Zipcar 2012 Future Metropolis Award and Index
-
date post
12-Sep-2014 -
Category
Business
-
view
10.544 -
download
0
description
Transcript of Zipcar 2012 Future Metropolis Award and Index
[ 1 ]
Zipcar Future Metropolis Index
Research Commissioned by ZipcarFebruary 2012
2 confidential
An Overview and Key Findings
The Future Metropolis Index recognizes cities that demonstrate smart urban planning and policymaking.
America’s cities are the economic engines of the country and a driving source of optimism.
San Francisco is the 2012 leading future metropolis. With high marks across all five dimensions – innovation, sustainability, vibrancy and creativity, efficiency, livability and optimism – San Francisco ranks at the top in the overall index.
The research also shows that urban living correlates with higher levels of optimism about the economic future. Americans living in metro areas are more likely to be optimistic about job prospects than those living in non-metro areas.
3 confidential
Key Findings (cont’d)
Cities along the East and West coast top the list. Following behind San Francisco are Seattle and Washington, DC, along with Portland, Boston and New York respectively.
The most sustainable cities are in the West with higher percentages of bike lanes (Tucson) and hybrid cars (San Francisco).
The Northeast can boast the most efficient cities. Washington, DC, New York and Boston top the list with their public transportation systems; Atlanta and San Francisco follow closely.
San Francisco shines vibrantly, with its arts-related businesses and jobs and many park acres across the city.
El Paso leads in livability. El Paso grabs the number-one spot as most livable due to its lowest homicide rate and second lowest burglary rate, while it falls in the bottom half for all other dimensions.
Atlanta is at the top tier of innovative cities with the most universities and hot spots per 100,000 residents; Pittsburgh follows closely.
4 confidential
Methodology Overview
Data collected for 36 U.S. cities (based on population size)
Publicly available data was used for most sources and converted to a per-capita basis, to equalize and standardize scores
Data was rescaled to further equalize/standardize scores
Data was collected July 2011 – January 2012
Survey and research were conducted by KRC Research, a full-service market and opinion research firm
5 confidential
Methodology Overview (cont’d)
Cities were evaluated on the following dimensions as they are values that align with Zipcar’s mission: Innovation was measured on number of free, publicly available wireless
hotspots per 10,000 residents as well as number of accredited post-secondary degree-granting institutions per 10,000 residents.
Sustainability was measured on miles of bike lanes and paths per 100,000 residents and percent of hybrid cars among the total registered cars.
Vibrancy and Creativity were measured on park acres as a percent of city land area, arts-related jobs per 1,000 residents, and arts-related businesses per 1,000 residents.
Efficiency was measured on the number of workers using public/commuter transportation as a percent of the total workforce and the number of public transportation rides/passenger trips as a percent of area population.
Livability and Optimism were measured on unemployment rate, violent crime rate (homicide per 100,000 residents), and property crime rate (burglaries per 100,000 residents).
6 confidential
Overall Index Ranking and ScoreCity Ranking Score City Ranking Score
San Francisco, CA 1 86 Phoenix, AZ 18 44
Seattle, WA 2 81 Baltimore, MD 20 43
Washington, DC 2 81 Dallas, TX 21 40
Portland, OR 4 79 Milwaukee, WI 22 39
Boston, MA 5 77 Kansas City, MO 22 39
New York, NY 6 72 El Paso, TX 24 38
Atlanta, GA 7 68 Charlotte, NC 25 37
Denver, CO 8 63 Houston, TX 26 34
Pittsburgh, PA 9 62 San Antonio, TX 26 34
Austin, TX 10 60 Las Vegas, NV 28 33
San Diego, CA 10 60 Oklahoma City, OK 29 32
Albuquerque, NM 12 57 Louisville-Jefferson, KY 29 32
Philadelphia, PA 13 55 Jacksonville, FL 29 32
Los Angeles, CA 14 53 Fort Worth, TX 32 30
San Jose, CA 15 50 Columbus, OH 33 29
Nashville-Davidson, TN 16 45 Indianapolis, IN 34 26
Tucson, AZ 16 45 Memphis, TN 34 26
Chicago, IL 18 44 Detroit, MI 36 20
7 confidential
Index Ranking and Dimension ScoreIndex Ranking City Innovation Sustainability Vibrancy/Creativity Efficiency Livability
1 San Francisco, CA 84 94 96 81 75
2 Seattle, WA 83 82 92 73 73
2 Washington, DC 91 79 92 100 43
4 Portland, OR 86 95 84 57 71
5 Boston, MA 95 44 74 98 73
6 New York, NY 40 63 78 99 81
7 Atlanta, GA 99 40 83 94 24
8 Denver, CO 90 48 59 45 73
9 Pittsburgh, PA 96 32 57 69 57
10 Austin, TX 37 82 74 31 74
10 San Diego, CA 38 77 75 33 77
12 Albuquerque, NM 20 92 83 26 67
13 Philadelphia, PA 62 37 51 81 43
14 Los Angeles, CA 23 61 73 51 56
15 San Jose, CA 38 79 32 29 72
16Nashville-Davidson, TN 49 40 57 25 55
16 Tucson, AZ 27 96 18 28 57
18 Chicago, IL 34 27 36 80 43
8 confidential
Overall Index Ranking & Dimension Score (cont’d)Index Ranking City Innovation Sustainability Vibrancy/Creativity Efficiency Livability
18 Phoenix, AZ 32 66 36 29 55
20 Baltimore, MD 67 40 31 66 12
21 Dallas, TX 32 29 65 31 44
22 Milwaukee, WI 55 31 30 39 38
22 Kansas City, MO 78 29 39 28 22
24 El Paso, TX 10 33 33 25 87
25 Charlotte, NC 29 41 33 29 56
26 Houston, TX 18 24 45 31 53
26 San Antonio, TX 21 21 30 28 68
28 Las Vegas, NV 23 51 19 38 34
29 Oklahoma City, OK 30 32 23 22 51
29Louisville-Jefferson, KY 38 30 14 27 49
29 Jacksonville, FL 24 38 30 24 43
32 Fort Worth, TX 18 26 24 23 57
33 Columbus, OH 30 27 29 27 30
34 Indianapolis, IN 29 21 27 24 27
34 Memphis, TN 45 18 20 25 21
36 Detroit, MI 31 14 17 40 0
9 confidential
Innovation Ranking and Scores
Atlanta is at the top tier of innovative cities with the most universities and hot spots per residents; Pittsburgh follows closely
Boston’s universities help it secure the third spot on our innovation list
Innovation Top 51. Atlanta, GA2. Pittsburgh, PA3. Boston, MA4. Washington, DC5. Denver, CO
10 confidential
Innovation Ranking and Scores (cont’d)
City Ranking Score City Ranking Score
Atlanta, GA 1 99 Austin, TX 19 37
Pittsburgh, PA 2 96 Chicago, IL 20 34
Boston, MA 3 95 Phoenix, AZ 21 32
Washington, DC 4 91 Dallas, TX 21 32
Denver, CO 5 90 Detroit, MI 23 31
Portland, OR 6 86 Columbus, OH 24 30
San Francisco, CA 7 84 Oklahoma City, OK 24 30
Seattle, WA 8 83 Indianapolis, IN 26 29
Kansas City, MO 9 78 Charlotte, NC 26 29
Baltimore, MD 10 67 Tucson, AZ 28 27
Philadelphia, PA 11 62 Jacksonville, FL 29 24
Milwaukee, WI 12 55 Los Angeles, CA 30 23
Nashville-Davidson, TN 13 49 Las Vegas, NV 30 23
Memphis, TN 14 45 San Antonio, TX 32 21
New York, NY 15 40 Albuquerque, NM 33 20
San Jose, CA 16 38 Houston, TX 34 18
Louisville-Jefferson, KY 16 38 Fort Worth, TX 34 18
San Diego, CA 16 38 El Paso, TX 36 10
11 confidential
The West wins. The top five sustainable cities are in the West, with the exception of Austin
Tucson ranks highest for sustainability with the most miles of bike lanes per 10,000 residents
San Francisco takes the lead on percentage of hybrid cars followed by Seattle
Sustainability Ranking and Score
Sustainability Top 5
1. Tucson, AZ2. Portland, OR3. San Francisco, CA4. Albuquerque, NM5. Seattle, WA6. Austin, TX
12 confidential
City Ranking Score City Ranking Score
Tucson, AZ 1 96 Baltimore, MD 19 40
Portland, OR 2 95 Jacksonville, FL 20 38
San Francisco, CA 3 94 Philadelphia, PA 21 37
Albuquerque, NM 4 92 El Paso, TX 22 33
Seattle, WA 5 82 Oklahoma City, OK 23 32
Austin, TX 5 82 Pittsburgh, PA 23 32
San Jose, CA 7 79 Milwaukee, WI 25 31
Washington, DC 7 79 Louisville-Jefferson, KY 26 30
San Diego, CA 9 77 Dallas, TX 27 29
Phoenix, AZ 10 66 Kansas City, MO 27 29
New York, NY 11 63 Columbus, OH 29 27
Los Angeles, CA 12 61 Chicago, IL 29 27
Las Vegas, NV 13 51 Fort Worth, TX 31 26
Denver, CO 14 48 Houston, TX 32 24
Boston, MA 15 44 San Antonio, TX 33 21
Charlotte, NC 16 41 Indianapolis, IN 33 21
Atlanta, GA 17 40 Memphis, TN 35 18
Nashville-Davidson, TN 17 40 Detroit, MI 36 14
Sustainability Ranking and Score (cont’d)
13 confidential
Vibrancy/Creativity Ranking and Score
San Francisco shines vibrantly, with its arts-related businesses/jobs & a top 10 spot for park acres
Atlanta leads in arts-related jobs; Seattle in arts-related businesses
Washington, DC and Portland score well across all measures for vibrancy
Albuquerque leads with the most park acres as % of city land
Vibrancy/Creativity Top 51. San Francisco, CA2. Seattle, WA3. Washington, DC4. Portland, OR5. Atlanta, GA5. Albuquerque, MN
14 confidential
City Ranking Score City Ranking Score
San Francisco, CA 1 96 Chicago, IL 19 36
Seattle, WA 2 92 Phoenix, AZ 19 36
Washington, DC 2 92 Charlotte, NC 21 33
Portland, OR 4 84 El Paso, TX 21 33
Atlanta, GA 5 83 San Jose, CA 23 32
Albuquerque, NM 5 83 Baltimore, MD 24 31
New York, NY 7 78 San Antonio, TX 25 30
San Diego, CA 8 75 Milwaukee, WI 25 30
Boston, MA 9 74 Jacksonville, FL 25 30
Austin, TX 9 74 Columbus, OH 28 29
Los Angeles, CA 11 73 Indianapolis, IN 29 27
Dallas, TX 12 65 Fort Worth, TX 30 24
Denver, CO 13 59 Oklahoma City, OK 31 23
Nashville-Davidson, TN 14 57 Memphis, TN 32 20
Pittsburgh, PA 14 57 Las Vegas, NV 33 19
Philadelphia, PA 16 51 Tucson, AZ 34 18
Houston, TX 17 45 Detroit, MI 35 17
Kansas City, MO 18 39 Louisville-Jefferson, KY 36 14
Vibrancy/Creativity Ranking and Score (cont’d)
15 confidential
Efficiency Ranking and Score
East coast cities are most efficient; Washington, DC, New York and Boston top the list
Washington, DC and New York have the highest proportion of commuters using public transportation
Efficiency Top 51. Washington, DC2. New York, NY3. Boston, MA4. Atlanta, GA5. San Francisco, CA5. Philadelphia, PA
16 confidential
City Ranking Score City Ranking Score
Washington, DC 1 100 Houston, TX 18 31
New York, NY 2 99 Dallas, TX 18 31
Boston, MA 3 98 San Jose, CA 21 29
Atlanta, GA 4 94 Phoenix, AZ 21 29
San Francisco, CA 5 81 Charlotte, NC 21 29
Philadelphia, PA 5 81 Kansas City, MO 24 28
Chicago, IL 7 80 Tucson, AZ 24 28
Seattle, WA 8 73 San Antonio, TX 24 28
Pittsburgh, PA 9 69 Louisville-Jefferson, KY 27 27
Baltimore, MD 10 66 Columbus, OH 27 27
Portland, OR 11 57 Albuquerque, NM 29 26
Los Angeles, CA 12 51 Nashville-Davidson, TN 30 25
Denver, CO 13 45 Memphis, TN 30 25
Detroit, MI 14 40 El Paso, TX 30 25
Milwaukee, WI 15 39 Indianapolis, IN 33 24
Las Vegas, NV 16 38 Jacksonville, FL 33 24
San Diego, CA 17 33 Fort Worth, TX 35 23
Austin, TX 18 31 Oklahoma City, OK 36 22
Efficiency Ranking and Score (cont’d)
17 confidential
Livability/Optimism Ranking and Score
El Paso leads in livability due to the lowest homicide rates and second lowest burglary rates after New York
Despite the Great Recession, Austin fares better with relatively lower unemployment rates
San Diego’s low crime rate earns it a spot among the top 5
Livability/Optimism Top 5
1. El Paso, TX2. New York, NY3. San Diego, CA4. San Francisco, CA5. Austin, TX
18 confidential
City Ranking Score City Ranking Score
El Paso, TX 1 87 Phoenix, AZ 18 55
New York, NY 2 81 Houston, TX 20 53
San Diego, CA 3 77 Oklahoma City, OK 21 51
San Francisco, CA 4 75 Louisville-Jefferson, KY 22 49
Austin, TX 5 74 Dallas, TX 23 44
Boston, MA 6 73 Chicago, IL 24 43
Seattle, WA 6 73 Philadelphia, PA 24 43
Denver, CO 6 73 Washington, DC 24 43
San Jose, CA 9 72 Jacksonville, FL 24 43
Portland, OR 10 71 Milwaukee, WI 28 38
San Antonio, TX 11 68 Las Vegas, NV 29 34
Albuquerque, NM 12 67 Columbus, OH 30 30
Fort Worth, TX 13 57 Indianapolis, IN 31 27
Tucson, AZ 13 57 Atlanta, GA 32 24
Pittsburgh, PA 13 57 Kansas City, MO 33 22
Los Angeles, CA 16 56 Memphis, TN 34 21
Charlotte, NC 16 56 Baltimore, MD 35 12
Nashville-Davidson, TN 18 55 Detroit, MI 36 0
Livability/Optimism Ranking and Score (cont’d)
[ 19 ]
Zipcar Future Metropolis National Survey Results
20 confidential
Key Findings
Half of Americans foresee a brighter economic future in their communities, but are doubtful their communities will be safer from violent crime.– Americans are more optimistic about future employment prospects and income
growth than they are about a decline in crime rates in their communities. • One in two Americans (52%) say they agree (either strongly agree or somewhat
agree) that household incomes in their communities will increase in three years, and nearly as many (49%) also agree that job opportunities will also rise in their communities.
• That said, only a third (35%) believe the amount of crimes will decrease in their communities and nearly half (45%) say they disagree that crime rates will decrease in their communities.
21 confidential
Key Findings
Optimism is higher in metro areas. Americans living in metro areas are more likely to be optimistic about job prospects than those living in non-metro areas.– Half of those living in metro areas (53%) say the number of job opportunities in
their communities will increase compared to four in ten of those living in non-metro areas (39%).
– More than four in ten (45%) of those living in non-metro areas disagree that household incomes will increase compared to a third (34%) of those living in metro areas.
Metro Areas Non-Metro Areas0%
10%20%30%40%50%60%
Optimism Around Job Growth
22 confidential
Looking into the future, one in two Americans believe income and job opportunities will increase three years from now.
-19%
-23%
-19%
-26%
-18%
-19%
15%
16%
18%
21%
33%
34%
Three years from now…
Somewhat disagree
Strongly disagree
Stronglyagree
Somewhat agree
Q. Next, I am going to read you a few statements about the future of your community, and I’d like to know whether you agree or disagree with each statement.*
% Neither agree nor disagree
8%
7%
16%
Number of job opportunities in my community will
INCREASE three years from now
Household income in my community will INCREASE 3 years
from now
Amount of violent crime in my
community will DECREASE three years from now
% Agree
52%
49%
35%
*Results are based on a nationally representative telephone survey of 1,006 adults , ages 18 and over, conducted October 13-16, 2011. The margin of error for the overall study is +/- 3.1% at the 95% confidence level.
23 confidential
Appendix: Sources for IndexInnovation
Number of hotspots: JiWire Global Wi-Fi Finder. Web. 20 Oct. 2011. <http://v4.jiwire.com/search-wifi-hotspots.htm?>.
For the number of universities per city , a list was taken from: Universities: The Database of Accredited Postsecondary Institutions and Programs.” U.S. Department of Education. Web. 26 Sept. 2011. <http://ope.ed.gov/accreditation/GetDownloadFile.aspx>. The websites of all institutions taken from this list were checked to confirm that the institutions were post-secondary degree-granting institutions within city limits.
Sustainability
Bicycle lanes and paths per 100,000 residents: "League of American Bicyclists * American Community Survey 2009, Bicycle Commuting Trends." League of American Bicyclists. http://www.bikeleague.org/resources/reports/acs09_commuter_trends_cities.php>. For Columbus, OH, please see: "Columbus Bicentennial Bikeways Master Plan." American Trails - Your National Resource for Trails and Greenways. Americantrails.org. Web. 22 Oct. 2011. <http://www.americantrails.org/resources/trans/Columbus-Ohio-Bikeways-Master-Plan.html>. For Oklahoma City, OK, please see: United States. The City of Oklahoma Planning Department. Oklahoma City Bicycle Transportation Plan. The City of Oklahoma, 10 Apr. 2008. Web. 10 Oct. 2011. <http://www.okc.gov/planning/documents/bicycle%20transportation%20plan%20final%20adopted.pdf>.
Hybrid car data purchased from R. L. Polk & Company 2011 based on hybrid car analysis of vehicle registration data in each city.
Vibrancy/Creativity
For percent of arts-related jobs and percent of arts-related businesses per 10,000 residents, please see: Americans for the Arts, 2011 .<http://www.AmericansForTheArts.org/CreativeIndustries>.
For the park acres as a percent of city land, please see: “2010 City Parks Facts.” The Trust for Public Land. http://cloud.tpl.org/pubs/ccpe_CityParkFacts_2010.pdf
Efficiency
For the percent of workforce that commutes via public transportation see: "2010 American Community Survey." American FactFinder. <http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml>.
For the number of unlinked trips on public transportation, please see: American Public Transportation Association; 2011 Public Transportation Fact Book, Appendix B: Transit Agency and Urbanized Area Operating Statistics. Table 3: Agency Total All Modes Combined Unlinked Passenger Trips and passenger Miles (Data for NTD Report Year 2009).
Livability/Optimism For homicide and burglary rates, see http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10tbl08.xls/view. Note Indianapolis did not
submit data in 2010 and 2009 data was used for homicide and burglary rates. For unemployment rates, see Bureau of Labor Statistics: http://www.bls.gov/lau/lacilg10.htm“ and for Pittsburgh, see American Fact Finder 2 (2010 American Community
Survey 1-Year Estimates | Pittsburgh city, PA) http://factfinder2.census.gov2010.