Future of Cities Featured

A Q&A with our Summer 2023 Center for the Future of Cities Fellows

by

As we head into summer, ESI welcomes two new teammates who will serve as ESI Center for the Future of Cities fellows. Samriddhi Khare currently attends the University of Pennsylvania and will be graduating in 2024. Samriddhi will receive her Master’s in City Planning and concentrations in smart cities and Technology. Patrick Darcy is a recent graduate from Temple University where he graduated with a BBA in Economics, and is currently working towards his MS in Financial Analysis with an anticipated graduation date of 2024.

We wanted to give our fellows an opportunity to express their goals for the fellowship, their thoughts on what interested them the most about Econsult Solutions and ESI Center for the Future of Cities, and where they hope to be once they graduate. Below is their commentary.

 

How did you hear about Econsult Solutions and ESI Center for the Future of Cities?

Samriddhi: “I heard about the ESI Center for the Future of Cities work from numerous Penn Students and faculty that were and continue to be a part of the team. Kendra Hills, my predecessor for the fellowship was my TA in my first semester!”

Patrick: “I initially heard about Econsult Solutions through a presentation by Rebecca DeJoseph at a meeting for the Temple Economics Society, a student professional organization, which I served on the Executive Board of. I heard about ESI’s Center for the Future of Cities through my behavioral economics professor, Donald Wargo, who let me know of the position and recommended I apply.”

What interested you in the fellowship position?

Patrick: “I was interested in the fellowship position because I felt it could supply an opportunity for me to highlight my skills and develop meaningful insights into how cities can effectively prepare for future challenges and opportunities.”

Samriddhi: “I was interested in studying the future of cities due to the dynamic nature of urban environments and the potential for transformative change. This fellowship offers an opportunity to explore innovative solutions that address emerging challenges such as rapid urbanization, technological advancements, and evolving social dynamics.”

What initially led you to learning more about urban planning and economics? What excites you about this line of work?

Samriddhi: “Prior to this line of work, I trained as an architect. I was inspired by the built environment and how influential cities were to our lives. I am excited by the potential current technology offers to improve citizens’ quality of life.”

Patrick: “I was initially drawn to urban planning and economics through academic research during my undergraduate experience. I am excited to research this topic because of its size, complexity, and opportunity to make a difference for the better.”

What is one topic you hope to learn more about this summer?

Patrick: “This summer I hope to learn more about urban planning and city development. They are both vital and intricate topics that will be integral to my research.”

Samriddhi: “I want to work and learn extensively about urban resilience. With the increasing frequency and intensity of challenges cities face, from climate change impacts to natural disasters and pandemics, urban areas are becoming more and more vulnerable to various shocks and stresses. By building resilience, cities can better prepare for and respond to these crises, minimizing their negative impacts on infrastructure, the economy, and the well-being of communities. Urban resilience is essential for safeguarding lives, reducing risks, and ensuring the long-term sustainability and adaptability of cities in the face of an uncertain and rapidly changing world.”

What city are you most interested in researching while at ESI?

Samriddhi: “Over the summer my research will span multiple cities, all of which will provide unique and interesting context. Coming from the National Capital Region of India (a group of cities surrounding New Delhi), I am excited to learn more about urban agglomerations. Agglomerations are inherently fascinating due to their complexity and the convergence of diverse cultures, economies, and lifestyles in one geographic space. I am researching the Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington metropolitan complex and learning a lot about the systems and networks between each city.”

Patrick: “I am most interested in researching Philadelphia. Philadelphia is a city with an incredible history, which is embedded in the story of America. I am excited to further explore its past and present, its challenges, as well as its opportunities for growth and improvement in the future.”

What do you see as the biggest challenge for cities to overcome in the next 3 – 5 years?

Patrick: “I see technological innovation and implementation as the biggest challenge for cities to overcome in the short-term future. Major technological advances have been developed to combat issues such as environmental threats, infrastructure, and economic inequality. Cities must leverage this technology to build a resilient and prosperous future.”

Samriddhi: “Cities face two critical challenges: escalating inequality and the pressing need to address climate crises and promote sustainability. Tackling these issues is pivotal for fostering inclusive urban environments that prioritize equity, resilience, and a sustainable future. By addressing inequality, cities can strive for economic justice and ensure that prosperity is shared by all residents. Simultaneously, integrating climate action and sustainability measures into urban planning and policies will pave the way for environmentally conscious cities, safeguarding future generations from the devastating impacts of climate change.”

What type of work do you hope to get into once you graduate?

Samriddhi: “I want to continue working towards making cities better and more equitable by incorporating holistic and accessible technology. By leveraging innovative solutions and inclusive practices, I want to help create urban environments that prioritize accessibility and sustainability, paving the way for a future where technology serves as a catalyst for change.”

Patrick: “After graduation, I hope to pursue economic research, investment management and financial analysis.”

 

ESI would like to welcome our newest fellows on this learning experience! We are excited to have them involved with our thought leadership initiative and look forward seeing their skills and understanding of urban issues grow. Best of luck on this fellowship!

 

Norah Serverson | [email protected]

Norah Serverson is a Marketing Assistant at Econsult Solutions Inc. (ESI) supporting the Business Development and Marketing Department. Ms. Serverson is currently a student at La Salle University studying Marketing and Communication.

Webinar Series: Equity and Inclusion Across the United States

by

In July of 2023, ESI will examine the role that equity and inclusion plays in different areas of life across the country and in different industries. We will explore food systems, construction and development, and tourism in conversations with industry leaders. These discussions will be moderated by Frank Robinson, Vice President at Econsult Solutions and  by a diverse group of leaders and industry experts.

These webinars will occur every Tuesday from July 11 to July 25, 12:00-12:30 pm.

Learn more about the different topics below or register here.

July 11: Danielle DiLeo Kim, Philadelphia250
View Here
A discussion with Danielle DiLeo Kim, AIA, the President and CEO of PHILADELPHIA250, the nonprofit leading and inspiring Philadelphia’s 250th anniversary celebration of American Independence in 2026. We will discuss her journey to this role and how equity and inclusion will be celebrated during the 250th anniversary of our nation’s birth.

July 18: Paula Daniels, Center for Good Food Purchasing
View Here
A discussion with Paula Daniels, Co-founder, Chief of What’s Next, and Founding Chair of the Center for Good Food Purchasing. We will discuss national and local efforts to make the growth and distribution of food more equitable and how that can lead to more good sustaining jobs.

July 25: Andreina Perez Hein, Everybody Builds
View Here
A discussion with Andreina Perez Hein, Executive Director of Everybody Builds. We will discuss the importance of equity and inclusion in the construction and what impact it has on jobs, wealth and the development of communities.

All sessions will be moderated by Frank Robinson, Vice President of ESI.

Frank Robinson is a Vice President with Econsult Solutions. He has been a leader in the economic development and sustainable development industries for over 20 years, working with corporate, government and nonprofit clients, banks and credit unions, as well as community development financial institutions and small businesses.

Congestion Pricing in New York: How Will It Work?

by

In April 2023, USDOT released the result of its environmental assessment of New York City’s proposed “Central Business Tolling” project—known more colloquially as “congestion pricing”—after years of examination and review. The result—a “Finding of No Significant Impact” or FONSI—means that the MTA can continue its process to implement a program to toll drivers for entering Manhattan below 60th St.

It’s supposed to have a monumental effect on travel and transportation throughout the New York Metropolitan region, and notably the program aims to accomplish two goals: fewer motor vehicles in Lower Manhattan and fewer motor vehicles traveling below 60th St., from River to River, and more dedicated money for the MTA, which is responsible for running transit and regional rail throughout New York and Connecticut.

Source: https://rpa.org/work/reports/congestion-pricing-in-nyc

 

How Will the Program Work?

The program would work similarly to this, and the final details are not yet finalized, but:

Motor vehicles that would enter Manhattan from the north, or by a connecting bridge or tunnel, would be subject to a fee—a toll of between $5 and $23—to enter the zone outlined in orange above, based on several factors, including time of day and consideration for freight vehicles, residents who live within the tolling zone, and low-income drivers.  More information can be found here, including over 29,000 pages of comments from concerned observers. The gist is that, if successful, New York City can be the first North American city to follow in the footsteps of London, Stockholm, Milan, and Singapore as cities around the world to successfully implement a charge.

What are the Program’s Goals?

According to the FONSI, the Tolling Program’s expected goals are as follows:

  • Reduce daily vehicle-miles traveled (VMT) within the Manhattan Central Business District (CBD) by at least 5 percent.
  • Reduce the number of vehicles entering the Manhattan CBD daily by at least 10 percent.
  • Create a funding source for capital improvements and generate sufficient annual net revenues to fund $15 billion for capital projects for the MTA Capital Program.
  • Establish a tolling program consistent with the purposes underlying the New York State legislation entitled the MTA Reform and Traffic Mobility Act.

The major goal is mode shift. The structure of the Tolling Program’s pricing mechanism is both incentives to take other means into and out of Lower Manhattan and deterrent for driving into one of the most congested business districts in the world. MTA would dedicate the collected revenue to fund nearly one-third ($15 billion over five years) of its plan to build more transit and make sure there are adequate and attractive options for regional travel.

How Do We Measure Congestion Pricing’s Success?

There are three important factors: what we choose to measure, how we choose to measure it, and how we interpret the results. Generally, the mechanism to compare how a project might perform is a benefit-cost analysis (BCA). The idea is relatively simple. A team of interested folks gathers a list of quantifiable benefits, which often include, but are not limited to:

  • Travel time savings: how will a reduction in congestion contribute to faster travel times for remaining drivers. How will this redistribution help save commuters who switched to another mode, too?
  • Reduced car crashes: the fewer the number of traveling vehicles, the lower the likelihood for incident.
  • Reduced noise benefits: fewer cars means potentially less noise.
  • Increased environmental benefits: directly related to both air pollution from car exhaust and particulate matter pollution from the paved asphalt.

A BCA’s execution can be wickedly complex to calculate and interpret correctly. How does the team estimate the number of motor vehicles that currently enter the area? How do they estimate the difference once the policy is put in place? Whose time are we measuring?

The goal is to quantify the benefits, extend them out to some point in the future—usually 30 years or more—and compare these benefits to the total cost of implementing the project.[1] This output is called a benefit-cost ratio (BCR) and is relatively easily interpretable in any context. If the BCR is more than 1, the benefits outweigh the costs, and if it’s less than 1, then the opposite is true. By itself a benefit-cost ratio is not a decision-making tool, but it can be used to compare the relative merit of two projects, or two alternatives for the same project. The team can seek to change inputs, like how much it charges to enter the congestion zone, and compare the outputs to optimize pricing, for instance.

Are There Other Places in the United States Ready for a Congestion Pricing/Tolling Program?

It is way too soon to tell. The program hasn’t been implemented in New York City yet, but it has been successful in other parts of the world—especially Singapore, which piloted a program in the mid-1970s and continues to faregate access to certain parts of its city to motor vehicles. It’s also been implemented in Northern and Southern Europe—London, Stockholm, Milan. In all transportation planning projects, context is king, so simply because one projects works in one place doesn’t mean it will work in any other place without considering a few factors, which include:

Historical Context. Has a program like congestion pricing been tried before? Was it successful? What’s driving this project here and now? What are the conditions of the place that might contribute to success?

Geography. What does the city/region physically look like? What would the congestion boundary look like. For example, London is a radial city—its boroughs spread from a central location and the congestion “zone” is somewhat circular. New York, however, is not. There was a conscious choice to limit the boundary to 60th Street and below, and to have it only cover Lower Manhattan, for now.

Political Will. This is potentially the biggest challenge for congestion pricing—telling the right story to the right stakeholders to understand what the tolling authority/agency wants to achieve is key. The coalition of politicians, riders, nonprofits, transit agency staff can make or break a successful program and it takes a champion and the ability to change minds to get a project this big and complex off the ground.

Let’s follow New York City closely as an exemplar and learn from its process. Other transit-starved cities and regions are looking closely.

 

[1] The BCA will seek to calculate the present values of costs and benefits, which simply considers inflation and the economic idea that a dollar today is worth some amount more than a dollar tomorrow, the next day, or next year.

 

Sam Sklar, Director | [email protected]

Sam Sklar is a director with Econsult Solutions, Inc. (ESI). Mr. Sklar has extensive experience in program and project management, planning, and analysis. As an effective communicator, Mr. Sklar has special expertise in many forms of communications strategies. In addition to his duties at ESI, he publishes a growing newsletter, Exasperated Infrastructures, which covers state and federal infrastructure policy.

 

Discussing the Future of Cities with Gina Lavery

by

For this week’s Present Value post, we interviewed Gina Lavery, Senior Vice President and Principal of Econsult Solutions and the new head of ESI Center for the Future of Cities. In this conversation, she talks about the opportunities cities have related to transportation, technology advances, and more! Get to know Gina and more about ESI Center for the Future of Cities through the Q&A below.

As lead principal for ESI’s Economic Development practice, how has your experience prepared you to lead ESI Center for the Future of Cities? 

GL: As a leader in ESI’s economic development practice, I have seen first hand the consistent need for cities, neighborhoods, community-serving organizations, and major economic development projects to address problems in their communities with interdisciplinary and holistic solutions. For example, when we’re working with a local government on their economic development plan, we aren’t simply listing the standard economic development incentives or approaches that used to comprise a plan; in today’s economy we are developing forward-looking strategies with an eye to how technology and future economic shifts will influence a place’s competitiveness. That means we as a firm need to be aware of the economic issues and policy climate as we always have, but we also need to be in a position to understand and provide insights into how the latest urban economic research and technological developments will affect how places grow and thrive.

What are some priorities you are most excited to explore in the coming months?

GL: I’m excited for our team to build on the research and thought leadership we have already done around electric vehicle policy. The interplay of innovations in transportation bumping up against longstanding questions of equity and gentrification in our cities is exactly the type of problem-solving I want ESI Center for the Future of Cities to continue to explore. Another priority for the summer will be the exploration of the “smart” technology being used to enhance urban resilience in cities. That research will be undertaken in large part by our Center for the Future of Cities Fellows, who will be developing metrics for an index of mid-sized cities addressing resilience in their communities.

What are some of the biggest opportunities for cities planning for economic competitiveness?

GL: Figuring out how to leverage smart technology is a huge opportunity for cities to explore. I don’t mean simply jumping on the smart cities/tech adoption bandwagon, but rather identifying the tools that improve quality of life for residents and visitors. What we have seen since coming out of the pandemic is increased fluidity in where people want to live and work. For places to compete for residents and workers they need to improve the suite of services and amenities that they offer. The right smart technology can help cities enhance their value proposition by improving services, enhancing public spaces, and just generally improving the attractiveness of their communities.

How can others get involved?

GL: I would love to hear from other smart city practitioners, urban planners, and policy experts on the issues they see affecting our communities in the years to come. ESI’s Center for the Future of Cities is our opportunity to examine big, hard to define topics and figure out what we think they mean for our communities. Some other topics we hope to explore in 2023 include the implementation of broadband access in communities across the U.S. and how the internet of things is influencing the built environment. I encourage anyone interested in joining us in our research or in learning more about our research agenda to connect with us on social media or by contacting me directly at [email protected]

 

Gina Lavery is Senior Vice President and Principal of Econsult Solutions, Inc. (ESI). Ms. Lavery has led a range of projects for ESI, primarily focused on urban planning, real estate, transportation, higher education, and public policy—particularly where these areas intersect with economic development.

 

Mike Daly, Business Development Manager | [email protected]

Mike Daly is the Business Development Manager at Econsult Solutions, Inc. (ESI), where he supports the marketing and business development team. In addition to assisting with proposals, he is responsible for enhancing ESI’s brand and work through traditional and social media, content development for the web, and managing the ESI blog, Present Value.

Parking Wars

by

We can no longer stay neutral; reasonable solutions must start to drive our decision making

A woman walks into a restaurant to meet a group of friends. She proceeds to apologize for being late but explains she was looking for parking for the past 20 minutes. This sparked a vibrant discussion that opened their evening. Parking wars is a hot topic in urban environments, with some believing that the world should go to zero car dependency (or somewhere close), others believing owning a car is a right and privilege and have no intention of giving it up, and a lot of opinions and concerns in between.

It’s important to acknowledge the history and complexity of this topic. Owning a car has been built into the fabric of society in America. To the point where if someone tells you they just bought a car, the typical response is “congratulations.” A nod to achieving a piece of the “American Dream,” that includes car ownership. However, vehicle traffic has also contributed to quality-of-life issues including climate change that has a variety of health impacts, traffic congestion and pollution.

To further complicate the matter, parking has become a sufficient source of revenue for cities. Parking provides jobs and tax income that if reduced or eliminated, without thoughtful replacement, could place a strain on City budgets. In Philadelphia, the Philadelphia Parking Authority in 2022 had $275 M in revenue of which $73 M (26%) went to the city of Philadelphia, $18 M (7%) to the Philadelphia School District, and $36 M (13%) went to the PA Department of Transportation. If the City was to wave a magic wand today and grant all the wishes of those advocating to rid the city of cars, the city’s budget would be in peril. It is crucial to account for the lost revenue of important items such as education and the mass transportation infrastructure when considering alternate solutions.

Parking has also become synonymous with terms such as gentrification. Over the past 15 plus years, we have seen a return of urban living that has resulted in residential and commercial development changing the look and feel of neighborhoods. In Philadelphia, one of the most notable projects is the potential building of 76ers arena in Center City. One of the more public backlashes from the stadium is, “Where will I park? Parking and access to the venue will be an absolute nightmare.” However, layered in that is a divisiveness between communities who are opposed to or in favor of the stadium. Complaints about parking has become a way for communities to voice their discontent with changes occurring in neighborhoods.

Approach to Solutions

Reasonable solutions to this complex problem cannot stem from forcing one side to heed to other’s demands. We have to take a more innovative approach that looks at the long-term goals that are implemented in phases, even if the implementation happens over decades.

New Thinking About Parking

Due to the built environment and the long road towards change, vehicles are here to stay for the foreseeable future. MIT professor Eran Ben-Joseph estimates there are 800 million surface parking spaces in the US. This translates into eight available parking spaces for every passenger car. It is projected that by the year 2060, 460 million people will live in the US. (Long, 2014). Following our current trajectory, an increase in population translates into an increase in car ownership. However, this should further incentivize cities to design and manage parking infrastructure in much more efficient ways.

One solution is to help people “rethink” how they think about parking. This can happen through mass transit organizations creating marketing campaigns for people to “Give Us a Try,” persuading current drivers to try mass transit. Another option is motivating people to park once in cities if they are going to multiple locations, incentivizing them with reduced fares for short transit and shared mobility trips to move through various locations.

Emphasize Shared Mobility

Shared mobility, including traditional public transportation, rental, and taxi services is here to stay. But also includes new modes, such as ridesharing with strangers, peer-to-peer car sharing, and shared electric scooters and bikes, pointing to a sizable potential market in the mobility space. In 2019, shared mobility revenues reached 130 billion. By 2030, total revenues are expected to reach between $450 and $860 billion for shared mobility industries. (Heinke, Kloss, Moller, & and Wiemuth, 2023).

The next big innovations in shared mobility include autonomous taxis (robo-taxis) and airborne variants, which have seen a huge acceleration in investment and traction in recent months. There is a range of public and private partnership investments that can help scale accessibility to current and future modalities, helping to ease congestion of parking while providing options for more sustainable living.

Next Steps

As long as people own cars, there will be discussions and arguments on where to store them. While some people will focus on the far ends of each debate. The actual solution will likely end up somewhere in the middle, with more incentives to use shared mobility and public transportation, without completely eliminating the use of cars. Cities are denser areas, where space is a hot commodity, and there are more communities’ interests to balance. The use of cars, parking, and the topic of mobility in cities will continue to evolve as society shifts to the needs of the population.

 

Frank RobinsonFrank Robinson | [email protected] 

Frank Robinson is a vice president with Econsult Solutions, Inc. Mr. Robinson has been a leader in the economic development and sustainable development industries for over 20 years, working with corporate, government and nonprofit clients, banks and credit unions, as well as community development financial institutions (CDFI) and small businesses.

Can your Downtown Benefit from Office Conversions?

by

Many cities across the United States are faced with two enduring impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic: vacant office space in their central business districts and a high demand for housing. Many cities across the country, including New York City, San Francisco, Boston, and Atlanta, have adopted or are considering policies to encourage the conversion of offices to residential buildings in their commercial districts.

ESI recently supported New York City’s Office Adaptive Reuse Task Force in developing a report that included a set of recommendations tailored to New York’s unique situation. Here are four lessons we learned from that work that may help you consider whether or not your city should adopt a policy to encourage office conversions.

Know your regulations

There are dozens of hurdles that will prevent an office building from being converted to a residential property—physical design, financing, risk, market conditions, future expectations—but none of them matter if existing land use regulations or building codes don’t allow conversions. Municipal zoning regulations are most likely to affect conversions, but state-level building, health, or safety regulations may also limit the ability of property owners to convert their buildings.

In New York City, there are large sections of Manhattan in which office conversions are either illegal or must meet a series of requirements that make conversions all but impossible. In other parts of Manhattan, office buildings built before 1979 may convert under a set of more lenient regulations than buildings in other areas. The Office Conversion Task Force made several recommendations to harmonize and loosen regulations governing conversions.

Vacancy rates will not dictate conversions

Owners will. When we first started looking at the New York City office market and talking with industry experts, it became clear that there was a subset of buildings in the office market that stood little to no chance of attracting new tenants in a post-COVID landscape. We heard over and over about a sustained “flight to quality,” in which tenants were signing leases for smaller floor area in more amenity rich buildings closer to major transportation hubs.

Landlords with high quality space in desirable locations were happy to oblige the shift, leaving landlords with lower-quality space in secondary locations with excess space. We saw buildings that were 30, 40 and sometimes more than 50 percent vacant with little immediate hope of attracting new tenants. What perfect conversion candidates!

However, most of these buildings are unlikely to convert. Why? Most property owners don’t have the experience to convert a building from one use to another. The risks of trying were too great. Many property owners aren’t willing to sell the building at a loss and would rather wait and see if the market returns. Or they had such favorable terms on loans signed before the pandemic that selling and buying back into the market at higher interest rates made little long-term sense.

Some buildings are more suitable to conversion than others, but most physical constraints can be overcome if someone is willing to pay

The office stock in any given city is a historical record of building materials, techniques, styles, preferences, and space requirements. In New York City, most successful office-to-residential conversions had three common characteristics: they were built before 1940 and had comparatively small floor plates and operable windows. In the 1950s and 60s, businesses demanded open floor plans and innovations in building technologies allowed for ever larger floorplates that continued to expand in subsequent decades.

Modern buildings do present a series of physical design challenges than older buildings, but architects are clever. In conversations with several designers with experience converting offices to residential buildings in New York City, it was clear that there is a design solution to nearly every physical challenge an office building can present. Curtain walls can be replaced to create windows that can open and close. Elevator banks can be moved or removed. Stairs can be installed. Cores can be cut out of the center of a building with large floorplates to allow air and light to reach the interior. Additional floors can be built on top of a building with structural reinforcement. But with every major shift in a building’s design, the costs of conversion goes up, and as those costs go up, property owners and developers will be looking to city governments for incentives.

Office-to-residential conversion is a niche practice, which means financing can be a challenge

Developers in the real estate industry tend to specialize in one building type, for example, high end commercial, low-income housing, large-format retail, or entertainment complexes. This specialization allows developers to deliver buildings with greater efficiency and lower costs. However, most practitioners don’t have experience converting one building type to another, and without a strong track record of success in a given market, lenders may be unwilling to finance conversions.

Office to residential conversions make good urban planning sense. With the right zoning regulations, tax incentives, and financing options, office-to-residential conversions can help meet the demand for housing, help remove excess vacancy from office markets, and bring more foot traffic to neighborhoods that have been struggling since the pandemic began three years ago. However, unless heavily incentivized, office conversions are likely to remain relatively uncommon.

If you are interested in learning more about commercial to residential adaptive reuse, you can contact us here, or read the New York City Adaptive Reuse Task Force Report here.

 

David Stanek | [email protected]

David Stanek, Ph.D., a director at ESI, is an urban planner who specializes in combining data science techniques, geographic information systems, and qualitative research methods to evaluate the role and influence of land use and preservation interventions on residents, places, and municipal budgets. Prior to joining the firm, he was a land use and zoning researcher at the Penn Institute for Urban Research. He has taught land use, urban policy, and public finance at Rutgers University and Hunter College and has consulted on projects for a variety of clients including the World Monuments Fund, Arup, the William Penn Foundation, Ford Foundation, USAID, the Urban Institute, and WSP as well as several municipal governments.