ANALYSIS OF DEMAND, SUPPLY AND ABSORPTION FOR RESIDENTIAL, OFFICE & RETAIL USES FOR THE CITY OF AZUSA, TOD SUBAREAS AND OTHER R E L E V A N T L O C A L/ REGIONAL GEOGRAPHIES

Prepared for: City of Azusa

April 2015

SUBMITTED BY: THE NATELSON DALE GROUP, INC. 24835 LA PALMA AVE SUITE I • YORBA LINDA, CA 92887 O: 714.692.9596 • F: 714.692.9597 • www.natelsondale.com

CONTENTS

REPORT OVERVIEW ...... 1 Introduction ...... 1

1 STATION COMPARISONS ...... 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 3 1.1 Station selection and data compilation ...... 6 1.2 Demographic overview ...... 7 Population, housing units, and education ...... 7 Housing type ...... 11 Commuting and transport ...... 13

2 PROJECTIONS OF DEVELOPMENT DEMAND ...... 15 2.1 Introduction to Section 2 ...... 15 2.2 Residential...... 15 2.3 Retail ...... 16 The Study Area ...... 16 Supportable Square Feet of Retail Development ...... 21 2.4 Office/Industrial ...... 26 Employment Forecasts by Industry ...... 26 Office and Industrial Employment by Industry ...... 28 2.5 Hotel Demand Projections ...... 32

APPENDIX A. DEMOGRAPHICS ...... 36

APPENDIX B. HOUSING DATA ...... 39

APPENDIX C. RETAIL DATA ...... 45

APPENDIX D. OFFICE/INDUSTRIAL DATA ...... 67

APPENDIX E. SUMMARY OF STATION DEVELOPMENT CHARACTERISTICS ...... 70

REPORT OVERVIEW

Introduction

This document summarizes the research and analysis related to:

 A comparison of Azusa station locations with other stations and associated transit-oriented development (TOD) projects, within the region, in terms of demographic conditions and TOD project characteristics.  Projections of demand for residential, office, retail and hotel uses for the Azusa TOD Subareas, based on, as applicable, projections for larger areas including Los Angeles County, San Gabriel Valley, and Azusa (citywide).1

The five comparison station locations are:

Del Mar: Del Mar, CA Highland Park: Los Angeles, CA Montclair: Montclair, CA Sierra Madre Villa: Pasadena, CA South Pasadena-Mission: Pasadena, CA

Demographic conditions at comparison station sites. Among the comparison sites, Highland Park has the highest population and the Azusa Citrus station the second lowest population among the comparable stations. The station with the highest percentage of residents with a Bachelor's or advanced degree is South Pasadena-Mission (60.9%); the Azusa Citrus percentage is 38.4%. In general, the Azusa station locations have lower population densities and a less-educated population than the other locations. Home values within Azusa tend to be lower. Azusa commuters near the stations are relatively heavy bus users, compared with the other places.

TOD comparison projects. These projects tend to be the output of experienced developers, notable architects delivering noteworthy designs, and considerable public interest. To some extent and in some cases, and because of the inherent logic of maximizing housing density near the rail stop, the presence of the rail station appeared to leverage the acceptability of multi-family housing in communities where such projects might otherwise be discouraged.

Demand summary. Table I-1 (below) summarizes TNDG’s market demand forecasts for the two stations, for multi-family, retail, office, and hotel uses. The projections are preliminary and reflect unconstrained demand (i.e., they have not yet been refined based on actual land/site capacity). The figures represent net demand numbers, over and above any existing development.

1 Geographies vary depending on data availability. The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 1

TABLE I-1. PRELIMINARY SUMMARY OF MARKET DEMAND FORECASTS Downtown Citrus Station Station Balance Citywide Land Use Area Area Of City Total Notes Residential demand forecasts will be refined based Multi-family dwelling units on pro forma financial analysis (forthcoming). Pro -- Conservative Scenario 560 240 800 forma analysis will also provide guidance on -- High Scenario 840 360 1,200 potential breakdown between apartments and condominiums.

See Table 2-11 (page 25) for breakdown of Retail (square feet) 183,000 167,000 226,000 576,000 demand by retail sales category.

Conservative scenario reflects a continuation of Office (square feet) historic trends; high scenario assumes that City -- Conservative Scenario 45,000 18,000 27,000 90,000 captures a higher share of San Gabriel Valley office -- High Scenario 75,000 30,000 45,000 150,000 demand.

A hotel currently proposed for a site along the 210 Freeway will absorb demand for approximately 110 rooms, leaving net demand of 95-150 rooms 110 205-260 for an additional hotel project. The analysis Hotel (rooms) 95-150 rooms rooms rooms assumes that any additional hotel would, in part, be premised on demand generated by APU. Facility would include small amount (2,500 square feet) of meeting space. Source: The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. (TNDG)

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 2

1 STATION COMPARISONS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The two Azusa station locations were compared with the following five stations and their associated primary TOD sites:

 Del Mar: Del Mar, CA  Highland Park: Los Angeles, CA  Montclair: Montclair, CA  Sierra Madre Villa: Pasadena, CA  South Pasadena-Mission: Pasadena, CA

The comparison has two components: 1) demographic/socioeconomic and transport data for the areas within a quarter-mile radius of the two Azusa Gold Line stations and five other station locations along the existing and planned Gold Line; and 2) a discussion of the characteristics of the primary TOD projects at the five comparison stations.

Table ES-1 (below) summarizes the following conditions for each of the Azusa stations relative to the five TOD comparison sites:  Demographic o Population o Households o Education  Housing o Type (Single family and multi-family) o Median home value o Housing age (median year)  Transport o Commuters, public transport by type o Commuters, travel time Table ES-2 (below) summarizes selected characteristics of the primary TOD projects at the five comparison sites. Additional details are Shown in Appendix E.

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 3

TABLE ES-1. SUMMARY OF DEMOGRAPHIC, SOCIOECONOMIC AND TRANSPORTATION CONDITIONS FOR AZUSA AND TOD CASE STUDIES Azusa Azusa Variable Citrus Downtown Notable conditions from comparable stations Station Station Demographic Population Low Medium Highland Park has the highest population, followed by South Pasadena-Mission. Households Medium High Montclair station has the most persons per household. Education The stations with the highest percentage of residents with a Bachelor's or % w/ Bachelor’s degree Medium Low advanced degree are South Pasadena-Mission and Del Mar. Housing The South Pasadena-Mission Station has the highest number of single family Single family Medium Medium units, followed by Highland Park. Multi-family Low Low Del Mar station has the highest percentage of multi-family housing units, by far. South Pasadena-Mission station has the highest median home value, followed Median home value Medium Medium by Sierra Madre. High Medium The housing within the Montclair Station area has a median year built of 1981, Housing age (median year) (Newer) (Older) the most current among the stations. Transport Both Azusa stations have the 2nd and 3rd highest percentage of commuters Commuters, bus High High that use the bus. The Highland Park and Del Mar stations have the highest percentage of Commuters, subway N/A N/A residents that use subway or elevated rail for their commute. Azusa Citrus station residents have the highest percentage of commuters with less than a 15 minute commute. Azusa Downtown residents have the 2nd Commuters, travel time N/A N/A highest percentage of commuters with a 15-29 minute commute and over a 60 minute commute. Note: Analysis is based on data within 0.25 miles of each station, as provided by ESRI. Low/Medium/High scale represents the conditions of the Azusa stations relative to the other analyzed stations.

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 4

TABLE ES-2. SUMMARY OF KEY CHARACTERISTICS FOR TOD COMPARISON SITES South Station name Del Mar Highland Park Pasadena/Mission Sierra Madre Villa Montclair Station Free On-site Parking – 877 (Metrolink) 1,600 spaces, 221 public parking Nearby Free Parking Spaces; Paid Reserved On- 32 handicapped spaces. Station Paid On-site Parking – 610 spaces; 10 Bike Rack (Independent) – 120 site Parking – 88 Spaces; 10 Free parking. Overnight characteristics Spaces; 26 Bike Rack Spaces Spaces; 16 Bike Spaces; 14 Bike Rack Bike Rack Spaces; 16 Bike parking allowed. 3 (Bike Room) Lockers Spaces Lockers available lots. Main TOD project element current Highland Park Transit Mission Meridian The Stuart at Sierra Madre Paseos at Montclair name Avalon Del Mar Station Village Village Villa Apartment Homes North Existing Metrolink and Line(s) also planned Gold Line Gold (804) Gold (804) Gold (804) Gold (804) Foothill Extension Year station opened 2003 2003 2003 2009 Expected to open in 2015 Year TOD completed Completed in 2007 Approved in 2013 Completed in 2005 Phase 1 Completed 2007 Anticipated summer 2014

City Los Angeles (Highland Pasadena Park Neighborhood) South Pasadena Pasadena Montclair Project Acreage 3.4 2.1 1.6 7.6 15.4 Ranges from 16 to 80 Residential units/acre, overall 40 densities Approx. 100 units/acre 38.1 units/acre overall units/acre 0 25 BHV Center Street Properties, LLC (Principal GLJ Partners, with equity Developer McCormack Baron Creative Housing now with Raintree investor Canyon-Johnson Urban Partners LLC Salazar Associates Partners) Urban Funds Moule & Polyzoides, Moule & Polyzoides, Architect Architects and Urbanists; Architects and Architects Orange (Stuart Nadel Architects DE Architects Urbanists building) DesignARC

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 5

1.1 Station selection and data compilation

This section summarizes demographic and other data for areas within a quarter-mile radius of the two Azusa Gold Line stations and five other station locations along the existing and planned Gold Line:

 Del Mar: Del Mar, CA  Highland Park: Los Angeles, CA  Montclair: Montclair, CA  Sierra Madre Villa: Pasadena, CA  South Pasadena-Mission: Pasadena, CA

The data represent estimates for 2007-2011 American Community Survey (ACS) for the area within 0.25 miles of the station address, extracted from ESRI within a GIS system.

The stations were selected based on a variety of factors including: TOD development accompanying the station, presence on the Gold Line, combination of planned and existing TODs, and availability of information, some of which documented exceptional or particularly interesting features of the projects. Available data were supplemented by, where possible, interviews with Gold Line representatives and with developers responsible for the TOD projects. These projects tend to be the output of experienced developers, notable architects delivering noteworthy designs, and considerable public interest. To some extent and in some cases, and because of the inherent logic of maximizing housing density near the rail stop, the presence of the rail station appeared to leverage the acceptability of multi-family housing in communities where such projects might otherwise be discouraged. Characteristics of the five stations/TODs are summarized in Table ES-2 (above), and detailed in Appendix E.

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 6

1.2 Demographic overview

Population, housing units, and education

Table 1-1 (below) shows the population, households and housing units within 0.25 miles of each of the case study stations. Highland Park has the highest population (4,538), followed by South Pasadena- Mission (2,261), Del Mar (1,909) and Azusa Downtown (1,494). The Azusa Citrus station has the second lowest population among the comparable stations. Montclair station has the most persons per household (3.2), followed by Highland Park (3.1), Azusa Downtown (3.1) and Azusa Citrus (2.2). The station with the highest percentage of residents with a Bachelor's or advanced degree is South Pasadena-Mission (60.9%), followed by Del Mar (59.5%), Sierra Madre (39.6%) and Azusa Citrus (38.4%). The Azusa Downtown station has the lowest percentage of residents within 0.25 miles that have a bachelor's or advanced degree (13.9%), among the case study stations. Figure 1-1 and Figure 1-2 (below) also provide a summary of population, and housing, and educational attainment, respectively.

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 7

TABLE 1-1. DEMOGRAPHIC SUMMARY, BY STATION

South Azusa Azusa Sierra Pasadena- Citrus Downtown Del Mar Highland Montclair Madre Mission Station Station Station Park Station Station Station Overview Total Population 579 1,494 1,909 4,538 937 522 2,261 Total Households 243 481 1,091 1,296 277 244 977 Total Housing Units 266 482 1,268 1,471 294 262 1,069 Persons/household 2.2 3.1 1.5 3.1 3.2 2.0 2.1

South Azusa Azusa Sierra Pasadena- Citrus Downtown Del Mar Highland Montclair Madre Mission Education Station Station Station Park Station Station Station Population over 25 Some HS 7.0% 28.0% 8.2% 54.3% 25.8% 8.9% 4.3% HS or equivalent 16.3% 27.5% 11.0% 14.7% 20.2% 24.7% 8.7% Some college/Associate's 38.4% 30.6% 21.1% 16.4% 38.2% 26.8% 25.1% Bachelor's 18.0% 9.1% 28.4% 10.6% 10.2% 24.9% 32.1% Advanced 20.3% 4.8% 31.1% 4.1% 5.5% 14.7% 28.8% Bachelor's or advanced 38.4% 13.9% 59.5% 14.7% 15.7% 39.6% 60.9% Source: US Census ACS 2008-12 estimates (5-year)

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 8

FIGURE 1-1. POPULATION & HOUSING 5,000 1,600

4,500 1,400

4,000 1,200 3,500

1,000 3,000

2,500 800 Population 2,000 HousingUnits 600

1,500 400 1,000

200 500

- - Azusa Citrus Azusa Downtown Del Mar Station Highland Park Montclair Station Sierra Madre South Pasadena- Station Station Station Mission Station Total Population Total Housing Units

Source: US Census ACS 2008-12 estimates (5-year)

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 9

FIGURE 1-2. EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

Source: US Census ACS 2008-12 estimates (5-year)

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 10

Housing type

As shown in Table 1-2 (below), the Del Mar station has by far the highest percentage of multi-family housing units (96.1%), followed by Montclair (68.8%), Highland Park (64.4%) and South Pasadena- Mission (55.8%). The Azusa Citrus (31.5%) and Downtown (37.9%) stations have the second and third lowest percentage of multi-family housing units.

Among the case study stations, the South Pasadena-Mission station has the highest median home value ($748,810), followed by Sierra Madre ($620,879), Del Mar ($495,455) and Azusa Citrus ($413,415). The Azusa Downtown station has the second lowest median home value among the case study stations ($370,000). Median housing value and housing type are also summarized on Figure 1-3 (below).

TABLE 1-2. HOUSING OVERVIEW

South Azusa Azusa Sierra Pasadena- Citrus Downtown Del Mar Highland Montclair Madre Mission Station Station Station Park Station Station Station

Single family 146 295 50 523 82 189 472 Multi-family (2 or more units) 67 180 1,216 947 181 72 597

% multifamily 31.5% 37.9% 96.1% 64.4% 68.8% 27.6% 55.8% Median home value $413,415 $370,000 $495,455 $505,682 $253,125 $620,879 $748,810 Source: US Census ACS 2008-12 estimates (5-year)

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 11

FIGURE 1-3. HOUSING TYPE, VALUE AND MEDIAN YEAR BUILT BY STATION 1,600 $800,000 1956

1,400 $700,000 1973 1,200 $600,000 1947

1,000 $500,000

800 $400,000

Housing units Housing Median homevalue Median 600 $300,000 1958

400 $200,000 1973 1981 1963 200 $100,000

- $0 Azusa Citrus Station Azusa Downtown Del Mar Station Highland Park Montclair Station Sierra Madre Station South Pasadena- Station Mission Station Single family Multi-family (2 or more units) Median home value

Source: US Census ACS 2008-12 estimates (5-year)

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 12

Commuting and transport

According to the data shown in Table 1-3 (below), Highland Park has the highest percentage of commuters that utilize bus/rail modes. South Pasadena-Mission has the lowest percentage of public transit commuters. Both Azusa stations have the 2nd and 3rd highest percentage of commuters that use the bus.

Azusa Citrus station residents (within 0.25 miles) have the highest percentage of commuters with less than a 15 minute commute (61.5%), compared to the Azusa Downtown station residents (20%). Azusa Downtown residents within 0.25 miles of the station have the 2nd highest percentage of commuters with a 15-29 minute commute and over a 60 minute commute.

Commute times and types are also summarized on Figure 1-4 (below).

TABLE 1-3. TRANSPORTATION SUMMARY, BY STATION

South Azusa Azusa Sierra Pasadena- Citrus Downtown Del Mar Highland Montclair Madre Mission Station Station Station Park Station Station Station Commute, by means of transport Total commuters Public Transport Bus or trolley bus 4.2% 7.4% 1.0% 12.3% No data 3.1% 2.3% Subway or elevated n/a n/a 9.5% 4.7% 1.5% 1.5% Travel Time Total Less than 5 minutes 13.9% 0.3% 0.5% 1.9% 4.3% 0.4% 7.2% 6-14 minutes 47.6% 19.7% 16.9% 12.9% 17.4% 31.2% 24.4% 15-29 minutes 13.1% 45.6% 40.0% 33.8% 53.3% 33.2% 29.7% 30-59 min 20.6% 23.5% 32.9% 32.8% 14.5% 26.5% 34.1% 60 min or more 5.2% 10.6% 9.7% 18.7% 10.4% 7.9% 4.7% Source: US Census ACS 2008-12 estimates (5-year)

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 13

FIGURE 1-4. TRANSPORTATION SUMMARY, COMMUTE MODE AND TIME

Source: US Census ACS 2008-12 estimates (5-year)

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 14

2 PROJECTIONS OF DEVELOPMENT DEMAND

2.1 Introduction to Section 2

The following section addresses development demand projections between 2014 and 2035 for the two Azusa station areas, based on projections for Los Angeles County, City of Azusa, and other select local/regional geographies. The projections address: 1) number of residential units, 2) square footage of retail, industrial and office space, and 3) hotel rooms.2 The projections are primarily based on official sources.

2.2 Residential

The following analysis provides projected demand for multi-family housing units between 2014 and 2035 for the City of Azusa and the Downtown and Citrus station area TODs. Additional housing-related data can be found in Appendix B – for Los Angeles County, Azusa and other cities within the region. Projections of housing demand for the TOD subareas utilize a top-down approach. First, SCAG projections of household growth citywide and other cities within the region were compiled and compared based on two growth scenarios – low and high. Next, the percent of projected units that would occur in multifamily configurations was estimated for the two TOD subareas.3 Finally, the projected number of new multifamily units in each TOD subarea was estimated.

Starting at the City level of the projection process, Table 2-1 (below) shows the projected growth in total and multifamily households for Azusa and the projected number of new multifamily units between 2014 and 2035 for the two TOD subareas.

2 Note that geographic areas could vary by use types. 3 Model assumption: Each TOD subarea was estimated to have a 35% share of the City’s projected demand for new multifamily units between 2014 and 2035. The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 15

TABLE 2-1. HOUSEHOLD GROWTH PROJECTIONS FOR THE CITY OF AZUSA AND TOD SUBAREAS Potential Demand (dwelling units):

Low High

Citywide Housing Demand 1,970 2,370

Multi-family share 800 1,200

-- Two Station Areas @ 70% 560 840 Source: TNDG

2.3 Retail

The Study Area

Retail demand analysis is based on the following geographies:

 Primary Market Area o City of Azusa  Secondary Market Area - East (SMA-E) o City of Glendora  Secondary Market Area - West (SMA-W) o City of Duarte  TODs o Downtown Station o Citrus Station area

Retail Sales Demand Demand for retail goods and services that is generated by residents of multiple market areas defined for this analysis is a function of four variables: existing and projected population, income levels, and the portion of income allocated toward retail expenditures. The population figures for the Primary and Secondary Market Areas are based on existing figures and SCAG projections. Per capita income levels, for this portion of the analysis, remain static. The allocation of those available dollars to retail goods varies depending on the relative affluence of the community. For this analysis the following factors were applied to total income in market areas:4

4 This factor is based on data from the National Consumer Expenditure Survey (published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics) for households with comparable income levels to those in the trade area. The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 16

 47% for PMA  41.3% for SMA-E  45% for SMA-W

Table 2-2 provides population, per capita incomes, estimated total income, and potential retail expenditures for residents of a primary and two secondary market areas for 2012 through 2035. Note that figures for market areas are not summed, because the market areas are treated very differently in subsequent tables in terms of their effect on the study area. Based on these income levels and the growth in population, the potential annual retail sales within the Primary Market Area (Azusa) are expected to increase from $373.5 million in 2012 to $459.3 million in 2035, a 23% increase.

TABLE 2-2. POPULATION, INCOME AND RETAIL SALES PROJECTIONS (2012-2035), REGIONAL RETAIL TRADE AREA Year Category 2012 2017 2020 2035 Population Primary Market Area (PMA) 43,753 47,790 49,500 53,800 Secondary Market Area-East (SMA-E) 50,101 50,441 52,900 56,700 Secondary Market Area-West (SMA-W) 21,193 21,101 22,100 23,400 Total Population 115,047 119,332 124,500 133,900 Per Capita Income Projections Primary Market Area (PMA) $18,157 $18,157 $18,157 $18,157 Secondary Market Area-East (SMA-E) $30,257 $30,257 $30,257 $30,257 Secondary Market Area-West (SMA-W) $24,792 $24,792 $24,792 $24,792

Total Income ($1000s) Primary Market Area (PMA) $794,423 $867,723 $898,772 $976,847 Secondary Market Area-East (SMA-E) $1,515,906 $1,526,193 $1,600,595 $1,715,572 Secondary Market Area-West (SMA-W) $525,417 $523,136 $547,903 $580,133 Total Income $2,835,746 $2,917,052 $3,047,270 $3,272,551 Potential Retail Sales (1) ($1000s) Primary Market Area (PMA) $373,524 $407,988 $422,586 $459,296 Secondary Market Area-East (SMA-E) $625,515 $629,760 $660,460 $707,904 Secondary Market Area-West (SMA-W) $236,520 $235,494 $246,643 $261,151 Total Potential Retail Sales $1,235,559 $1,273,241 $1,329,690 $1,428,351

1) Calculated as 47% of income for PMA, 41.3% for SMA-E and 45% for SMA-W. Source: ESRI; Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG); The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. (TNDG).

Projected retail demand for project residents is disaggregated into various retail categories based upon historic retail expenditure patterns. The basic distribution of retail sales by retail category is as follows (Table 2-3):

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 17

TABLE 2-3. DISTRIBUTION OF SALES BY RETAIL CATEGORY Retail Category % Distribution Shopper Goods: Apparel 8.34% General Merchandise 11.76% Home Furnishings 7.96% Specialty 10.13%

Subtotal 34.54%

Convenience Goods: Food 18.55% Eating and Drinking 13.43%

Subtotal 33.58%

Heavy Commercial Goods: Building/ Hardware/ Farm 5.59% Auto Dealers and Parts 14.24% Service Stations 11.90%

Subtotal 31.88%

Total 100.00% Source: TNDG, based on historic trends for Los Angeles County as reported by the State Board of Equalization.

Table 2-4 (below) shows the breakdown of projected retail sales by major category.

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 18

TABLE 2-4. PROJECTED PMA DEMAND FOR RETAIL SALES BY MAJOR RETAIL CATEGORY, IN THOUSANDS OF $ Retail Category 2012 2017 2020 2035

Shopper Goods: Apparel $31,160 $34,035 $35,253 $38,316 General Merchandise $37,930 $41,430 $42,912 $46,640 Furniture/Appliances $20,439 $22,325 $23,124 $25,132 Specialty $39,489 $43,133 $44,676 $48,557

Subtotal $129,019 $140,923 $145,965 $158,645

Convenience Goods: Food (Convenience/Specialty) $69,302 $75,697 $78,405 $85,216 Eating and Drinking $56,131 $61,310 $63,504 $69,020

Subtotal $125,433 $137,006 $141,909 $154,236

Heavy Commercial Goods: Building/ Hardware/ Farm $22,133 $24,175 $25,040 $27,216 Auto Dealers and Parts $49,221 $53,762 $55,686 $60,523 Service Stations $47,719 $52,121 $53,986 $58,676

Subtotal $119,072 $130,059 $134,713 $146,415

Total $373,524 $407,988 $422,586 $459,296 Source: TNDG

Potential Capture of Resident Demand for All Market Areas Total demand was allocated to the PMA and SMA areas using factors that ranged from 5% to 100%. Based on these capture rates, the potential capture of retail sales demand for the three market areas is projected in Table 2-5 (below). The projections show that retail sales figures are expected to increase from nearly $397 million in 2017 to over $500 million by 2035.

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 19

TABLE 2-5. POTENTIAL CAPTURE OF SALES FROM COMBINED MARKET AREAS, IN THOUSANDS OF $ Retail Category 2012 2017 2020 2035

Shopper Goods: Apparel $24,809 $26,970 $27,953 $33,078 General Merchandise $54,324 $49,748 $52,788 $54,898 Furniture/Appliances $20,697 $19,732 $21,343 $22,137 Specialty $38,123 $41,237 $42,770 $50,873

Subtotal $132,411 $142,338 $147,758 $171,938

Convenience Goods: Food (Convenience/Specialty) $81,096 $77,299 $83,723 $86,820 Eating and Drinking $54,188 $58,615 $60,794 $72,312

Subtotal $131,487 $142,338 $147,614 $166,517

Heavy Commercial Goods: Building/ Hardware/ Farm $25,653 $24,687 $26,739 $27,728 Auto Dealers and Parts $55,866 $54,900 $59,463 $61,662 Service Stations $53,398 $57,822 $59,963 $65,061

Subtotal $132,986 $144,024 $149,353 $162,056

Total $396,884 $428,700 $444,725 $500,511 Source: TNDG

Table 2-6 (below) shows the total capture rate of sales from the combined market areas, and includes estimates of contributions to demand from APU students and faculty/staff, and transit riders. The projections show that retail sales figures are expected to increase from $421.4 million in 2017 to $527.2 million by 2035.

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 20

TABLE 2-6. TOTAL POTENTIAL CAPTURE OF SALES FROM COMBINED MARKET AREAS, APU STUDENTS AND FACULTY/STAFF, AND TRANSIT RIDERS, IN THOUSANDS OF $ Retail Category 2012 2017 2020 2035

Shopper Goods: Apparel $26,101 $28,369 $29,363 $34,540 General Merchandise $54,324 $57,914 $60,078 $67,106 Furniture/Appliances $20,697 $22,309 $23,103 $27,297 Specialty $40,227 $43,714 $45,284 $53,570

Subtotal $141,349 $152,307 $157,827 $182,513

Convenience Goods: Food (Convenience/Specialty) $81,096 $87,815 $90,940 $98,471 Eating and Drinking $63,117 $67,603 $69,787 $81,334

Subtotal $144,213 $155,417 $160,728 $179,805

Heavy Commercial Goods: Building/ Hardware/ Farm $25,653 $27,705 $28,694 $31,052 Auto Dealers and Parts $55,866 $60,429 $62,628 $67,874 Service Stations $54,364 $58,788 $60,929 $66,027

Subtotal $135,883 $146,922 $152,251 $164,953

Total $421,445 $454,645 $470,806 $527,271 Source: TNDG

Supportable Square Feet of Retail Development

Comparison of Potential Demand with Actual Sales There are two methods of converting gross demand sales figures into the net supportable square feet of new retail development. Both methods involve the use of sales-per-square-foot standards, as shown in Table 2-9. The first method is to compare the projected sales demand to actual sales based on data from the State Board of Equalization. The second method is to estimate the space requirements based on gross sales demand, and compare that to the existing stock of retail facilities. This study uses the former method. Table 2-7 (below) compares the calculated estimated demand in 2012 with actual 2012 sales for each major retail category for the City of Azusa. The expected-less-actual figures are then used as the starting point for calculating the net supportable retail sales for the Regional Retail Trade Area, as shown below in Table 2-8.

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 21

TABLE 2-7. COMPARISON OF POTENTIAL DEMAND WITH ACTUAL SALES, CITY OF AZUSA, IN THOUSANDS OF $ Retail Expected Category 2012 2012 Less Percent Demand Sales Actual Actual/Expected

Shopper Goods: Apparel $26,101 $13,421 $12,680 51.42% Furniture/Appliances $20,697 $3,656 $17,041 17.66% Specialty* $40,227 $20,114 $20,114 50.00%

Subtotal $87,025 $37,191 $49,835 42.74%

Convenience Goods: Food (Convenience/Specialty) $81,096 $59,924 $21,172 73.89% Eating and Drinking $63,117 $46,714 $16,403 74.01%

Subtotal $144,213 $106,638 $16,403 73.94%

Heavy Commercial Goods: Building/ Hardware/ Farm $25,653 $3,178 $22,475 12.39% Auto Dealers and Parts $55,866 $16,444 $39,422 29.43% Service Stations $54,364 $77,498 ($23,134) 142.55%

Subtotal $135,883 $97,120 $38,763 71.47%

Total $367,121 $240,948 $126,173 65.63% *For this schedule, 2012 sales in the category of "specialty" have been estimated at the level shown. The data were not available independently because Specialty was combined with General Merchandise in the source database for disclosure reasons. For this same reason, and given that General Merchandise stores are so limited in Azusa, that category is disregarded in this schedule and the subsequent analysis. Source: TNDG, State Board of Equalization

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 22

TABLE 2-8. NET SUPPORTABLE RETAIL SALES, REGIONAL RETAIL TRADE AREA, IN THOUSANDS OF $ Retail Category 2012 2017 2020 2035

Shopper Goods: Apparel $12,680 $14,841 $15,825 $20,949 Furniture/Appliances $17,041 $18,653 $19,447 $23,641 Specialty $20,114 $23,228 $24,761 $32,864

Subtotal $49,835 $56,722 $60,032 $77,453

Convenience Goods: Food (Convenience/Specialty) $21,172 $27,596 $30,693 $38,079 Eating and Drinking $16,403 $20,829 $23,009 $34,526

Subtotal $37,575 $48,426 $53,702 $72,605

Heavy Commercial Goods: Building/Hardware/Garden $22,475 $24,527 $25,516 $27,874 Auto Dealers and Parts $39,422 $43,985 $46,184 $51,430 Service Stations $0 $4,424 $6,565 $11,663

Subtotal $61,897 $72,936 $78,265 $90,967

GRAND TOTAL $149,307 $178,084 $191,998 $241,026 Source: TNDG Sales per Square Foot Standards The final step in the retail demand analysis is to translate the dollar volumes of projected retail demand into supportable square footages of retail space. Projected sales volume requirements per square foot of retail space by retail category are derived from typical sales standards from the Urban Land Institute’s Dollars & Cents of Shopping Centers periodic publication and from typical sales-per-square-foot data from representative stores in each retail category. These standards are shown in Table 2-9. The standards represent sales levels normally required for newly developed space to be viable; although existing areas with older space could be functioning sustainably at lower levels.

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 23

TABLE 2-9. SUPPORTABLE SPACE ANNUAL SALES PER SQUARE FOOT STANDARDS Sales/ Square Retail Category Feet Shopper Goods: Apparel $300 Furniture/Appliances $500 General Merchandise + Specialty $300 Convenience Goods: Food (supermarkets, etc.) $475 Eating/Drinking $400 Heavy Commercial Goods: Building/Hardware/Garden $300 Auto Parts* $175 Services Space @ 10% of Total Space N/A

*Assumes that automotive parts stores account for 8% of sales in overall Automotive group category (based on statewide average as reported SBOE). Source: TNDG, ULI

Supportable Retail Space for the Regional Trade Area, City of Azusa and TOD Subareas The above standards are applied to net demand for retail sales in each retail category in order to convert sales figures to net supportable square feet of retail space. Table 2-10 and Table 2-11 (below) provides these estimates through 2035 for the Regional Retail Trade Area and the City of Azusa/TOD Subareas respectively. The supportable square footages for retail stores have been increased by 10 percent to account for personal and business services space appropriate for shopping center settings.5

5 This factor is based on data from the ULI’s Dollar & Cents of Shopping Centers: 2006 publication and a review of a proprietary database of shopping center information in a major metropolitan area. Depending on the shopping center format, the percent of total services space usually ranges from 5% to 30%. For neighborhood shopping facilities, services space typically accounts for 20 to 25% of total shopping center space. The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 24

TABLE 2-10. POTENTIAL SUPPORTABLE SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL DEVELOPMENT, REGIONAL RETAIL TRADE AREA

Retail Category 2017 2020 2025 Shopper Goods: 49,471 52,748 69,830 Apparel 37,306 38,893 47,281 Furniture/Appliances 77,425 82,536 109,546 General Merchandise + Specialty

Convenience Goods: 58,098 64,617 80,166 Food (supermarkets, etc.) 52,074 57,521 86,316 Eating/Drinking

Heavy Commercial Goods: 81,755 85,052 92,915 Building/Hardware/Garden 27,648 29,030 32,327 Auto Parts* 42,642 45,600 57,598 Services Space @ 10% of Total Space Total 426,419 455,998 575,979 Source: TNDG *Assumes that automotive parts stores account for 8% of sales in overall Automotive group category (based on statewide average as reported SBOE).

TABLE 2-11. PROJECTED DEMAND FOR NEW RETAIL SPACE, CITY OF AZUSA AND TOD SUBAREAS Potential Square Feet of Potential Shares of New Retail Citywide Citywide Development Demand Demand (Station Areas) (Station Areas)

Through Retail Sales Category 2035 Downtown Citrus Downtown Citrus

Apparel 70,000 35% 35% 25,000 25,000 Furniture/Appliances 47,000 25% 25% 12,000 12,000 Specialty 110,000 35% 35% 39,000 39,000 Food (supermarkets, etc.) 80,000 50% 25% 40,000 20,000 Eating/Drinking 86,000 50% 25% 43,000 22,000 Building/Hardware/Garden 93,000 10% 25% 9,000 23,000 Auto Parts 32,000 0% 35% 0 11,000 Services (in retail space) 58,000 25% 25% 15,000 15,000

Total 576,000 183,000 167,000

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 25

2.4 Office/Industrial

This section evaluates the future potential demand for office and industrial facilities in Azusa and the San Gabriel Valley. Employment projection estimates were based on derived from California EDD and SCAG forecast data for Los Angeles County and the San Gabriel Valley. Azusa office demand estimates were calculated using two (2) methods:6

 Method 1: Azusa demand based on proportion of San Gabriel Valley (excluding Pasadena) demand for office/industrial space.  Method 2: Azusa office demand based on proportion of San Gabriel Valley (excluding Pasadena) total employment by place of residence.

Projections for the City of Azusa were calculated as a proportion of San Gabriel Valley based on US Census OnTheMap employment by place of residence data for 2011. The following analysis examines current and future demand through 2035.

Employment Forecasts by Industry

Industry employment data were derived from a variety of sources, starting with the State forecasts.7 TNDG extrapolated the State industry projection data for Los Angeles County through 2035 and used employment projections from SCAG and US Census on the Map employment data to estimate the employment projections for Azusa. Table 2-12 presents the employment forecast figures for Los Angeles, which as a whole are projected to increase from 4.06 million in 2014 to 4.82 million by 2035, a 19 percent increase. Table 2-13 (below) shows the industry forecast data for San Gabriel Valley (excluding Pasadena), which was based on 2014 data from California EDD and SCAG, and the County projection figures. Total nonfarm employment is projected to increase from 619,572 in 2014 to 667,400 by 2035, a 7.7% increase.

6 Azusa estimates also include US Census OnTheMap employment by place of residence data for 2011. 7 Forecasts included data through 2020, as provided by the California Employment Development Department (EDD) and calibrated based on SCAG projections through 2035. The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 26

TABLE 2-12. EMPLOYMENT FORECASTS BY INDUSTRY GROUP, LOS ANGELES COUNTY Jobs Industry Group 2014 2020 2035 Natural Resources, Mining, & Construction 121,066 142,500 154,278 Manufacturing 367,629 359,428 355,542 Wholesale Trade 226,202 265,483 287,020 Retail Trade 423,232 485,921 519,695 Transportation & Utilities 163,250 184,245 195,403 Information 201,671 217,949 226,307 Financial Activities 220,480 238,039 247,047 Professional & Business Services 583,041 677,507 728,891 Educational & Health Services 589,033 706,063 771,312 Leisure & Hospitality 431,213 511,537 555,952 Other Services 143,754 155,024 160,800 Government 593,239 614,302 624,753

Total 4,063,812 4,558,000 4,827,000 Source: TNDG, based on estimates and forecasts prepared by California Employment Development Department (CEDD), and SCAG.

TABLE 2-13. EMPLOYMENT FORECASTS BY INDUSTRY GROUP, SAN GABRIEL VALLEY (SGV) Jobs Industry Group 2014 2020 2035 Natural Resources, Mining, & Construction 20,938 21,515 22,948 Manufacturing 53,907 53,708 53,237 Wholesale Trade 43,325 44,497 47,407 Retail Trade 74,833 76,572 80,867 Transportation & Utilities 26,455 26,992 28,312 Information 10,007 10,136 10,450 Financial Activities 37,576 38,056 39,221 Professional & Business Services 87,463 89,677 95,163 Educational & Health Services 161,788 166,755 179,171 Leisure & Hospitality 55,169 56,763 60,736 Other Services 35,575 36,023 37,108 Government 12,535 12,607 12,781

Total 619,572 633,300 667,400 Source: The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. (TNDG) based on estimates and forecasts prepared by U.S. Census Bureau.

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 27

Office and Industrial Employment by Industry

Distribution of Office and Industrial Employment by Industry The next step in the analysis identifies the percentage of employment attributable to office or industrial space (i.e. as a type of use) by industry, shown in Table 2-14 (below). The distribution percentages were derived by TNDG based on long-term studies of office and industrial demand conditions, related to employment growth, across southern California.

TABLE 2-14. ALLOCATION OF OFFICE AND INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY, SGV Percentage Distribution of Employees in Space Types by Industry: Office Industrial Industry Group Space Space Other (1) Total

Natural Resources, Mining, & Construction 0.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Manufacturing 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 100.0% Wholesale Trade 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 100.0% Retail Trade 0.0% 5.0% 95.0% 100.0% Transportation & Utilities 0.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Information 75.0% 25.0% 0.0% 100.0% Financial Activities 90.0% 0.0% 10.0% 100.0% Professional & Business Services 25.0% 20.0% 55.0% 100.0% Educational & Health Services 25.0% 0.0% 75.0% 100.0% Leisure & Hospitality 5.0% 0.0% 95.0% 100.0% Other Services 5.0% 50.0% 45.0% 100.0% Government (2) 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% 100.0% 1. “Other” category includes for example retail space, hotels, government buildings, and employment that occurs outdoors and in other non-specific locations. 2. The assumption applied within this allocation process is that only government uses in privately owned buildings would be included in the Office Space category. Source: The Natelson Dale Group, Inc.

Projected Employment by Land Use Category The projected office and industrial employment figures are a product of the data in Table 2-14 (above) and Table 2-13 (preceding), and the projections are shown below in Table 2-15. The data reveal that office employment is expected to increase from 108,174 in 2014 to 116,612 by 2035, an increase of 7.8 percent. Industrial is projected to increase from 162,453 in 2014 to 170,517 in 2035, representing a five (5) percent increase. Both office and industrial employment are expected to increase at a lower rate than Other employment, representing all other nonfarm industries, which is anticipated to rise from 348,946 in 2014 to 380,272 by 2035 (9% increase).

Table 2-16 (below) highlights the incremental change in Office, Industrial and Other employment by time interval. The largest absolute increases for each of the employment categories, by a wide margin even allowing for the longer interval, are projected to occur between 2020 and 2035.

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 28

TABLE 2-15. PROJECTED EMPLOYMENT BY LAND USE CATEGORY, SGV Employment (Jobs) by Year:

Land Use Category 2012 2020 2035

Office 108,174 110,600 116,612 Industrial 162,453 164,767 170,517 Other 348,946 357,933 380,272

Total Nonfarm Employment 619,572 633,300 667,400 Source: The Natelson Dale Group, Inc.

TABLE 2-16. PROJECTED CHANGE IN OFFICE AND INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT BY TIME PERIOD, SGV Jobs Land Use Category 2012-2020 2020-2035

Office 2,426 6,012 Industrial 2,314 5,749 Other 8,987 22,339

Total Nonfarm Employment 13,727 34,101 Source: The Natelson Dale Group, Inc.

Projected Demand for New Office/Industrial Space Based on the projected Office and Industrial employment figures in Table 2-16 (above), the final portion of the analysis translates the employment estimates into supportable square footages for each use type. Table 2-17 (below) shows the square-feet-per-employee factors that were used in the conversion process.

TABLE 2-17. SQUARE FOOTAGE PER EMPLOYEE BY LAND USE TYPE Square Feet per Use Type Employee Office 175 Industrial 500 Source: The Natelson Dale Group, Inc.

Based on these factors, Table 2-18 (below) displays the estimated demand for new Office and Industrial space for the SGV through 2035. New supportable office space is expected to increase by a total of 1.6 million square feet during the projection period, most of this within the 2020-2035 period during which the annual average increase is 77,159 square feet. Demand for industrial space is projected to increase by 4.4 million square feet between 2012 and 2035, most of this within the 2020-2035 period during which the annual average increase is 210,811 square feet.

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 29

TABLE 2-18. PROJECTED DEMAND FOR NEW OFFICE AND INDUSTRIAL SPACE, SGV 2012-2020 2020-2035 Total Office Demand Demand for New Space 424,571 1,052,162 1,476,733 Construction Demand @ 110% 467,028 1,157,378 1,624,406

Net Demand for New Space 467,028 1,157,378 1,624,406

Industrial Demand Demand for New Space 1,157,093 2,874,690 4,031,783 Construction Demand @ 110% 1,272,802 3,162,159 4,434,961

Net Demand for New Space 1,272,802 3,162,159 4,434,961 Note that construction demand at 105% allows for a 95% stabilized occupancy rate. Source: The Natelson Dale Group, Inc.

Projected Demand for New Office/Industrial Space, Azusa The following estimates projected demand for Azusa represent industrial and office demand estimates. The office space estimates were calculated using two separate estimates based on the following.

The following demand analysis for Azusa includes:

 Office Method 1: Azusa office demand based on Azusa’s proportion (2.2%) of San Gabriel Valley (excluding Pasadena) demand for office space.  Office Method 2: Azusa office demand based on Azusa’s proportion (2.7%) of San Gabriel Valley (excluding Pasadena) total employment by place of residence.  Industrial: Azusa industrial space demand based on Azusa’s proportion (3.6%) of San Gabriel Valley (excluding Pasadena) demand for industrial.

Table 2-19 (below) shows projected demand estimates for office space in Azusa based on ‘Method 1.’ This method projects a net increase of 36,320 square feet of office space by 2035. Table 2-20 (below) shows projected demand estimates for office space in Azusa based on ‘Method 2,’ and projects an increase of 44,565 square feet of office space by 2035.

TABLE 2-19. PROJECTED DEMAND FOR NEW OFFICE SPACE, CITY OF AZUSA (METHOD 1) Demand in Square Feet (SF) Office Demand 1 2014-2020 2020-2035 Total Demand for New Space 9,493 23,525 33,018 Construction Demand @ 110% 10,442 25,878 36,320

Net Demand for New Space 10,442 25,878 36,320

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 30

TABLE 2-20. PROJECTED DEMAND FOR NEW OFFICE SPACE, CITY OF AZUSA (METHOD 2) Demand in Square Feet (SF) Office Demand 2 2014-2020 2020-2035 Total Demand for New Space 11,648 28,866 40,513 Construction Demand @ 110% 12,813 31,752 44,565

Net Demand for New Space 12,813 31,752 44,565

Industrial space within the City of Azusa are projected to increase by 157,616 square feet between 2014 and 2035 (Table 2-21, below).

TABLE 2-21. PROJECTED DEMAND FOR INDUSTRIAL SPACE, CITY OF AZUSA Demand in Square Feet (SF) Industrial 2014-2020 2020-2035 Total Demand for New Space 41,122 102,165 143,287 Construction Demand @ 110% 45,235 112,381 157,616

Net Demand for New Space 45,235 112,381 157,616

Projected Demand for New Office/Industrial Space, City of Azusa TOD Subareas Table 2-22 (below) shows the estimated projected office and industrial demand for the Azusa Downtown Station and Citrus Station areas. The office space estimates were calculated using the results of the preceding analysis.

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 31

TABLE 2-22. PROJECTED DEMAND FOR OFFICE SPACE, CITY OF AZUSA & TOD SUBAREAS Potential Demand (in square feet): Low High

(Method 1) (Method 2) Azusa's Share of Incremental Office Demand, based on Employment Growth 36,320 44,565

Potential "Opportunistic" Demand Based on Current Under-representation In Office-related Employment Sectors 52,845 105,689

Total Potential Demand for New Office Space, Citywide 89,165 150,254

Potential Shares of TOD Subareas (total square feet of new office construction)

-- Downtown Station Area @ 50% 45,000 75,000

-- Citrus Station Area @ 20% 18,000 30,000

2.5 Hotel Demand Projections

In order to analyze potential demand for future hotel development in Azusa, TNDG evaluated current and historic hotel market data for the overall 210 Freeway Corridor. The evaluated market area includes the following cities:

 Azusa  San Dimas  Glendora  Duarte  Covina  Irwindale  Monrovia  Bradbury  Arcadia

The evaluated market area excludes Pasadena since the nature of the hotel market in Pasadena is generally not comparable to the other communities along the 210 Corridor (Pasadena is more urbanized and also is more recognized as a tourism destination).

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 32

Within the evaluated 210 Corridor, the existing supply of hotel facilities totals approximately 2,800 guest rooms. Based on the data source8 used for this analysis, Azusa currently has five hotels (or motels) totaling 237 rooms. Thus, Azusa’s share of the room count for the overall 210 Corridor is approximately 8%. In comparison, Azusa accounts for approximately 16% of total population and approximately 15% of total employment in the Corridor, suggesting that Azusa is substantially under-represented in the hospitality market. Moreover, the existing facilities in Azusa are smaller, economy hotels ranging in age from 25 to 50 years. As such, Azusa’s effective participation in the 210 Corridor hotel market is actually smaller than the 8% market share would indicate.

Within the hospitality industry, an average occupancy rate of 70% is generally regarded as the threshold at which new hotel development becomes feasible. Based on this benchmark, if occupancy rates are below 70% a market area is considered overbuilt; if occupancies exceed 70% a market is considered under-supplied and able to support new facilities. For the overall 210 Corridor, hotel occupancy rates during averaged 70.4% in 2012 and 71.0% in 2013. Between 2007 and 2010, ranged from 60% to 68%, reflecting the general recessionary conditions during those years. Within the immediate Azusa- Glendora-San Dimas sub-area, occupancy rates are generally comparable to the overall Corridor, although in 2013 the sub-area’s occupancy level was somewhat higher at 73.1%. These occupancy levels indicate that the area would currently be able to support new hotel facilities.

Table 2-23 summarizes TNDG’s projections of potential demand for future hotel development in Azusa. The projections are based on the following assumptions:

 Demand growth for the overall 210 Corridor is projected to average 1% per year. This assumption is based on historic trends, as well as projected population and employment growth in the area (which are the basic drivers of hotel demand in a non-tourism market).  Azusa’s market share of incremental demand is projected to range from 8% (its current share) to 15% (a more aggressive assumption, proportionate to Azusa’s share of the Corridor’s population and employment).  In addition to capturing a share of incremental demand, the analysis also considers potential “catch up” demand, whereby Azusa would capture a larger share of total existing hotel demand (in effect correcting for the City’s current under-representation). For this component of the analysis, TNDG has assumed a one-time adjustment of 4.5% of the Corridor’s total supportable hotel supply in 2014.

As detailed in Table 2-23, TNDG projects total potential support for new hotel facilities (citywide) to range between 205 and 260 rooms in 2035. A 111-room hotel project is currently proposed in Azusa for a 2.82-acre site at 229 S. Azusa Avenue (adjacent to the 210 Freeway). Adjusting for this proposed project, the net remaining demand available to support other future hotel projects in the City would be 94 to 149 rooms.

Station Area Hotel Opportunities. Hotel development opportunities tend to be location sensitive. In particular, hotel developers typically prefer sites that have either: (a) freeway visibility/access (such as

8 Hotel market data cited in this report are from Smith Travel Research. The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 33 the project currently proposed at 229 S. Azusa Avenue), or (b) close proximity to a major activity generator or other amenity. In Azusa’s case, the most significant opportunities for additional hotel development (i.e., beyond the freeway-oriented project already proposed) are likely to relate to Azusa Pacific University (APU). While APU is not likely by itself to generate sufficient demand to support a new hotel, it would, in combination with general demand in the area, provide a strong market attraction for a hotel developer. The future availability of transit facilities in Azusa will further enhance this attraction and would potentially allow a Downtown hotel location to take advantage of APU-related demand (i.e., the hotel would not necessarily need to be located in immediate proximity to APU in order to serve APU demand).

Given nature of the hotel market in Azusa (and the potential connection to APU demand), TNDG believes the most appropriate scale of hotel development would be a “focused/limited-service” hotel of approximately 100 to 150 guest rooms. Based on the projections developed for this analysis, this scale of hotel development would be feasible in Azusa by approximately 2025. However, given that Azusa is already substantially under-served with hotel facilities (in terms of the numbers of hotel rooms per capita), it is possible that demand for an additional hotel could emerge sooner than projected.

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 34

TABLE 2-23. POTENTIAL DEMAND FOR NEW HOTEL DEVELOPMENT Hotel Market Variable 2000 2004 2008 2012 2013 2014 2016 2018 2020 2025 2035 Room Supply, 210 Corridor 1,125,295 1,114,582 1,118,626 1,135,028 1,134,267

Room Demand, 210 Corridor1 803,967 845,530 695,424 799,404 805,422 813,476 829,827 846,507 863,521 907,570 1,002,522

Supportable Supply, 210 Corridor2 1,148,524 1,207,900 993,463 1,142,006 1,150,603 1,162,109 1,185,467 1,209,295 1,233,602 1,296,528 1,432,174

Cumulative Increase in Supportable Supply (210 Corridor), 2000-2024 59,376 0 0 2,079 13,585 36,943 60,771 85,078 148,004 283,649

New Hotel Rooms Supportable 37 101 166 233 405 777 POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT DEMAND IN AZUSA (Quantified in Rooms)

Component 1 - share of incremental growth: Azusa Market Potential Share @ 8.00% 3 8 13 19 32 62 Azusa Market Potential Share @ 15.00% 6 15 25 35 61 117

Component 2 - "catch up" demand (based on current underrepresentation): Azusa "catch up" demand @ 4.50% of total existing inventory in 210 Corridor 143

Total Potential Demand by Year Low Projection 146 151 156 162 175 205 High Projection 149 158 168 178 204 260 1. Annual Room Demand Growth: 2014-2035 @ 1.00% 2. Stabilized Occupancy Rate of 70.0% Sources: Smith Travel Research; The Natelson Dale Group, Inc.

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 35

Appendix A. Demographics

DEMOGRAPHIC SUMMARY, ABSOLUTE VALUES (0.25 MIL RADIUS FROM STATION)

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 36

South Azusa Sierra Pasadena- Azusa Citrus Downtown Del Mar Highland Montclair Madre Mission Station Station Station Park Station Station Station Overview Total Population 579 1,494 1,909 4,538 937 522 2,261 Total Households 243 481 1,091 1,296 277 244 977 Total Housing Units 266 482 1,268 1,471 294 262 1,069 Education School Enrollment 572 1,430 1,857 4,356 931 513 2,245 Enrolled in school 386 456 352 1,342 256 92 711 Population over 25 172 935 1,556 2,783 654 429 1,699 Some HS 12 262 128 1,510 169 38 73 HS or equivalent 28 257 171 408 132 106 148 Some college/Associate's 66 286 328 457 250 115 427 Bachelor's 31 85 442 294 67 107 545 Advanced 35 45 484 114 36 63 489 Commute, by means of transport Total commuters 262 591 1,053 1,926 369 259 1,288 Public Transport 12 44 123 333 4 12 66 Bus or trolley bus 11 44 11 237 - 8 30 Streetcar or trolley car - - 2 5 - - 10 Subway or elevated - - 100 90 - 4 19 Railroad 1 - 10 1 4 - 8 Ferryboat ------Travel Time Total 252 583 1,029 1,833 345 253 1,223 Less than 5 minutes 35 2 5 34 15 1 88 6-14 minutes 120 115 174 236 60 79 298 15-29 minutes 33 266 412 620 184 84 363 30-59 min 52 137 339 601 50 67 417 60 min or more 13 62 100 343 36 20 57 Income Median Household Income $57,614 $31,632 $52,832 $40,364 $53,859 $74,270 $69,456 Per Capita Income $16,719 $17,713 $54,833 $15,596 $20,443 $38,383 $46,013 Housing Housing units, total 266 482 1,268 1,471 294 262 1,069 Single family 146 295 50 523 82 189 472 Multi-family (2 or more units) 67 180 1,216 947 181 72 597 Mobile home/RV 54 7 2 - 31 - - Housing units, year built Units built after 2005 11 - 227 35 - 13 16 Units built 2000 to 2004 5 1 135 12 9 8 46 Median year structure built 1973 1958 1973 1956 1981 1956 1947 Housing, Value Median home value $413,415 $370,000 $495,455 $505,682 $253,125 $620,879 $748,810 Median contract rent $1,523 $1,021 $1,448 $889 $1,438 $1,643 $1,251

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 37

DEMOGRAPHIC SUMMARY, % OF TOTAL, AS RELEVANT (0.25 MIL RADIUS FROM STATION) South Azusa Azusa Sierra Pasadena- Citrus Downtown Del Mar Highland Montclair Madre Mission Station Station Station Park Station Station Station Overview Total Population N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total Households N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total Housing Units N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Education Population over 25 Some HS 7.0% 28.0% 8.2% 54.3% 25.8% 8.9% 5.2% HS or equivalent 16.3% 27.5% 11.0% 14.7% 20.2% 24.7% 8.7% Some college/Associate's 38.4% 30.6% 21.1% 16.4% 38.2% 26.8% 25.1% Bachelor's 18.0% 9.1% 28.4% 10.6% 10.2% 24.9% 32.1% Advanced 20.3% 4.8% 31.1% 4.1% 5.5% 14.7% 28.8% Transport Total Public Transport 4.6% 7.4% 11.7% 17.3% 1.1% 4.6% 5.1% Bus or trolley bus 4.2% 7.4% 1.0% 12.3% 0.0% 3.1% 2.3% Streetcar or trolley car 0.0% 0.0% 0.2% 0.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.8% Subway or elevated 0.0% 0.0% 9.5% 4.7% 0.0% 1.5% 1.5% Railroad 0.4% 0.0% 0.9% 0.1% 1.1% 0.0% 0.6% Travel Time Total Less than 5 minutes 13.9% 0.3% 0.5% 1.9% 4.3% 0.4% 7.2% 6-14 minutes 47.6% 19.7% 16.9% 12.9% 17.4% 31.2% 24.4% 15-29 minutes 13.1% 45.6% 40.0% 33.8% 53.3% 33.2% 29.7% 30-59 min 20.6% 23.5% 32.9% 32.8% 14.5% 26.5% 34.1% 60 min or more 5.2% 10.6% 9.7% 18.7% 10.4% 7.9% 4.7% Income Median Household Income N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Per Capita Income N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Housing Housing units, total Single family 54.9% 61.2% 3.9% 35.6% 27.9% 72.1% 44.2% Multi-family (2 or more units) 25.2% 37.3% 95.9% 64.4% 61.6% 27.5% 55.8% Mobile home/RV 20.3% 1.5% 0.2% 0.0% 10.5% 0.0% 0.0% Housing units, year built Units built after 2005 4.1% 0.0% 17.9% 2.4% 0.0% 5.0% 1.5% Units built 2000 to 2004 1.9% 0.2% 10.6% 0.8% 3.1% 3.1% 4.3% Median year structure built Housing, Value Median home value N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Median contract rent N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 38

Appendix B. Housing Data

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 39

HOUSING UNIT SUMMARY (LOCAL CITIES WITH AVAILABLE DATA) 2012 2013 2014 Persons Existing housing Persons Existing housing Persons per supply per supply per Existing housing supply household % SFR % MFR household % SFR % MFR household % SFR % MFR

Los Angeles County 2.99 56.4% 41.9% 3.00 56.3% 42.0% 3.02 57.8% 42.2%

Azusa 3.44 59.2% 36.7% 3.46 59.2% 36.7% 3.47 63.8% 36.2%

Baldwin Park 4.38 78.5% 19.8% 4.40 78.4% 19.8% 4.42 78.4% 19.8%

Bradbury 2.97 97.3% 2.7% 2.98 97.3% 2.7% 3.00 97.3% 2.7%

Covina 3.00 67.1% 29.6% 3.02 67.2% 29.5% 3.03 67.2% 29.5%

Glendora 2.89 81.7% 14.0% 2.90 81.6% 14.1% 2.92 81.4% 14.3%

Duarte 3.00 77.0% 20.7% 3.01 77.1% 20.7% 3.02 77.1% 20.7%

Monrovia 3.68 94.6% 3.9% 3.70 92.2% 6.3% 3.72 92.2% 6.3%

Irwindale 2.66 69.8% 29.1% 2.67 69.7% 29.2% 2.69 69.7% 29.2%

West Covina 3.35 74.1% 24.9% 3.37 74.1% 24.9% 3.38 74.1% 24.9% Source: California Department of Finance

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 40

BUILDING PERMIT DATA 2005, 2010-13 2005 2010 2011 2012 2013 Bldgs Units Bldgs Units Bldgs Units Bldgs Units Bldgs Units LA County

SFR 12,523 12,523 2,384 2,384 2,275 2,275 2,675 2,675 3,839 3,839 % SFR 92.4% 53.3% 87.2% 32.8% 87.6% 23.0% 86.5% 23.5% 88.7% 26.0%

MFR 1,024 10,975 350 4,876 322 7,620 416 8,690 487 10,937 % MFR 7.6% 46.7% 12.8% 67.2% 12.4% 77.0% 13.5% 76.5% 11.3% 74.0% Azusa, CA

SFR 57 57 35 35 153 153 136 136 208 208 % SFR 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

MRF ------% MFR 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Source: U.S. Census, Building Permits - Annual New Privately-Owned Residential Building Permits

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 41

POPULATION & HOUSEHOLD PROJECTIONS population households % % change % change % change change 08-20 20-35 08-20 20-35 Los Angeles County Azusa 6.91% 8.69% 8.7% 7.2% Baldwin Park 3.71% 5.12% 4.1% 3.9% Bradbury 10.00% 0.00% 33.3% 0.0% Covina 1.88% 3.08% 1.9% 3.1% Glendora 6.44% 7.18% 5.9% 2.2% Duarte 4.25% 5.88% 5.7% 6.8% Monrovia 3.86% 4.51% 5.1% 3.5% Irwindale 14.29% 25.00% 0.0% 25.0% West Covina 5.75% 7.13% 3.2% 4.0% Source: SCAG

POPULATION & HOUSEHOLD PROJECTIONS, ABSOLUTE VALUES 2008 2020 2035 2008 2020 2035 Population Population Population Households Households Households Los Angeles County Azusa 46,300 49,500 53,800 12,700 13,800 14,800 Baldwin Park 75,400 78,200 82,200 17,200 17,900 18,600 Bradbury 1,000 1,100 1,100 300 400 400 Covina 47,800 48,700 50,200 15,900 16,200 16,700 Glendora 49,700 52,900 56,700 17,000 18,000 18,400 Duarte 21,200 22,100 23,400 7,000 7,400 7,900 Monrovia 36,300 37,700 39,400 13,600 14,300 14,800 Irwindale 1,400 1,600 2,000 400 400 500 West Covina 106,100 112,200 120,200 31,600 32,600 33,900 Source: SCAG

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 42

POPULATION & HOUSEHOLD PROJECTIONS, ABSOLUTE CHANGE population households Change Change Change Change 08-20 20-35 08-20 20-35 Los Angeles County

Azusa 3,200 4,300 1,100 1,000

Baldwin Park 2,800 4,000 700 700

Bradbury 100 - 100 -

Covina 900 1,500 300 500

Glendora 3,200 3,800 1,000 400

Duarte 900 1,300 400 500

Monrovia 1,400 1,700 700 500

Irwindale 200 400 - 100

West Covina 6,100 8,000 1,000 1,300 Source: SCAG

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 43

TENURE Estimate; Total: Estimate; Total: Geography Estimate; Total: Owner-occupied % Owner-Occupied Renter-occupied % Renter-Occupied Los Angeles County, California 3,218,511 1,523,331 47.3% 1,695,180 52.7% Azusa city, California 12,137 6,369 52.5% 5,768 47.5% Baldwin Park city, California 17,330 10,496 60.6% 6,834 39.4% Charter Oak CDP, California 3,081 2,129 69.1% 952 30.9% Citrus CDP, California 2,675 1,919 71.7% 756 28.3% Covina city, California 15,152 8,979 59.3% 6,173 40.7% Duarte city, California 6,876 4,696 68.3% 2,180 31.7% Glendora city, California 16,403 11,460 69.9% 4,943 30.1% Irwindale city, California 365 260 71.2% 105 28.8% Monrovia city, California 13,428 6,717 50.0% 6,711 50.0% Vincent CDP, California 3,787 3,239 85.5% 548 14.5% West Covina city, California 30,760 19,827 64.5% 10,933 35.5%

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 44

Appendix C. Retail Data

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 45

Table C-1 Population Regional Retail Trade Area

Area 2012 2017 2020 2035

Primary Market Area (PMA) 43,753 47,790 49,500 53,800 Secondary Market Area-East (SMA-E) 50,101 50,441 52,900 56,700 Secondary Market Area-West (SMA-W) 21,193 21,101 22,100 23,400

Total 115,047 119,332 124,500 133,900

PMA = City of Azusa SMA-E = City of Glendora SMA-W = City of Duarte

Source: ESRI; Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG); The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. (TNDG).

Table C-2 Per Capita Income Projections Regional Retail Trade Area In constant dollars 2012

Primary Market Area (PMA) $18,157 Secondary Market Area-East (SMA-E) $30,257 Secondary Market Area-West (SMA-W) $24,792

Annual Increase Factor 0.00%

Area 2012 2017 2020 2035

Primary Market Area (PMA) $18,157 $18,157 $18,157 $18,157 Secondary Market Area-East (SMA-E) $30,257 $30,257 $30,257 $30,257 Secondary Market Area-West (SMA-W) $24,792 $24,792 $24,792 $24,792

Source: ESRI; TNDG

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 46

Table C-3 Total Income and Potential Retail Sales Projections Regional Retail Trade Area In Thousands of 2012 Dollars

Area 2012 2017 2020 2035

Percent of Income Spent on Retail Goods Primary Market Area (PMA) 47.0% 47.0% 47.0% 47.0% Secondary Market Area-East (SMA-E) 41.3% 41.3% 41.3% 41.3% Secondary Market Area-West (SMA-W) 45.0% 45.0% 45.0% 45.0%

Total Income: Primary Market Area (PMA) $794,423 $867,723 $898,772 $976,847 Secondary Market Area-East (SMA-E) $1,515,906 $1,526,193 $1,600,595 $1,715,572 Secondary Market Area-West (SMA-W) $525,417 $523,136 $547,903 $580,133

Total Income $2,835,746 $2,917,052 $3,047,270 $3,272,551

Potential Retail Sales: Primary Market Area (PMA) $373,524 $407,988 $422,586 $459,296 Secondary Market Area-East (SMA-E) $625,515 $629,760 $660,460 $707,904 Secondary Market Area-West (SMA-W) $236,520 $235,494 $246,643 $261,151

Total Potential Retail Sales $1,235,559 $1,273,241 $1,329,690 $1,428,351

Source: State Board of Equalization (BOE); U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey; U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis; TNDG.

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 47

Table C-4 Distribution of Retail Sales by Retail Category Regional Retail Trade Area

% % % Distributio Distributio Distributio n n n % Distribution Retail Category 2012 2017 2020 2035

Shopper Goods: Apparel 8.34% 8.34% 8.34% 8.34% General Merchandise 10.15% 10.15% 10.15% 10.15% Home Furnishings 5.47% 5.47% 5.47% 5.47% Specialty 10.57% 10.57% 10.57% 10.57%

Subtotal 34.54% 34.54% 34.54% 34.54%

Convenience Goods: Food 18.55% 18.55% 18.55% 18.55% Eating and Drinking 15.03% 15.03% 15.03% 15.03%

Subtotal 33.58% 33.58% 33.58% 33.58%

Heavy Commercial Goods: Building/ Hardware/ Farm 5.93% 5.93% 5.93% 5.93% Auto Dealers and Parts 13.18% 13.18% 13.18% 13.18% Service Stations 12.78% 12.78% 12.78% 12.78%

Subtotal 31.88% 31.88% 31.88% 31.88%

Total 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%

Source: TNDG, based on historic trends for Los Angeles County as reported by the State Board of Equalization.

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 48

Table C-5 Projected PMA Demand for Retail Sales by Major Retail Category Regional Retail Trade Area In Thousands of 2012 Dollars

Retail Category 2012 2017 2020 2035

Shopper Goods: Apparel $31,160 $34,035 $35,253 $38,316 General Merchandise $37,930 $41,430 $42,912 $46,640 Furniture/Appliances $20,439 $22,325 $23,124 $25,132 Specialty $39,489 $43,133 $44,676 $48,557

Subtotal $129,019 $140,923 $145,965 $158,645

Convenience Goods: Food (Convenience/Specialty) $69,302 $75,697 $78,405 $85,216 Eating and Drinking $56,131 $61,310 $63,504 $69,020

Subtotal $125,433 $137,006 $141,909 $154,236

Heavy Commercial Goods: Building/ Hardware/ Farm $22,133 $24,175 $25,040 $27,216 Auto Dealers and Parts $49,221 $53,762 $55,686 $60,523 Service Stations $47,719 $52,121 $53,986 $58,676

Subtotal $119,072 $130,059 $134,713 $146,415

Total $373,524 $407,988 $422,586 $459,296

Source: TNDG

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 49

Table C-6 Projected SMA-E Demand for Retail Sales by Major Retail Category Regional Retail Trade Area In Thousands of 2012 Dollars

Retail Category 2012 2017 2020 2035

Shopper Goods: Apparel $52,182 $52,536 $55,097 $59,055 General Merchandise $63,519 $63,950 $67,067 $71,885 Furniture/Appliances $34,228 $34,460 $36,140 $38,736 Specialty $66,130 $66,579 $69,824 $74,840

Subtotal $216,059 $217,525 $228,129 $244,516

Convenience Goods: Food (Convenience/Specialty) $116,056 $116,843 $122,539 $131,342 Eating and Drinking $93,998 $94,636 $99,250 $106,379

Subtotal $210,054 $211,479 $221,789 $237,721

Heavy Commercial Goods: Building/ Hardware/ Farm $37,065 $37,316 $39,136 $41,947 Auto Dealers and Parts $82,426 $82,986 $87,031 $93,283 Service Stations $79,911 $80,453 $84,375 $90,436

Subtotal $199,402 $200,755 $210,542 $225,666

Total $625,515 $629,760 $660,460 $707,904

Source: TNDG

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 50

Table C-7 Projected SMA-W Demand for Retail Sales by Major Retail Category Regional Retail Trade Area In Thousands of 2012 Dollars

Retail Category 2012 2017 2020 2035

Shopper Goods: Apparel $19,731 $19,646 $20,576 $21,786 General Merchandise $24,018 $23,914 $25,046 $26,519 Furniture/Appliances $12,942 $12,886 $13,496 $14,290 Specialty $25,005 $24,897 $26,075 $27,609

Subtotal $81,696 $81,342 $85,193 $90,204

Convenience Goods: Food (Convenience/Specialty) $43,883 $43,693 $45,761 $48,453 Eating and Drinking $35,543 $35,388 $37,064 $39,244

Subtotal $79,426 $79,081 $82,825 $87,697

Heavy Commercial Goods: Building/ Hardware/ Farm $14,015 $13,954 $14,615 $15,474 Auto Dealers and Parts $31,167 $31,032 $32,501 $34,413 Service Stations $30,216 $30,085 $31,509 $33,363

Subtotal $75,398 $75,071 $78,625 $83,250

Total $236,520 $235,494 $246,643 $261,151

Source: TNDG

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 51

Table C-8 Potential Capture Rates of PMA Demand Regional Retail Trade Area

Retail Category 2012 2017 2020 2035

Shopper Goods: Apparel 75% 75% 75% 80% General Merchandise 85% 85% 85% 90% Furniture/Appliances 85% 85% 85% 90% Specialty 85% 85% 85% 90%

Convenience Goods: Food (Convenience/Specialty) 100% 100% 100% 100% Eating and Drinking 85% 85% 85% 90%

Heavy Commercial Goods: Building/ Hardware/ Farm 100% 100% 100% 100% Auto Dealers and Parts 100% 100% 100% 100% Service Stations 100% 100% 100% 100%

Source: TNDG

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 52

Table C-9 Potential Capture Rates of SMA-E Demand Regional Retail Trade Area

Retail Category 2012 2017 2020 2035

Shopper Goods: Apparel 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 3.0% General Merchandise 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% Furniture/Appliances 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 7.0% Specialty 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 7.0%

Convenience Goods: Food (Convenience/Specialty) 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% Eating and Drinking 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 7.0%

Heavy Commercial Goods: Building/ Hardware/ Farm 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% Auto Dealers and Parts 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% Service Stations 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0%

Source: TNDG

Table C-10 Potential Capture Rates of SMA-W Demand Regional Retail Trade Area

Retail Category 2012 2017 2020 2035

Shopper Goods: Apparel 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 3.0% General Merchandise 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% Furniture/Appliances 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 7.0% Specialty 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 7.0%

Convenience Goods: Food (Convenience/Specialty) 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% Eating and Drinking 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 7.0%

Heavy Commercial Goods: Building/ Hardware/ Farm 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% Auto Dealers and Parts 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% Service Stations 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0%

Source: TNDG

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 53

Table C-11 Potential Capture of Sales from PMA Regional Retail Trade Area In Thousands of 2012 Dollars

Retail Category 2012 2017 2020 2035

Shopper Goods: Apparel $23,370 $25,527 $26,440 $30,653 General Merchandise $32,241 $35,215 $36,475 $41,976 Furniture/Appliances $17,373 $18,976 $19,655 $22,619 Specialty $33,566 $36,663 $37,975 $43,701

Subtotal $106,550 $116,381 $120,545 $138,949

Convenience Goods: Food (Convenience/Specialty) $69,302 $75,697 $78,405 $85,216 Eating and Drinking $47,711 $52,113 $53,978 $62,118

Subtotal $117,013 $127,810 $132,383 $147,334

Heavy Commercial Goods: Building/ Hardware/ Farm $22,133 $24,175 $25,040 $27,216 Auto Dealers and Parts $49,221 $53,762 $55,686 $60,523 Service Stations $47,719 $52,121 $53,986 $58,676

Subtotal $119,072 $130,059 $134,713 $146,415

Total $342,635 $374,250 $387,641 $432,698

Source: TNDG

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 54

Table C-12 Potential Capture of Sales from SMA-E Regional Retail Trade Area In Thousands of 2012 Dollars

Retail Category 2012 2017 2020 2035

Shopper Goods: Apparel $1,044 $1,051 $1,102 $1,772 General Merchandise $12,704 $12,790 $13,413 $14,377 Furniture/Appliances $1,711 $1,723 $1,807 $2,712 Specialty $3,306 $3,329 $3,491 $5,239

Subtotal $18,765 $18,893 $19,814 $24,099

Convenience Goods: Food (Convenience/Specialty) $5,803 $5,842 $6,127 $6,567 Eating and Drinking $4,700 $4,732 $4,962 $7,447

Subtotal $10,503 $10,574 $11,089 $14,014

Heavy Commercial Goods: Building/ Hardware/ Farm $1,853 $1,866 $1,957 $2,097 Auto Dealers and Parts $4,121 $4,149 $4,352 $4,664 Service Stations $4,121 $4,149 $4,352 $4,664

Subtotal $10,096 $10,164 $10,660 $11,426

Total $39,364 $39,631 $41,563 $49,538

Source: TNDG

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 55

Table C-13 Potential Capture of Sales from SMA-W Regional Retail Trade Area In Thousands of 2012 Dollars

Retail Category 2012 2017 2020 2035

Shopper Goods: Apparel $395 $393 $412 $654 General Merchandise $4,804 $4,783 $5,009 $5,304 Furniture/Appliances $647 $644 $675 $1,000 Specialty $1,250 $1,245 $1,304 $1,933

Subtotal $7,096 $7,065 $7,399 $8,890

Convenience Goods: Food (Convenience/Specialty) $2,194 $2,185 $2,288 $2,423 Eating and Drinking $1,777 $1,769 $1,853 $2,747

Subtotal $3,971 $3,954 $4,141 $5,170

Heavy Commercial Goods: Building/ Hardware/ Farm $701 $698 $731 $774 Auto Dealers and Parts $1,558 $1,552 $1,625 $1,721 Service Stations $1,558 $1,552 $1,625 $1,721

Subtotal $3,817 $3,801 $3,981 $4,215

Total $14,884 $14,820 $15,521 $18,275

Source: TNDG

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 56

Table C-14 Potential Capture of Sales from Combined Market Areas Regional Retail Trade Area In Thousands of 2012 Dollars

Retail Category 2012 2017 2020 2035

Shopper Goods: Apparel $24,809 $26,970 $27,953 $33,078 General Merchandise $49,748 $52,788 $54,898 $61,657 Furniture/Appliances $19,732 $21,343 $22,137 $26,331 Specialty $38,123 $41,237 $42,770 $50,873

Subtotal $132,411 $142,338 $147,758 $171,938

Convenience Goods: Food (Convenience/Specialty) $77,299 $83,723 $86,820 $94,206 Eating and Drinking $54,188 $58,615 $60,794 $72,312

Subtotal $131,487 $142,338 $147,614 $166,517

Heavy Commercial Goods: Building/ Hardware/ Farm $24,687 $26,739 $27,728 $30,087 Auto Dealers and Parts $54,900 $59,463 $61,662 $66,908 Service Stations $53,398 $57,822 $59,963 $65,061

Subtotal $132,986 $144,024 $149,353 $162,056

Total $396,884 $428,700 $444,725 $500,511

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 57

Table C-15 Projected Retail Spending of APU "Daytime" Student Population (1) PMA In Thousands of 2012 Dollars

Total APU full-time students 7,330

2012 2017 2020 2035

Total APU students 7,330 7,330 7,330 7,330 Less: Est. PMA Residents, @: 2,932 2,932 2,932 2,932 40% Daytime Student/Faculty/Staff Population 4,398 4,398 4,398 4,398 Estimated local spending component: 45% Annual PMA Retail Spending (2) $19,316 $19,316 $19,316 $19,316

(1) "Daytime" population is defined as students who do NOT live within the PMA; those who DO live in the trade area are not included in the "daytime" demand numbers since they are assumed to be included in the residential demand analysis summarized on the preceding table.

(2) Retail spending of daytime student population assumes annual expenditures of $9,760

Source: Spending amount from previous studies by TNDG, adjusted for inflation.

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 58

Table C-16 Distribution of Retail Expenditures of Daytime Student Population* PMA In Thousands of 2012 Dollars

Retail Category 2012 2017 2020 2035 Figures are all calibrated to be similar to ASU study breakdown Shopper Goods: Apparel @ 5.00% $966 $966 $966 $966 G.M. @ 15.00% $2,897 $2,897 $2,897 $2,897 Furniture @ 5.00% $966 $966 $966 $966 Specialty @ 5.00% $966 $966 $966 $966

Subtotal 30.00% $5,795 $5,795 $5,795 $5,795

Convenience Goods: Food @ 15.00% $2,897 $2,897 $2,897 $2,897 Eating/Drinking @ 40.00% $7,726 $7,726 $7,726 $7,726

Subtotal 55.00% $10,624 $10,624 $10,624 $10,624

Heavy Commercial Goods: Hardware @ 5.00% $966 $966 $966 $966 Automobiles @ 5.00% $966 $966 $966 $966 Svc. Stations @ 5.00% $966 $966 $966 $966

Subtotal 15.00% $2,897 $2,897 $2,897 $2,897

Total 100.00% $19,316 $19,316 $19,316 $19,316

Source: TNDG

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 59

Table C-17 Projected Retail Spending of APU Faculty & Staff Population (1) PMA In Thousands of 2012 Dollars

Total Faculty and Staff 1,929

2012 2017 2020 2035

Total APU faculty/staff 1,929 1,929 1,929 1,929 Less: Est. PMA Residents, @: 772 772 772 772 40% Daytime Faculty/Staff 1,157 1,157 1,157 1,157 Daily spending in area @: $25.18 Annual Retail Spending $5,245 $5,245 $5,245 $5,245

Source: Michael P. Niemira and John Connolly. Office Worker Retail Spending in the Digital Age. ICSC, 2012. TNDG

Table C-18 Distribution of Retail Expenditures of Faculty/Staff* PMA In Thousands of 2012 Dollars

Retail Category 2012 2017 2020 2035 Breakdowns per ICSC Shopper Goods: Apparel @ 6.22% $326 $326 $326 $326 G.M. @ 32.00% $1,678 $1,678 $1,678 $1,678 Furniture @ 0.00% $0 $0 $0 $0 Specialty @ 21.71% $1,139 $1,139 $1,139 $1,139

Subtotal 59.93% $3,143 $3,143 $3,143 $3,143

Convenience Goods: Food @ 17.14% $899 $899 $899 $899 Eating/Drinking @ 22.93% $1,202 $1,202 $1,202 $1,202

Subtotal 40.07% $2,102 $2,102 $2,102 $2,102

Heavy Commercial Goods: Hardware @ 0.00% $0 $0 $0 $0 Automobiles @ 0.00% $0 $0 $0 $0 Svc. Stations @ 0.00% $0 $0 $0 $0

Subtotal 0.00% $0 $0 $0 $0

Total 100.00% $5,245 $5,245 $5,245 $5,245

Source: ICMA report; TNDG

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 60

Table C-19 Projected Retail Spending of Transit Riders PMA In Thousands of 2012 Dollars

(Station open) 2017 2020 2035

Avg weekday ridership 1,000 1,070 1,175 1,700 Avg weekend/holiday ridership, as % of weekday @: 220 235 259 374 22% Annual ridership 275,080 294,336 323,219 467,636

Commuter Retail Expenditures Per Day $20.27 Allocation to station area @: 25% Weekend Traveler Retail Expenditures Per Day $15.20 As % of weekday @: 75% Allocation to station area @: 20% Weighted daily expenditures near station $4.70 $4.70 $4.70 $4.70

Annual Rider Expenditures $1,293 $1,384 $1,520 $2,199

Source: Michael P. Niemira and John Connolly. Office Worker Retail Spending in the Digital Age. ICSC, 2012. TNDG

Table C-20

Distribution of Retail Expenditures of Transit Riders

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 61

PMA In Thousands of 2012 Dollars

Retail Category 2012 2017 2020 2035 Re-allocated from ICSC, adjusted for no lunches Shopper Goods: Apparel @ 7.73% $0 $107 $117 $170 G.M. @ 39.74% $0 $550 $604 $874 Furniture @ 0.00% $0 $0 $0 $0 Specialty @ 26.97% $0 $373 $410 $593

Subtotal 74.44% $0 $1,030 $1,131 $1,637

Convenience Goods: Food @ 21.29% $0 $295 $324 $468 Eating/Drinking @ 4.27% $0 $59 $65 $94

Subtotal 25.56% $0 $354 $389 $562

Heavy Commercial Goods: Hardware @ 0.00% $0 $0 $0 $0 Automobiles @ 0.00% $0 $0 $0 $0 Svc. Stations @ 0.00% $0 $0 $0 $0

Subtotal 0.00% $0 $0 $0 $0

Total 100.00% $0 $1,384 $1,520 $2,199

Source: ICMA report; TNDG

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 62

Table C-21 Potential Capture of Sales from Combined Market Areas, APU Students and Faculty/Staff, and Transit Riders Regional Retail Trade Area In Thousands of 2012 Dollars

Retail Category 2012 2017 2020 2035

Shopper Goods: Apparel $26,101 $28,369 $29,363 $34,540 General Merchandise $54,324 $57,914 $60,078 $67,106 Furniture/Appliances $20,697 $22,309 $23,103 $27,297 Specialty $40,227 $43,714 $45,284 $53,570

Subtotal $141,349 $152,307 $157,827 $182,513

Convenience Goods: Food (Convenience/Specialty) $81,096 $87,815 $90,940 $98,471 Eating and Drinking $63,117 $67,603 $69,787 $81,334

Subtotal $144,213 $155,417 $160,728 $179,805

Heavy Commercial Goods: Building/ Hardware/ Farm $25,653 $27,705 $28,694 $31,052 Auto Dealers and Parts $55,866 $60,429 $62,628 $67,874 Service Stations $54,364 $58,788 $60,929 $66,027

Subtotal $135,883 $146,922 $152,251 $164,953

Total $421,445 $454,645 $470,806 $527,271

Source: TNDG

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 63

Table C-22 Comparison of Potential Demand with Actual Sales City of Azusa In Thousands of 2012 Dollars

Expected Retail Category 2012 2012 Less Percent Demand Sales Actual Actual/Expected

Shopper Goods: Apparel $26,101 $13,421 $12,680 51.42% Furniture/Appliances $20,697 $3,656 $17,041 17.66% Specialty* $40,227 $20,114 $20,114 50.00%

Subtotal $87,025 $37,191 $49,835 42.74%

Convenience Goods: Food (Convenience/Specialty) $81,096 $59,924 $21,172 73.89% Eating and Drinking $63,117 $46,714 $16,403 74.01%

Subtotal $144,213 $106,638 $16,403 73.94%

Heavy Commercial Goods: Building/ Hardware/ Farm $25,653 $3,178 $22,475 12.39% Auto Dealers and Parts $55,866 $16,444 $39,422 29.43% Service Stations $54,364 $77,498 ($23,134) 142.55%

Subtotal $135,883 $97,120 $38,763 71.47%

Total $367,121 $240,948 $126,173 65.63%

*For this schedule, 2012 sales in the category of "specialty" have been estimated at the level shown. The data were not available independently because Specialty was combined with General Merchandise in the source database for disclosure reasons. For this same reason, and given that General Merchandise stores are so limited in Azusa, that category is disregarded in this schedule and the subsequent analysis. Source: TNDG, State Board of Equalization

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 64

Table C-23 Net Supportable Retail Sales Regional Retail Trade Area In Thousands of 2012 Dollars

Retail Category 2012 2017 2020 2035

Shopper Goods: Apparel $12,680 $14,841 $15,825 $20,949 Furniture/Appliances $17,041 $18,653 $19,447 $23,641 Specialty $20,114 $23,228 $24,761 $32,864

Subtotal $49,835 $56,722 $60,032 $77,453

Convenience Goods: Food (Convenience/Specialty) $21,172 $27,596 $30,693 $38,079 Eating and Drinking $16,403 $20,829 $23,009 $34,526

Subtotal $37,575 $48,426 $53,702 $72,605

Heavy Commercial Goods: Building/Hardware/Garden $22,475 $24,527 $25,516 $27,874 Auto Dealers and Parts $39,422 $43,985 $46,184 $51,430 Service Stations $0 $4,424 $6,565 $11,663

Subtotal $61,897 $72,936 $78,265 $90,967

GRAND TOTAL $149,307 $178,084 $191,998 $241,026

Source: TNDG

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 65

Table C-24 Net Supportable Retail Space Regional Retail Trade Area Expressed in Sales/Square Feet

Sales/ Square Retail Category Feet 2017 2020 2035

Shopper Goods:

Apparel $300 49,471 52,748 69,830

Furniture/Appliances $500 37,306 38,893 47,281

General Merchandise + Specialty $300 77,425 82,536 109,546 Convenience Goods:

Food (supermarkets, etc.) $475 58,098 64,617 80,166

Eating/Drinking $400 52,074 57,521 86,316 Heavy Commercial Goods:

Building/Hardware/Garden $300 81,755 85,052 92,915

Auto Parts* $175 27,648 29,030 32,327

Services Space @ 10% of Total Space N/A 42,642 45,600 57,598

GRAND TOTAL 426,419 455,998 575,979

Source: TNDG *Assumes that automotive parts stores account for 11% of sales in overall Automotive group category (based on statewide average as reported SBOE).

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 66

Appendix D. Office/Industrial Data

OTM DATA San Gabriel Valley Azusa

Total Primary Jobs 2011 2011

Count Share Count Share

590,861 100.0% 16,210 100.0% Total Primary Jobs

Jobs by Worker Age 2011 2011

Count Share Count Share

134,281 22.7% 3,805 23.5% Age 29 or younger 338,543 57.3% 9,478 58.5% Age 30 to 54 118,037 20.0% 2,927 18.1% Age 55 or older

Jobs by Earnings 2011 2011

Count Share Count Share

126,566 21.4% 3,360 20.7% $1,250 per month or less 228,375 38.7% 6,737 41.6% $1,251 to $3,333 per month 235,920 39.9% 6,113 37.7% More than $3,333 per month

Jobs by NAICS Industry Sector 2011 2011

Count Share Count Share

4,314 0.7% 99 0.6% Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting 379 0.1% 18 0.1% Mining, Quarrying, and Oil and Gas Extraction 6,031 1.0% 155 1.0% Utilities 18,593 3.1% 668 4.1% Construction 62,785 10.6% 2,042 12.6% Manufacturing 43,182 7.3% 956 5.9% Wholesale Trade 64,753 11.0% 1,808 11.2% Retail Trade 21,972 3.7% 620 3.8% Transportation and Warehousing 13,227 2.2% 355 2.2% Information

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 67

San Gabriel Valley Azusa 24,386 4.1% 572 3.5% Finance and Insurance 8,408 1.4% 212 1.3% Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 33,144 5.6% 810 5.0% Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services 9,964 1.7% 233 1.4% Management of Companies and Enterprises Administration & Support, Waste Management 36,397 6.2% 1,178 7.3% and Remediation 56,591 9.6% 1,714 10.6% Educational Services 70,120 11.9% 1,863 11.5% Health Care and Social Assistance 10,178 1.7% 237 1.5% Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation 45,631 7.7% 1,219 7.5% Accommodation and Food Services 33,807 5.7% 775 4.8% Other Services (excluding Public Administration) 26,999 4.6% 676 4.2% Public Administration

Jobs by Worker Race 2011 2011

Count Share Count Share

389,386 65.9% 12,954 79.9% White Alone 24,375 4.1% 607 3.7% Black or African American Alone 7,773 1.3% 266 1.6% American Indian or Alaska Native Alone 156,728 26.5% 2,034 12.5% Asian Alone 1,781 0.3% 56 0.3% Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander Alone 10,818 1.8% 293 1.8% Two or More Race Groups

Jobs by Worker Ethnicity 2011 2011

Count Share Count Share

322,931 54.7% 7,142 44.1% Not Hispanic or Latino 267,930 45.3% 9,068 55.9% Hispanic or Latino

Jobs by Worker Educational Attainment 2011 2011

Count Share Count Share

101,772 17.2% 3,174 19.6% Less than high school 87,751 14.9% 2,511 15.5% High school or equivalent, no college 131,003 22.2% 3,616 22.3% Some college or Associate degree

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 68

San Gabriel Valley Azusa 136,054 23.0% 3,104 19.1% Bachelor's degree or advanced degree Educational attainment not available (workers 134,281 22.7% 3,805 23.5% aged 29 or younger)

Jobs by Worker Sex 2011 2011

Count Share Count Share

296,897 50.2% 8,383 51.7% Male 293,964 49.8% 7,827 48.3% Female

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 69

Appendix E. Summary of Station Development Characteristics

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 70

APPENDIX E. SUMMARY OF KEY DATA FOR TOD CASE STUDIES Station name Del Mar Highland Park South Pasadena/Mission Station Sierra Madre Villa Montclair

(Metrolink) 1,600 spaces, 32 handicapped Free On-site Parking – 877 Spaces; Paid spaces. Free parking. Overnight parking allowed. Station Paid On-site Parking – 610 Spaces; 26 221 public parking spaces; 10 Bike Nearby Free Parking (Independent) – 120 Spaces; 14 Bike Rack Spaces Reserved On-site Parking – 88 Spaces; 10 3 available lots. Gold Line and Metrolink characteristics Bike Rack Spaces (Bike Room) Rack Spaces; 16 Bike Lockers Bike Rack Spaces; 16 Bike Lockers platforms will be connected via the existing pedestrian tunnel. Main TOD project The Stuart at Sierra Madre Villa Apartment element current Avalon Del Mar Station Highland Park Transit Village Mission Meridian Village Paseos at Montclair North Homes name Existing Metrolink and also planned Gold Line Line(s) Gold (804) Gold (804) Gold (804) Gold (804) Foothill Extension Year station opened 2003 2003 2003 2009 Expected to open in 2015

Year TOD completed Completed in 2007 Approved in 2013 Completed in 2005 Phase 1 Completed 2007 Anticipated to be complete by summer 2014 Los Angeles (Highland Park City Pasadena South Pasadena Pasadena Montclair Neighborhood) Phase 1: 188 apartments. Phase 2: 212 apartments; and 300-seat, live performance 385 residential units; 385,000 square feet of 80 residential units plus public theatre with 15,000 s.f. of ancillary office 347 apartments and retail above a A 3-story mixed-use building houses 5,000 square feet of ground-floor living space, 722 parking spaces, as well as parking, on three City-owned space. The project's clubhouse, and the 1,200-car multi-level subterranean retail and 14 loft condominiums, and is designed to reflect the extensive common area amenities: 2 outdoor sites. The project will be built in theatre, re-purpose the historic (mid-20th parking garage, with 600 spaces character of the historic commercial buildings that line Mission Street. swimming pools, a clubhouse, and a public park. two phases, the first phase a 50- century), neo-formalist design, and Completed/planned dedicated to transit. Old Santa Fe The remaining residential structures contain 50 units — Property also has a coffee bar, a business and unit residential building with 49 architecturally significant Stuart Company development Depot (approx. 6,000 SF) repurposed condominiums, townhomes, and duplexes that range in size from 763 leasing center with 2 conference rooms, and a affordable units and a 10-unit Building, adding 21st-century conveniences. to restaurant/retail functions and square feet to 2,400 square feet. The project also includes three single- fitness center. Homes range in size from 541 multi-family building with all units Project includes a business center and media another 11,000 SF for such purposes family residences, fronting on Magnolia Street, as a transition to the square-foot studios to 1,442 square-foot three affordable. The second phase is a room (L) apartments range in size from 585 added (A, B). 21 affordable units. adjoining residential neighborhood. bedroom apartments, plus a limited number of 20-unit condominium. to 1200 SF (K). 12 affordable units (M). A live-work units. (H,J,Q) final project phase, recently approved, will include additional apartments. (S) Though all units were built for sale, the inclusion of very small units provided for affordability by design. 324 parking spaces are situated in (continued from a two-level subterranean structure that extends the length of the above) project. Separate entrances are provided for public parking and private residential parking, with 142 spaces reserved for transit users.

Project Acreage 3.4 2.1 1.6 7.6 15.4

Ranges from 16 to 80 units/acre, overall average density 40 units/acre Residential densities Approx. 100 units/acre 38.1 units/acre overall 25.0 (F)

BHV Center Street Properties, LLC (Principal GLJ Partners, with equity investor Canyon- Developer Urban Partners LLC McCormack Baron Salazar Creative Housing Associates now with Raintree Partners) Johnson Urban Funds

Moule & Polyzoides, Architects and Architect DE Architects Moule & Polyzoides, Architects and Urbanists Architects Orange (Stuart building) DesignARC Urbanists; Nadel Architects

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 71

Station name Del Mar Highland Park South Pasadena/Mission Station Sierra Madre Villa Montclair Metro and Gold Line Construction Authority were part of a joint- The project is to be built on 3 City- Besides the 188 apartment units, the development undertaking with Urban owned (Department of Public participation in the project dev. was based on providing developers were responsible for a 267-car Partners, all parties working Transportation) parking lots, and commuter parking. The city used eminent domain proceedings to help two-level parking structure (one level cooperatively with the City of the parking spaces lost to the assemble much of the property. The remainder of the mostly vacant podium and one partially subterranean Pasadena. Oaktree Capital project's construction are to be land was owned by an adjacent convalescent hospital, and the parking level), but eventually split off the Management and California National replaced on a one-to-one basis. developer agreed to replace parking and build new laundry facilities. garage to Metro because could not come to Bank were also involved. At grade The City’s approval of the project The developer also worked with the city, Caltrans, and Pasadena mutually acceptable terms. Historically Ownership/deal level, Metro built a double-track rail allowed increased densities (80 Heritage to relocate existing bungalows (to a site owned by Caltrans), renovated community/leasing center – a Canyon-Johnson Urban Funds provided a $25.7 structure (i.e., line and northbound and southbound units instead of the 54 permitted restore them, and sell them to first-time homebuyers. Metro granted building that served as the Stuart million equity investment for the acquisition and private, public, or station platforms. As part of its by existing zoning), reduced set- the city $2.56 million in public transportation funds for construction of Pharmaceutical office and research campus development of the site. (H) joint development) development agreement the backs, and increased height limits, the garage; Caltrans provided an additional $1.5 million for the garage during the late 1950’s to the mid-1990’s. The developer provided 600 of the compared to the existing zoning, and utility relocation, and the city contributed $500,000; the total building design, facade and front yard subterranean parking spaces to serve and required construction of 221 public contribution was $5 million, or approximately 20 percent of the landscaping was listed on the Register of transit riders. (B) Multiple parking spaces for public use and project’s $25 million total cost. All parties functioned as partners Historic Places in October 1998. Developer agreements, involving reciprocal 106 for residents. (P) All units are throughout the design, entitlement, construction, and operation got no benefit for having to incorporate easements, land transfers, etc., were affordable with exception of 25 phases. (C, F) building into project. Project was all privately necessary to get the project in place. units for sale at market rates. (V) funded. (S) Overall process is very complicated and requires close coordination (U).

The City Council approved a motion directing the Department of Transportation (LADOT) and the Los Angeles Housing Department (LAHD) to explore the concept of developing a transit oriented project including residential, Gold Line Construction Authority (or Gold Line Construction Authority (or mixed-use retail and public The project has been economically successful. Shared parking was one predecessor agency) sold land for station at predecessor agency) sold land for parking on underutilized City benefit from the TOD, and one way in which the rail stop was key to (continued from market value as required (R). Station was station at market value as required owned parking lots located in near the project - it essentially caused the project to happen. The project is above) end of the line and initially was very (R). Public art was required as part of the Avenue 57 Gold Line Station. family-oriented and tenants make use of the trains. So. Pasadena is a underutilized; but this made no difference in deal. An RFQ was issued in September good place for families to live. (T) the strong lease-up of the project. (S) 2005. Three developers were invited to respond to a formal RFP issued by the City in November 2006, due in February 2007. Proposals were reviewed by LADOT and LAHD based on established evaluation criteria.

Pasadena Central District Specific Specific Plan within which project Plan also guided project design and is located: Avenue 57 Transit approvals. Oriented District

Functional/physical Montclair Transcenter, which includes Old station restored to site, and Project sits adjacent to the transit station relationship to connections for regional bus and Metrolink rail courtyards added. Part of building Across street from station Project, including garage, is across street (Mission) from station along Foothill Boulevard. Apartments are associated transit service, is about one block north from the straddles track. transit-accessible (sharing Gold Line parking) station property.

Approx. $1700 to $4600, and units [not yet built or fully Approximately $1800 to $2600 dollars per Market rents About $1290 to $2500 per month (Q) ranging from 560 to over 1600 SF programmed] (V) month. (K)

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 72

Station name Del Mar Highland Park South Pasadena/Mission Station Sierra Madre Villa Montclair

Immediate surroundings are mostly The 1.2 million square foot Nordstrom-anchored Figueroa Street is shopping single-story commercial buildings, Minimal retail uses, in small-scale structures, occur in immediate site Montclair Plaza regional mall is across the street Surrounding land district, to south, with mix of The project is located across the street from plus Central Park, a major open space area. Within a few blocks east on Market Street is South Pasadena's (to the south) from the property. The Claremont uses and functional neighborhood and convenience the Hastings Ranch shopping center, with amenity. The regional shopping Mission West district, "one of Southern California's more charming Colleges are about one mile (travel distance) relationship with shopping; mostly single-family grocery stores, banks, a bowling alley and district of Paseo Colorado (Colorado shopping areas. . . [that] looks much the same today as it did in the away. The immediate surrounding area includes TOD homes in general area, with some other retailers. Blvd.) and the Pasadena Auditorium early 20's and 30's." (E) single family homes, institutional buildings, and multi-family. are a few walkable blocks away small-scale retail and industrial.

Demographics of [see separate tab] - coming soon surrounding area

Developers submitted to a competitive selection process, City’s marketing administered by the Metro Developer submitted proposal in strategy (to attract development arm. Density competitive process developers) enhancements were generally in place prior, so land value was accordingly maximized. (U)

Density bonuses, in exchange for affordable housing; otherwise City/other Eminent domain to secure property. There was no redevelopment Specific plan included focus on the development Reduced fees, expedited approval (U) project should be straightforward City assistance essentially non-existent incentives offered program involvement (T). concept. to build, so no exceptional costs were involved. Project is located within the Highland Park – Garvanza Historic Preservation Overlay Zone. The Successful developer competed against 20 project has ben the subject of bidders, on land price and design, for rights The project is the first one within the North some controversy, according to to site. Original program called for a tech- Montclair Downtown Specific Plan, intended to news/website reports (N, O). oriented office park, but the collapse of the guide project master planning across Citizens have questioned its scale, tech market after the year 2000 project approximately 150 acres. The Plan envisions a generation of additional parking Awarded Best Transit Oriented Project by the Urban Land Institute; award created the need to re-invent the walkable, vibrant Town Center that includes Project was winner of the Congress demand (i.e. the demand created winner of the Congress for the New Urbanism’s 2006 Charter Award; project as residential, which the City initially multiple uses and activities that take advantage for the New Urbanism’s 2003 Charter by the project coupled with the Tranny Award from Caltrans; 2006 Golden Nugget Award from the objected to but finally accepted (Metro was of the major transit amenities, and includes Award. One of keys to success was loss of existing spaces), and the Pacific Coast Builders Conference. (C) The transit plaza adjacent to the Other success supportive of this change). Light rail was a transit-oriented, mixed-use development. The maintaining communication among overall ability of the area to serve station is used throughout the year for community events (such as a factors, issues, and real asset to the project; but the developer Plan also includes a “pedestrian first” mixed-use the parties - Metro construction the additional residents. The LA weekly Farmers Markets and summer outdoor movie series), and the “lessons learned” was unable to forge an acceptable operating district, which requires an extensive, connected entity, city, and developer. Metro is City Council approved the project city of South Pasadena also decided to spend city funds to augment agreement with Metro construction network of public spaces and smaller streets. generally better at this than the cities in August 2013. The project was the budget for station art and design. Known as “betterments,” the authority and so separated the garage from The Plan's goal is to establish livable (U). approved without an city’s investment resulted in upgrades to the baseline materials used the rest of the property. (S) neighborhoods based upon the concept of Environmental Impact on the platforms, landscaping, lighting and more. (D) In 2008, the Stuart was a finalist in the traditional town centers by creating mixed- Assessment, and some citizens prestigious Gold Nugget award competition, density housing types (townhouses, also claimed the assessment receiving two Awards of Merit for its condominiums, apartments, live/work lofts, and should be required. As of June architecture and reuse of a historical courtyard housing) above retail and office. (J) 2014 the project is tied up in court building. (M) on CEQA issues and matters pertaining to entitlement approvals.

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 73

Station name Del Mar Highland Park South Pasadena/Mission Station Sierra Madre Villa Montclair

In 2006, Pasadena adopted mixed- use standards to encourage the construction of transit-oriented According to one source (G), the community was concerned about development (TOD) projects within negative impacts of the train—noise and interference with traffic—and one-quarter mile of a light-rail station it feared higher density and mixed-use developments would bring platform and within the greater unwanted residents and change the quality-of-life of the Central District Transit-Oriented Area. neighborhood. To counter this, CHA (the developer) conducted Using development standards and aggressive outreach by presenting the project and TOD best practices incentives for TOD projects, the 347- Issue has been (and typically is) to the community, including educational trips to show courtyard unit Del Mar Apartment project was about balancing density for the If Metro could orchestrate all the potential housing of various densities. 23 public meetings and workshops were (continued from built, which provides 21 affordable sake of feasibility and travel partners in TOD projects, that would boost held between November 1998 and April 2002, plus personal meetings above) units. (A) Developers generally prefer efficiency, etc. with what is their chances for success, by alleviating and informal discussions with local businesses and community fee simple ownership because it politically acceptable in the view developers' risks. (S) representatives. The project was built under guidelines of South results in the largest pool of potential of the neighborhood residents. Pasadena’s Mission Street Specific Plan. investors; but the Metro agency does Developer would recommend that TOD sites and components be not always want to do this because of developed in unison so all elements work together, rather than some rules they must follow. Consequently things, like parking, being added later. High-density housing in the it is generally better if Metro land is vicinity of the station really takes advantage of the rail-travel aspect of not involved in the deal and the City a TOD, and helps the residents and the train operators both. (T) is willing to sell land it owns, then keep distance regarding dictating the development details. (U).

Redevelopment has never been a factor in this developer's TOD projects. The covenants attached to Redevelopment projects made them too restrictive, so the impression of (continued from increased project affordability was an above) illusion. In general, cities need to understand that developers need time, after being awarded a project through a competitive process, to raise capital. (U)

Although approved for construction, the fate of this project is uncertain. It has been This project was particularly challenged by the subject of criticism in the the collapse of the "tech bubble" because it official and unofficial This project had the benefit of being, at least This project is often held up as a "role was originally conceived as an employment press/blogsphere, covering a conceptually, pre-planned for its location, model" for TOD, in terms of its center for tech firms, and had to be re- range of objections. Its somewhat According to the developer, people come from around the world to through a Specific Plan process, so had no design, prime setting and location, invented as a residential project by the complicated nature (e.g. multiple visit this project and seek advice from the developer. Shared parking entitlement hurdles. The location was also well- Key points market success, etc. It is the most developer then accepted as such, reluctantly, sites, with different regulatory and was key and having public partners who recognize that the station is established as a transit point due to the existing dense and the most "urban" of all the by the City. The approved deal still design challenges) seemed to best utilized by having high-density housing around. Metrolink station, and is attractive generally as case studies, and involved a complex demanded the retention of an historic office widen the door for objections. an urban living setting because of the retail series of agreements. building on the site, even with the change in Developer claims "98%" of citizens concentration nearby. use, and the developer received no were satisfied with the project, compensation for doing this (S). but vocal minority opposed it and has successfully blocked it so far. (V) These projects tend to be the output of experienced developers, notable architects delivering noteworthy designs, and considerable public interest. To some extent and in some cases, and because of the inherent logic of maximizing housing density near Key points, general the rail stop, the presence of the rail station appeared to leverage the acceptability of multi-family housing in communities where such projects might otherwise be discouraged.

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 74

Station name Del Mar Highland Park South Pasadena/Mission Station Sierra Madre Villa Montclair

A. Pasadena Housing Plan B. Laguna Niguel (in part) C. Creative Housing Associates website

D. Foothills Extension.org: http://www.foothillextension.org/cities-stations/south-pasadena/ E. Metro.net (station descriptions)

F. ULI case study files: http://casestudies.uli.org/Profile.aspx?j=7584&p=2&c=6 G. Small Community Case Study: Mission Street Revitalization, South Pasadena, California. Susan Weaver & Deepak Bahl, Weaver Research and Consulting Group. January 2011. H. Canyon-Johnson Press Release J. City of Montclair K. Apartment Guide: http://www.apartmentguide.com

L. BRE Properties literature: http://www.breproperties.com/california/pasadena-apartments/stuart-sierra-madre-villa/lax1228

M. BHV Center Street Properties, LLC: http://www.bhvcp.com/pasadena.html

N. Curbed LA: http://la.curbed.com/places/highland-park-transit-village O. The Eastsider: http://www.theeastsiderla.com/2013/08/highland-park-transit-village-wins-backing-of-city-council/ P. Department of City Planning Recommendation Report. City Planning Commission Case No.: CPC-2013-226-SPE-CUZAA-CCMP-SPP Date: June 13, 2013 Q. GLJ Partners Paseos website: http://paseosliving.com/residences/ R. Telcom with Greg Angelo, Metro Joint Development Program representative, 04/23/2014 S. Telcom with Jeff Allen, Raintree Partners, 5/5/14 T. Telcom with Michael Dieden, Creative Housing Associates, 5/6/14 U. Telecom with Paul Keller, Urban Partners LLC V. Telecom with Antonio Bermudez, McCormack Baron Salazar, 6/2/14

The Natelson Dale Group, Inc. Demographic and Demand Projection Summary for the City of Azusa 75