL r business Figure 2.6 displays the DAL passenger’s transportation modes phasing for redevelopment. In addition, the veling for of choice to the airport. Over half of passengers used a private IUS study provides recommendations for ercent of vehicle, such as a car, van, or motorcycle, as their mode of enhancing the value of the redevelopment s (to/from transportation to DAL. The second popular transportation mode Figure 2.5: Purpose of Travel Figure 2.6: DAL Passenger Transportation Mode to the Airport 2 percent through focused branding and innovation was a rental vehicle (23%) followed by a taxi/limousine service (source: 2015 Dallas Love Field Airport Passenger Survey, NCTCOG) (source: 2015 Dallas Love Field Airport Passenger Survey, NCTCOG) medical (8%). Approximately 6.6 percent of passengers used ridesharing district approaches with regard to the ents, long services (Uber, Lyft, Sidecar, etc.), while 3 percent used a hotel/ DALLAS LOVE FIELD contemporary “knowledge-based” HIGHEST AND BEST USE 31 motel shuttle, and 2.1 percent used an airport shuttle. Only a economy. small share of passengers used a charter bus, DART light rail/bus, or other transportation mode.

NCTCOG)

Figure 2.6: DAL Passenger Transportation Mode to the Airport (source: 2015 Dallas Love Field Airport Passenger Survey, NCTCOG)

DALLAS LOVE FIELD HIGHEST AND BEST USE

31

The IUS research and design team utilized a number of datasets and methodologies in order to converge critical project components for the development of potential land use scenarios within the study area. This process involved the evaluation of the legal uses for which the study area properties could be adapted or constructed to produce the highest net returns over an established period of time, using a net present value approach. Each scenario was designed with respect to innovative place and destination branding so as to brand Dallas Love Field as an innovative flight transit center as well as a hub for tourism and traveler investment.

These branding strategies fold into the narrative of the Dallas Love Field Airport Innovation District, as it holds the capacity for increased business travel relative to the growing industries of the region including: Biotechnology and Life Sciences, Information and Electronics, Professional Services, Financial Services, Aerospace and Aviation, Industrial Manufacturing, and Logistics and Transportation. The needs for these industries and anticipated growth patterns were considered in the development mixes with uses that include commercial, retail, office, hospitality, education, and health, along with alternative transportation network recommendations facilitating a more resilient development paradigm. Ultimately this study offers the City of Dallas Department of Aviation a thoughtful approach to development for the study area that synchronizes development innovation and resilience.

19

VICKERY MEADOW STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN LOCATION: DALLAS, TX COMPLETION: 2017

21

Crime & Safety Concerns Walkability Concerns Live (Âź mi. radius) Work School

The City of Dallas Planning & Urban Design Department (P+UD), in conjunction with area stakeholders, requested that the Institute of Urban Studies (IUS) at the University of Texas at Arlington (UTA) facilitate a community engagement process to develop a Strategic Action Plan, including a redevelopment coordination strategy, for the Neighborhood Plus Vickery Meadow Target Area in northeast Dallas.

This plan aims to foster inclusive and sustainable economic growth and area redevelopment through coordination of existing public and private sector efforts and resources, and coordination with stakeholders in re-branding the area to counter existing perceptions of the neighborhood.

The public engagement process entails meeting with stakeholders from within the community and representative jurisdictions through the implementation of Advisory Task Force meetings. The Institute of Urban Studies worked closely with the Advisory Task Force in the orchestration of community meetings and the formulation and administration of the survey. This collaboration was necessary to provide the most appropriate course of action for the public engagement process relative to specific community dynamics and the conveyance of data, conclusions, and action plan items to participants.

Utilizing the data collected from the community survey, in addition to information, comments, and concerns voiced throughout the project process, the research team from the Institute of Urban Studies developed a Strategic Action Plan.

This plan will act as a blueprint for the implementation of action item categories in order to coordinate redevelopment strategies aimed at improving infrastructure, safety and crime prevention, affordable housing, economic and workforce development, and branding and marketing, among others. Action item categories contain successful precedents and case studies, strategies and recommendations, goals and actions, and coordination efforts in order to outline best practices for implementation.

23

GRANBURY ISD

HIGHEST & BEST USE STUDY LOCATION: GRANBURY, TX COMPLETION: 2017

25

Granbury ISD conducted a study of the Highest and Best Use for Granbury ISD owned properties at 600 W. Bridge Street and 600 W. Pearl St. The Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice define highest and best use as “the reasonably probable and legal use of property that is physically possible, appropriately supported, and financially feasible, and that results in the highest value� (The Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, 2002). The goals of the project were to ascertain the legal use to which the properties could logically be adapted, analyze the current market to determine feasibility, profitability, and the highest economic viability, and finally investigating and identifying options that may reasonably be expected to produce the greatest net return over a given period of time.

The project team from the Institute of Urban Studies (IUS) in the College of Architecture, Planning, and Public Affairs at the University of Texas at Arlington analyzed the project scope and properties involved, investigated the adaptive reuse of property, performed site, market, economic, and regulatory analyses, and evaluated financial feasibility.

The project end goal was to produce a final master plan for the site with a detailed highest and best use report for Granbury ISD for further action needed to proceed with implementation.

27

DALLAS EXECUTIVE AIRPORT LAND USE STUDY

LOCATION: DALLAS, TX COMPLETION: 2017

29

In an effort to further enhance the standing of the Dallas Executive Airport (DEA) and its surrounding communities, the Institute of Urban Studies (IUS) performed a series of assessments and analyses to guide and direct future decisions. The land use study was designed to not only incorporate spatial, socio-economic, and infrastructural analyses but also to capture the needs and aspirations of the communities. Public meetings and consultation activities revealed that economic development, sustainability, and improved quality of life were at the forefront of both the Dallas Executive Airport and its communities’ agendas. Working toward a greater integration of airport activities with its communities was another critical target that had been identified; building a strategic and mutually beneficial relationship between the airport and its community was deemed vital. Accordingly, the vision statement of the Dallas Executive Airport emerged as follows: “The Dallas Executive Airport is an attractive, accessible, economic growth hub that contributes to a strong sense of place for South Dallas by empowering surrounding neighborhoods and enhancing sustainability to improve quality of life.”

Following the land use, transportation, socio-demographics, and employment analyses, it appeared that room to improve transportation accessibility existed. Fostering accessibility to the airport was important for the economic development of the airport and its surrounding communities. Situating the airport within the greater transportation system allowed for the identification of modal gaps and opportunities. Similarly, IUS found that the airport and its communities benefited from great locational amenities, notably open spaces and green assets, which could be further leveraged to address connectivity gaps, preservation concerns, and the mitigation of noise pollution. Going beyond site analyses, this study also examined creative practices that could be emulated by the airport. Among others, a possible direction identified was for the airport to position itself as a supportive agent to the community’s development, activities, and well-being.

31

CITY OF KEENE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LOCATION: KEENE, TX COMPLETION: 2017

33

7.3 SUITABILITY ANALYSIS

ult

CHAPTER 7

Figure 7-1. Suitability Analysis Process

Suitability Weightings

Factors

Man Made factors

plan, use well land work ysis. ating

are h as ables de all tion.

Accessibility Factors

Transportation Factors

Natural Factors

mine The type tors. ng a The sical, ulting bility

Weight 5 25 5 5 5 10 5 10 10 10 10

Land Value Land Use Access to Fire Station Access to Police Service Access to City Hall Access to Post Office Access to Schools Access to University Highways and Major Road Minor Road Rail Road Flood Plain Soil Type Slope

Policy Factors

City of Keene Comprehensive Plan | 89

Suitability Maps

High Density Residential

Low Density Residential

Commercial

Mixed Use

Industrial

Future Land Use Scenarios

Institutional

Parks

CAPE: SON COUNTY

y surrounded by the Joshua to the north, o the southwest. The rth, approximately 40 s access to numerous ring cities and in the

EVELOPMENT

Percentage of Millennials

Alvarado

Burleson

Cleburne

Joshua

2,583

1,323

15,326

10,691

1,921

52,387

42.40%

34.20%

37.70%

35.90%

32.20%

33.70%

ne is its demographics. e median age of Keene n North Central Texas 47 Texas cities with a of millennials is also ring cities, as well as in 0-1).

In this report, we considered the population born between 1981 to 2005 (age 10 to 34 in 2015) as millennials (Figure 10-2).

980s to the early 2000s.

Millennials are one of the largest generations in history and they are about to move into their prime spending year. Unique millennial

COUNTY’S C STATUS: the parameters of this ION and researchers define

Johnson County

Keene Total Millennials

Figure 10-1. Millennials in Keene, neighbor cities, and Johnson County (U.S. Census, 2015)

experiences and patterns are reshaping the economy. Borrowing from the Goldman Saches’ research on the millennial effect (2016), millennial spending is predicted to increase by 17% over the next 5 years and their purchasing power will likely overtake that of baby boomers by 2018.

d 36,399 employees and blishments in 2014 (Figure ent grew by 4% with a gain course of one year (2013 to hnson County grew by 30% 10 years (2004 to 2014); the try was Support Activities for 2 jobs. Detailed data of each Appendix D.

wage for Johnson County was is 74% of the average wage th region ($56,381) and 78% f Texas as a whole ($53,218) Keene should seek industries verage wage for the area, it ohnson County’s average pay a cost advantage to potential

Figure 10-5. Average Wage Comparison (BLS, 2014)

Shift-Share Shift-share is a major tool for the analysis of dynamic changes in a local economy by growth rate, industry mix effect, or differential shift.

Differential shift, also called local share effect, is the most popular tool for shift-share analysis, and provides an indication of the competitive advantage of the local economy (Leigh & Blakely, 2013).

and cautious regarding ning to a new set of to products without the nd to prefer carpooling o, millennials are more health and wellness; tending more events, rter, and smoking less

To identify Johnson County’s competitive advantage in the Dallas-Fort Worth region, the IUS research team applied LQ and differential shift analysis with respect to the DFW region and provided matrices of LQ as well as 5-year and 10-year differential shifts of Johnson County. Figure 10-6 shows how to interpret the produced matrix from LQ and Shift-share analysis.

llennials can also be Survey (Appendix A-5). e two things you would serve you better, what eir responses focused various retail, and a

an

CHAPTER 10

to be a guide for shaping policies and initiatives over Job creation, whether stemming from new or existing business, is most likely 20-25 the aim direct to bethe linked tonext the economic strengthsyears; or growth poles of each region. was The most basic, but primary analysis for exploring the importance of regional development of policy decisions in comparative advantage in job creation is location quotients and shift-share analysis.

These two analytical toolswith help to identify patterns within thecommunity local accordance identified economy as noted below. goals and aspirations. The study was a realistic appraisal of what the community Location Quotient (LQ) LQ, sometimes the concentration is a technique used was atcalled the time, factor, a framework for what to identify the concentration of an industry sector in a local economy theto acommunity aspired and a relative larger reference economy.

It is shown asto a ratiobecome between thespecific percentage of employment an industry locally to the percentage set ofinpolicies to help achieve the of employment in the same industry in the region, state, or nation common ensuing (Leigh & Blakely, 2013).community For example, an LQ of 1.5vision indicates thatand the local industry has 50% more jobs per capita than the reference area, goals. i.e. the Dallas-Fort Worth region for this report.

MENT

fordable housing and ng cities and Johnson more affordable food, tation (Figure 9-3).

The report covered the outcomes generated from the baseline analysis and public engagement strategy and was designed to predicate the analyses to be undertaken. It comprised of data gathered for the community outlining existing conditions in the City of Keene, including the demographics and future projections of the city’s population, employment, housing, transportation, education and economic conditions. The concluding section of the report offered a description of the public engagement process by way of which the JOHNSON COUNTY’S ECONOMIC STATUS IN DFW REGION community10.2vision was elicited.

Economic Analysiswas for Johnson County The plan intended

Figure 10-4. Employments in Johnson County (U.S. census and BLS)

nsive Plan

politan areas in Texas f have been supreme d affordability. Texas living in the United partment of Economic

The City of Keene witnessed a great deal of change in and around its environs.

In response to these changes, this comprehensive plan was intended to guide the long-term vision for Keene’s future development. The overall project included a future regional growth analysis, land use plan and projected infrastructure demand analysis report.

City of Keene Comprehensive Plan | 153

Cost of Living

Keene

Alvarado

Joshua

Cleburne

Burleson

Johnson County

Texas

United States

Overall

90

85

97

87

96

96

90

100

Grocery

95

95

95

95

95

95

90

100

Health

123

123

123

123

123

123

97

100

Housing

65

50

86

55

84

85

82

100

Utilities

113

96

100

Transportation

93

93

93

93

93

93

97

100

Miscellaneous

103

113

103

113

103

113

103

113

103

113

103

95

100

Figure 10-3. Cost of Living Comparison (Sperling’s Best Places, 2016)

35

P L A N 4 H E A LT H FOOD DESERT STUDY

LOCATION: TARRANT COUNTY, TX COMPLETION: 2017

37

Food Desert in the Study Area

Food Deserts in the Dallas-Fort Worth Area Source: USDA Economic Research Service, ESRI.

0

1.25 2.5

5 mi

food

Plan4Health Tarrant County was intended to highlight the policies, systems, and environmental changes (PSE) geared toward a healthy quality of life within three zip codes of southeast Fort Worth. These zip codes fall within the peripheries of a food desert; the US Department of Agriculture defines food desert areas as parts of the country lacking the resources of fresh fruits and vegetables critical to healthy, holistic diets, usually found in impoverished areas (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2016).

Improving access to healthy food vendors as well as the availability of produce in corner stores in close proximity to these neighborhoods was a critical goal for these initiatives. In addition, providing convenient, portable options such as mobile food markets and push carts (with proper City approval) within street environments and public areas such as schools, churches, etc. was also a goal. With the help of several health-related coalition partners, the initiative sought to enhance the City’s involvement in the health and livelihood of its residents, catalyzing the establishment of healthy best practices for current and future generations.

The project team from the Institute of Urban Studies (IUS) in the College of Architecture, Planning, and Public Affairs at the University of Texas at Arlington analyzed the project scope area to find the most suitable stores to join the program, created designs and visualizations for the selected stores, and created a detailed report deliverable to the Plan4Health Tarrant County Coalition for final report compilation. The team from the Plan4Health Tarrant County Coalition provided support to the selected stores joining the program including new store layout design, locating high quality fresh food suppliers, promotions, necessary supplies, cooking demonstrations etc.

The project end goal was to have pilot stores that would adopt models of healthy practice and establish a baseline target for surrounding stores to emulate. Reaching the populations within these zip codes with strategies aimed at generating a sustainable impact on not only the environment but also the health and well-being of residents was of paramount priority.

39

NORTH TEXAS COMMISSION

DEVELOPMENT DASHBOARD LOCATION: NORTH TEXAS COMPLETION: 2016

41

EDUCATION ATTAINMENT •

2014 Education Attainment by city, county, North Texas, Texas, and U.S.

•

North Texas has highest percentage (32.8%) of residents over Bachelor's degree than Texas (27%) and U.S. (29.3%).

Percentage of Higher Education Attainment by County Note: Higher Education means Bachelor’s, Master’s and PhD’s degree

Acres of Park •

Acres of Park

•

40 cities have

% of Pa

Acres

WORKFORCE •

2015 labor force, employed and unemployed, and unemployment rate by city, county, MSAs

•

DFW is the 4th largest labor pool, and has the 4th lowest unemployment rate among 30 largest MSAs.

National

per 1,000 Population

The goal of this project was to initiate a data repository for North Texas in order to expand the understanding of the region’s business and residential relocations as well as other purposes.

Top 100 Park System

ks

k, % of park area in the city, and acres per 1000 population

e more park acres per 1000 population than the 2014 national median (9.9 acres per 1000 population).

ark area in City

per 1,000 Population

l Top 100 Park System

ST OF LIVING •

2015 Consumer Price Index of all items, food and beverage, housing, fuel and utilities, apparel, transportation, medical care, recreation, and education by MSAs

•

DFW region is ranked the 3rd lowest on housing, 5th lowest on all items, and 6th lowest on apparel and recreation among 30 MSAs, but cost of food and beverage is little expensive than other 13 MSAs.

ote: Number indicates DFW’s rank among 30 populous MSAS.

43

DOWNTOWN DALLAS WALKABILITY STUDY

LOCATION: DALLAS, TX COMPLETION: 2016

45

The Downtown Dallas Walkability Study evaluated the five urban design qualities identified by Ewing et al. (2006) and four control variables specific to the City of Dallas, as well as six GIS variables, to identify urban design as well as other qualities that affect the physical activities of the people in 402 block faces in the Dallas Downtown Improvement District. This study used a comprehensive incorporation of the experience of observers for imageability, enclosure, human scale, transparency and complexity and control variables and software analysis (GIS and SPSS) to measure density, diversity, design, destination accessibility, distance to transit, demographics, employment concentration and number of parks.

The research team from the Institute of Urban Studies (IUS) in the College of Architecture, Planning and Public Affairs at the University of Texas at Arlington collected data during the summer of 2016 and continued analysis through the fall of 2016 to deliver a highly communicative report from the analysis with graphics and visualizations. The result of the study was a determination of the high and low scored block faces for each quality and provided policy and design recommendations such as improvements for crosswalks, landscape features and furniture, adding public art and creating more diverse colors, and strategies to boost retail activities as well as diverse land use along streets including Elm, Main, Commerce and in low scoring areas. The policy recommendations were intended to improve the quality of life and sense of place for the entire community of users in Downtown Dallas.

47

201

• Ar

ling

0-20

ton • Oa Urb k a • Ar Cliff De n Desi

11

gn ling sign Cen ton Cen ter Ani ic P t e m r a l a l n Ser • An vice net sS ta S Lan traout dU h Com se • Ce Pla p r n ehe lina nsiv Cor • Vi e rido dor r St Com u Use d pre y hen • De Plan sive Sot Lan oD d • Lit i s t tle r i c t Bou • SE Elm D nda istr For ries ict B tW Dev oun o r t h, I elo dar p n ies • La me c. E nt D con kes ash om ide ic boa Ga tew rd ay Pro per ty teg

201

• Ar

ling

1-20

12

ton • Ka Urb ufm an an Des Fea Dow ign sibi n Cen l tow ity • Be ter nD nbr esig ook n & Tar get Ind ust ry

PROJECT TIMELINE

• Ar

201 ling

ton • Al Urb ed an Des • Br o Mast i

2-20

er P gn azo Cen ria ark Fea sP ter ty o l a s ibili n f Pa ty W lest ate ine r Pa Tra rk inin g

13

• Ci

201

• Ar

ling

3-20

ton • Ea Urb st an Des • Gr Texas i

14

gn CO anb Cen GS ury ter trat ED ty o e CS g i f c Pilo trat Pla P l a egi t Po n n cP int lan • Sa Com gin p reh aw • Ci ens Ma ty ive ste r Pa • Gr of Irvin rks gF ays Pla e o a nC n sibi fare oun lity Pla Stu ty R n • Ci d M y AT ty hor • Ci of Wax oug aha ty o hchie f Pa Pla lest Tra n ine il P lan Com • Em pre erg hen ing Cor sive Ma po rke ts D • Ne ration eve ig lop •TX hborho me nt od APA S tud Res y ear ch

• Ci

201

4-20

• A rlin

gto • B nU un rba nD • N che Pa esig rk P CT n C

Ped

OG

/

lan

Gra es nd • C trian P Pra lan ity iri

of C • R orin iver th P sid a D

15

Cen

201

ter

eB

ike/

eN rk M eve eig lop ast hbo me er P Are rho nt C lan aP od o l o a per n • Ci ativ ty o eS fW ma Inv eat ll ent her ory f o

• TX rd L and APA Use Res • No eac lan h Hig hS cho ol C am pus Pla n

• Ar

ling

5-20

16

ton Urb an f Des W Inv e a ent ign the ory Cen rfor • Ci II dL ter ty o and f Ke Use Pla ene n Com • Fa pre ir P hen a sive rk R • Hi ede ll C velo • No ollege p m Cam rth ent Tex pu Dev as elo Com s Des p ign me • Da mis nt D Pla sio lla n • Da s Walk ashboa n abi r llas d l i t E y Use xec Stu utiv dy S eA • Pl tudy irpo an4 r t La Hea nd lth Stu dy

• Ci

ty o

201

• Ar

ling

6-20

17

ton •D Urb alla an sL Des and ove ign Fie Bes Cen ld A t Us • Vi ter irpo eS cke rt H tud r y igh y Me Pla est ado n wS •D trat alla egi sR cA •D esil ctio alla ien n s c yP Pub •H roje lic S alto ct m p a City •C ce -TE Inv Sur ent DD vey ory •G Gra ran nt A bur war Use y IS d DH ed Stu igh dy est and Bes t

201

•A

Com

7-20

18

pre Sta hen te o sive f Tr Dal Stu ans las dy por on tati •D the on oes Equ L ity i oca Stu n tion dy Ma • Pl tter ann A ffor ing dab Op for por ility Acc tun ess ities •C to ity o f Arli Pla ngt n on Foo •N dT orth ruc R kP ichl Sch ark and ool Hill Pla sS n afe Rou tes to

IN FO IN R FO IN RM FO IN RM IN FO F IN IN RM FO FO RM RM IN IN FO FO IN IN RM FO RM IN IN FO RM IN FO RM F O I R IN NF IN RM FO OR FO IN RM M RM FO IN IN FO RM F IN IN F FO RM OR I NF RM M IN I O NF FO I R I N N OR M FO FO RM M RM RM IN IN IN FO FO FO IN I N F RM RM RM FO RM IN IN IN FO FO FO IN IN RM RM RM FO F RM IN IN IN FO FO FO IN RM RM RM FO IN IN RM FO FO RM RM IN IN FO FO I NF RM RM OR M IN I FO R

INVITE INV

INVITE I

INVITE I

INVIT

INVI

IN

The Center for Transportation, Equity, Decisions and Dollars (CTEDD) is a USDOT University Transportation Center leading transportation policy research that aids in decision making INVand improves economic development through ITE INV INV more ITE INV efficient, ITE cost-effective use of the existing ITE INV ITE ITtransportation I N E VIT system and offers better access to INV INV E ITE TE INV jobs Iand We are leading a larger INV INVopportunities.

ITE IN VIT ITE ITE INV E ofINVuniversities ITE focused on providing INV consortium INV I T ITE TE ITE and Eresearch INV outreach to policy makers, INV INV ITE INV ITE ITE INV ITE through methods and educating INV VIT INinnovative ITE E IN I V ITE NV ITE VIT ITE INVleaders future field.

Iof E N the transportation

VIT INV ITE INV ITE E I VIT ITE INV NV INV E IN ITE ITE ITE VIT INV EI E I INV N I V NV NV ITE ITE ITE ITE ITE INV INV INV INV ITE ITE ITE INV ITE INV INV INV ITE I T INV ITE ITE E IN INV ITE INV VIT E IN ITE E IN INV ITE VIT INV V I INV TE E IN ITE ITE INV ITE VIT INV ITE E IN ITE ITE INV INV VIT INV INV ITE E IN ITE ITE I TE VIT VIT INV INV INV E IN E I ITE ITE ITE NV VIT INV INV E IN ITE ITE I V NV T I I I NV NV EI TE ITE I N I T I T NV E VIT INV E I ITE ITE EI NV INV E I NV ITE INV ITE NV ITE ITE INV ITE I I N I T N INV VIT EI VIT NV NV E IN ITE E ITE ITE VIT INV INV INV E IN E ITE ATV ITE NITE G I INV I I T EAITNE IN INV SVT ITE E ITE INV ITE STIG VITE INV E ITE TE I NV INV ATE NVIT INV INVITTIGA ITE SE EI INV ESTIGITE IN TE NV INVE VIT IV IGA I TE T T E E E IN AT INV TE ES INV INV GAITE TIGVITE ATE ITE I S G T I I E NVV T ES E ES INV INVIT E IN ITE IGAT NV I T T E ATE A ES TIG TIG INV ES ATE ES INV TIG INV E S ATE T E A TIG INV TIG ATE ES ES TIG INV E S INV T E ATEStudies Institute Urban actively IGA TE INV TIG TThe Aof ES ES TIG Swith TE INV communities INV E collaborates our to resolve A V E TE T IN TIG A A S G G E TI TI real-world problems by offering the INV practical, ATE ES ES TIG INV INV ES TE experience and substantial expertise of the E INV GA T I T TE ES G A university’s students, faculty, GAmultidisciplinary INV T I STI VE and INstaff.

AsV EaS neutral broker, the Institute N I

E IN

convenes representatives from public, business, and nonprofit sectors around topics related to improving cities.