|
Year 2015 Socio-Economic Forecasts
Click HERE for graphic. TABLE OF CONTENTS PART I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 District 3 County Forecast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Employment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Other Variables. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 II 2015 POPULATION FORECAST METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . .10 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10 UNM-BBER Forecast. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10 Subarea Allocations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11 Allocation Equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11 Independent Area Forecasts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13 Forecast of Sandoval County Outside Rio Rancho/Corrales. . . .13 Allocation of Population to Subareas 4 and 27. . . . . . . . .18 Bernalillo County East Mountain Area Forecast. . . . . . . . .19 Isleta Reservation Forecast. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22 Forecast of Canoncito/Subarea 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25 Kirtland Air Force Base Forecast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26 Allocation Forecasts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28 Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28 Developed and 2015 Available Developable Land . . . . . . .28 Population Allocation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34 Allocation to DASZs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36 III 2015 EMPLOYMENT FORECAST METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . .40 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40 District 3 Employment Forecast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40 Employment Sector Forecasts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48 County Control Tables. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .50 Subarea Control Totals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .57 Employment Allocation to DASZs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61 IV 2015 FORECAST METHODOLOGY FOR OTHER VARIABLES. . . . . . . . .62 Dwelling Units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .62 Vehicles Available to Households . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .65 Employed Residents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .66 APPENDICES APPENDIX A- DATA ANALYSIS SUBZONES FOR STATE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 3 APPENDIX B- 2005 FORECAST SOCIOECONOMIC FOR DATA ANALYSIS SUBZONE APPENDIX C- 2015 FORECAST SOCIOECONOMIC FOR DATA ANALYSIS SUBZONES APPENDIX D- DATA ANALYSIS SUBZONE LAND USE DATA SET FOR 1990 AND 2015 FORECAST APPENDIX E- NONAGRICULTURAL WAGE AND SALARY JOBS AND ARMED FORCES PERSONNEL BY SECTOR,BY SUBAREA FOR 1990, 2005, AND 2015 APPENDIX F- 2005 AND 2015 FORECASTS BY PLANNING INFORMATION AREA (PIA) LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1 State Planning and Development District 3. . . . . . . . . . . 2 2 Subareas Of State Planning and Development District 3. . . . . 4 3 2015 Forecast and 1970, 1980, and 1990 Population for District 3 Counties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4 1990 Population and 2015 Forecast. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5 2015 Forecast and March 1980 and March 1990 Jobs and Military for District 3 Counties. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 6 2015 Forecast and 1980 and 1990 Jobs and Military. . . . . . . 8 7 Developed and Vacant Developable by 2015 Residential Acreage .27 8 Developed and Vacant Developable by 2015 Commercial/ Industrial Acreage. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35 LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1 County, District, and State Population History and Projections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11 2 Historical Populations for Sandoval County and Two Component Parts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15 3 Demographic Model Inputs for Subareas 4 and 27 . . . . . . . .17 4 Forecast Population for Sandoval County and Two Component Parts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18 5 Historical Populations for Subareas 4 and 27 . . . . . . . . .18 6 Forecast Populations for Subareas 4 and 27 . . . . . . . . . .19 7 Bernalillo County East Mountain Population Growth. . . . . . .20 8 Population Forecasts for East Mountain Area. . . . . . . . . .22 9 Forecast of Isleta Reservation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23 10 Population of the Isleta Reservation by Subarea. . . . . . . .23 11 Population Based Projections for Subareas 24 and 25. . . . . .24 12 Share Based Projections for Subareas 24 and 25 . . . . . . . .24 13 Forecast Of Subareas 24 and 25 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24 14 Population of the Canoncito Navajo Reservation and the Bernalillo County Portion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25 15 Resident Population and Housing Occupancy for KAFB . . . . . .26 16 Categorization of City Land Use Codes. . . . . . . . . . . . .32 17 Subareas Forecast by a Population Allocation Model- Data Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37 18 Historical and Forecast Populations by Subarea . . . . . . . .38 19 Nonagricultural Jobs, Estimates and Projections. . . . . . . .41 20 Historical Rates of Self-Employment and Unpaid Family Workers as a Percentage of All Employed Persons . . . . . .42 21 Summary of 2005 Employment Forecasts . . . . . . . . . . . . .43 22 Summary of 2005 Forecast Of Employed Persons . . . . . . . . .43 23 Forecast 2005 Civilian Population 16 and Over and Labor Force . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44 24 Initial Forecast of 2015 Nonagricultural Employment. . . . . .45 25 Initial Forecast 2015 Civilian Population 16 and Over and Labor Force . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .46 26 Summary of 2015 Forecast of Employment and Employed Persons. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47 27 BEA Forecast Applied to District 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48 28 Nonagricultural Jobs by Sector to 2015 . . . . . . . . . . . .49 29 Proportion of Jobs in Each County by Year. . . . . . . . . . .50 30 Initial Average Annual Percentage of Jobs by Sector. . . . . .51 31 Initial Allocation of Jobs by Sector and County. . . . . . . .52 32 Ration of Population to Retail, FIRE, Service, and Government Jobs for Counties 1990 . . . . . . . . . . . . .53 33 Minimum 2005 and 2015 Retail, FIRE, Services and Government Jobs Based on Current Ratios . . . . . . . . . .55 34 Forecast of Jobs Including Military by County and Sector 2005. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55 35 Forecast of Jobs Including Military by County and Sector 2015. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .56 36 Historical and Forecast Nonagricultural and Military Employment by Subarea. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .59 37 Household Size and Persons Per Dwelling Unit for District 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61 38 Average Household Sizes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .62 39 Ratios of County and District Household Sizes to the National Household Size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .62 40 District 3 Projected Averages for Household Size and Persons Per Dwelling Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .63 41 DASZs Having Over 5% Non-Household Population In 1990. . . . .64 42 District Summary of Forecast of Vehicles Available to Households . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .65 PART I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction The Middle Rio Grande Council of Governments (MRGCOG) maintains an ongoing surveillance and forecasting program for socioeconomic conditions in State Planning and Development District 3 (FIGURE 1). This project was part of Activity 92-4 and 93-4 "Socioeconomic Surveillance and Forecasting", of the Unified Planning Work Program for Intermodal Transportation Planning for the Greater Albuquerque Area. This project was also part of the Locality Planning Assistance Program financed in part by a grant from the New Mexico Department of Finance and Administration, Local Government Division. A Data Analysis Subzone (DASZ) system has been developed for District 3. A series of locator maps for the DASZs are provided in APPENDIX A. Written descriptions of the DASZ boundaries are available in Data Analysis Subzone System, TR-106. This report presents 2005 and 2015 socioeconomic data sets by DASZ for District 3. Variables that are forecast are population, dwelling units, vehicles available to households, employed residents, jobs (wage and salary jobs and military enlistment), and retail jobs. The 2005 data set is provided in APPENDIX B. The 2015 data set is presented in APPENDIX C. These data sets were primarily developed to support transportation systems planning. A principal activity in the transportation planning process is forecasting future traffic volumes based in part on projected socioeconomic data. The six forecasted variables are currently used in the traffic forecasting model. These data sets are also intended for use by local governments in planning and project development, especially long range transportation systems planning, economic development, and individual community planning for development. Currently the MRGCOG is updating its traffic forecasting model. The new model is expected to use at least two other variables, either in addition, or in place of one or more of the current variables. The new variables will be added to these data sets when they are sufficiently defined. These forecasts were based on the most recent University of New Mexico Bureau of Business and Economic Research (UNM-BBER) forecasts for county population and employment. The UNM-BBER population forecasts were used without modification, however, the employment forecasts were used along with two other forecasts. The most recent U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) employment Insert Figure State Planning and Development District III forecasts were also used in projecting jobs, especially jobs by industrial sectors. In addition, the 1992 projections of labor force participation rates by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) were used in both the projection of jobs and the projection of employed residents. Population, jobs, and retail jobs were the primary forecast variables. County projections were disaggregated to 28 subareas ((FIGURE 2) and reviewed for reasonability. Subarea 28 is coincident with Torrance County. Subarea forecasts were disaggregated to DASZs by a variety of techniques described in the methodology. Dwelling units and vehicles were forecast based on 1990 ratios to population and anticipated changes in those ratios. Employed residents were based on BLS projections and 1990 ratios of population to employed residents. District 3 County Forecasts Population: It is forecast that 819,000 people will reside in District 3 by 2015. The county distribution is presented in FIGURE 3 along with county populations for 1970, 1980, and 1990. Fifty-three percent of the increase in District population is forecast for Bernalillo County. Sandoval and Valencia Counties, however, are projected to be the fastest growing; both are expected to nearly double during the 25 year forecast period. The subarea forecast is provided in FIGURE 4. Strong growth is anticipated in the suburban areas. Some redevelopment and infill is anticipated in the core areas to produce slight population increases. In some cases the amount of population increase was limited by expected declines in household size and limited available land. PART II contains a discussion of the methodology used to disaggregate the county population control totals to subareas and DASZs. Land use was a principal variable where data was available. In areas without detailed land use data, demographic and other techniques were used for the disaggregation. Employment: Total employment including armed forces is projected for 2015 to be 409,780. This forecast is also used as the District control total for employed residents. This assumes that the number of persons leaving the District for work will be approximately equal to the number of persons residing outside the District and working in the District. The 1990 base data for employment is currently only for jobs, defined as wage and salary workers and military personnel. Estimates of total employment by DASZ should be available in 1993 when the Census Transportation Planning Package is released. To match this forecast with the currently available 1990 DASZ level data, jobs for 2015 were forecast as a component of total employment. INSERT FIGURE INSERT FIGURE INSERT FIGURE INSERT FIGURE INSERT FIGURE Forecast 2015 jobs were 379,703. The ratio between jobs and population was projected to increase from 1:2.27 in 1990 to 1:2.16. The forecast distribution of jobs by county is shown in FIGURE 5 along with historical 1980 and 1990 data. The disagregration of jobs to subareas is presented in FIGURE 6. Employment is expected to continue to concentrate in the same areas as today, but there will also be some new centers which are currently taking form. The proportion of jobs west of the Rio Grande will increase but still be far less than the number of workers residing west of the river. Part III provides the methodology used to forecast total employment, jobs, jobs by sector, and the disaggregation of jobs. The sector disaggregation provided the retail job distribution. The District control total was based on a combination of three sources: UNM-BBER, BEA, and BLS. Current trends, proposed new developments, and the geographic location of projected population were all considered in allocating jobs. Other Variables: The forecasting methodologies for dwelling units, vehicles available to households, and the allocation of employed residents are provided in PART IV. Dwelling units were based on 1990 ratios of population to household units with some allowance for future decline in the household size. Vehicles were forecast based primarily on 1990 ratios of vehicles to dwelling units, but with some consideration to the ratios of vehicles to population. Employed residents used the control total of total employment. Employed residents were allocated to DASZs based primarily on 1990 ratios of employed residents to dwelling units but with some consideration to the ratios of employed residents to population. PART II 2015 POPULATION FORECAST METHODOLOGY Overview Population forecasts for each of the four counties of State Planning and Development District 3 were obtained from the University of New Mexico Bureau of Business and Economic Research (UNM-BBER). The task of the Middle Rio Grande Council of Governments (MRGCOG) was to allocate these county forecasts to Data Analysis subzones (DASZs) for use in the MRGCOG travel model. DASZs are equivalent to Transportation Analysis Zones (TAZs) in the new model. The DASZ forecasts will also be used by the MRGCOG in other planning projects which may not be related to transportation. Maps locating the 665 DASZs are presented in APPENDIX A. The methodology for allocating the UNM-BBER forecasts among the 665 zones is discussed. Generally the allocation consisted of two phases. The first phase was an allocation of forecast population in each county to geographical subdivisions of each county called subareas. Subarea forecasts were reviewed for reasonability. The second phase was an allocation of subarea population growth to DASZs. This allocation could be either positive or negative growth. UNM-BBER Forecast A summary of the patterns of growth for each county in District 3 over the past 40 years is displayed in TABLE 1. Also shown is the growth for the State of New Mexico. The UNM-BBER forecasts for each District 3 county and the State, as a whole, are also displayed. Populations for Valencia County are for the current boundaries. In 1981, Valencia County was split to form the current counties of Cibola and Valencia. Valencia populations for 1960-1980 are the sums of the Belen and Los Lunas Census County Divisions which approximate the current boundaries. The 1950 population is the sum of the precincts which approximate the current boundaries. Prior to 1970, Bernalillo County captured 95% of the District 3 population growth. Since 1970, Bernalillo County has been the recipient of a much lower 69% of the District 3 population growth. Over the next quarter century, UNM-BBER projects that the Bernalillo County share of growth will decline further to 53% of the District growth. The UNM-BBER forecast implies an urbanized area that is expanding in land area with considerable urbanization in Sandoval and Valencia Counties. TABLE 1 COUNTY, DISTRICT, AND STATE POPULATION HISTORY AND PROJECTIONS Click HERE for graphic. Sources: U.S Bureau of Census and UNM-BBER Subarea Allocations Allocation Equation: District 3 is divided into 28 subareas which were displayed in FIGURE 2. Torrance County and Subarea 28 are coincident. The other three counties are divided into two or more subareas. In all cases, subareas aggregate to counties. Two general processes were used for the allocation of population growth to subareas. One was an independent subarea forecast, the other was a regression based allocation model. Independent forecasts were used for subareas 4, 9, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, and 27; generally, these were areas that did not have sufficient land use information or were unique such as military and Indian reservations. The other 19 subareas were forecast by use of a regression equation. After the population allocation, the distribution was reviewed for reasonability. MRGCOG staff interviewed a number of local developers and others associated with the development process to acquire a qualitative perspective of the direction of development in the District. In addition, MRGCOG staff have closely monitored District 3 development for 30 years and have substantial historical data including building permit data as well as individual staff experience. The resulting distribution was reviewed from this qualitative perspective. Socioeconomic data from the census years of 1970, 1980, and 1990 were examined to develop an allocating equation to distribute county population growth to subareas. The same equation was intended to distribute subarea population to DASZs. Multiple regression analysis was used to define an allocating equation that would account for the general variables of land use, density, and some measure or measures of likelihood of development. A number of variables were examined before selecting the following equation with four variables. PGI = .0018 + (PPOP*.0064) - (HHDEV*.0073) + (HPQ*.0046) + (ITCBD*.0309) Where PGI = Population growth index; PPOP = Potential population index defined as ((POPb/RESb)*VRESb)/10000; POPb = Base year population; RESb = Developed residential acreage for base year; VRESb = Vacant developable residential acreage for base year; HHDEV = Development index defined as (RESb/TOTRES)*HHSZb' TOTRES = RESb+VRESb; HHSZb = Mean household size in the base year; HPQ = Median housing price quartile; ITCBD = 1/TCBD; and TCBD = Travel time from the Central Business District in minutes. This equation was developed from tract level data in the Albuquerque area with data from 1970, 1980, and 1990. The specific coefficients were derived by using 1970 as the base year and 1990 as the projection year. The R-square was .80. A discussion of the theoretical basis of the 4 variables in the equation is provided in the following paragraphs. Potential population index (PPOP) is a measure of the amount of population that could be added to an area if the available developable residential acreage develops at the same density as the current residential development. The variable is current density of population per acre times the vacant developable acres; the result is divided by 10,000 to make the numerical values similar to the other variables. The assumptions underlying this variable are that future development in an area will be similar to existing development. Development index (HHDEV) is the proportion of residential developable land that has been developed times the household size. The higher the proportion of residential development and the higher the household size, the nearer the area is to its reasonable capacity. The closer an area is to capacity, the more likely growth is to be slowed or even reduced. As a result, this variable appears in the equation as a negative term so that the more developed an area or the more an area population is dependent on a high household size, the greater will be the depressant on future growth. Median housing price quartile (HPQ) ia a categorical variable. Each area is coded into one of four categories based on the median housing price. The lowest quartile is coded 1. Historically, new construction in Albuquerque has tended to be greatest in areas with higher than average median housing prices. While there are notable exceptions to this tendency, the trend has been strong enough to include this variable in the equation. Inverse of travel time to the Central Business District (ITCBD) is a measure of dispersion. The greater the distance from the CBD, the lower the value of this variable. However, the greatest distinction between zones is close to the CBD. The greater the distance from the CBD, the less the difference in values between zones at different distances from the CBD. Persons seeking to be near the CBD would probably find a difference between five minutes and 15 minutes travel time to the CBD. Persons not as interested in being close to the CBD would probably not find much difference between 25 and 35 minutes travel time. Use of the inverse creates a curve which produces less distinction as distances increase. This variable reflects infill and redevelopment in the urban core. Independent Area Forecasts: Six subareas were forecast by demographic methods. A seventh, Subarea 26, was forecast as the balance of county by subtracting the forecast for Subarea 25 from the forecast for Valencia County. Subarea 22, containing Kirtland Air Force Base, was forecast based on qualitative assessments. These subareas were areas that either did not have sufficient land use data to support use of the allocation equation or were in some way unique. The independent forecasts were performed first. Forecasts for Subareas 4 and 27 were removed from the Sandoval County forecast; the balance of Sandoval county became the control total for the allocation to Subareas 1, 2, and 3 using the allocating equation. Likewise, Subareas 9,22,23, and 24, in Bernalillo County were forecast first to produce a control total for use in allocating to the remaining Bernalillo County subareas. Discussion of each of the independent forecasts are presented. There were five forecast processes. The forecast of Sandoval County Outside Rio Rancho/Corrales provided forecasts for Subareas 4 and 27. The Bernalillo County East Mountain Area Forecast established the forecast for Subarea 23. The Isleta Reservation Forecast provided forecasts for Subareas 24 and 25. The forecast of Subarea 25 also generated the Subarea 26 forecast as the difference between the Valencia County forecast and the forecast for the portion of Valencia County on the Isleta Reservation. Subarea 9, dominated by the Canoncito Navajo Reservation, was a fourth forecast. Finally the forecast of Subarea 22, containing Kirtland Air Force Base (KAFB), used qualitative analysis. Forecast of Sandoval County Outside Rio Rancho/Corrales Sandoval County is projected to have over 121,000 persons by 2015. Growth of nearly 58,000 persons is forecast. The growth was to be divided among five subareas. Subareas 4 and 27 which contains the majority of the land area of Sandoval County, lying outside of Rio Rancho and Corrales, does not have available land use data. To forecast subarea control totals, a division of population was first made between Subareas 4 and 27 which do not have land use data and Subareas 1, 2, and 3 which do have land use data. Subareas 4 and 27 are made up of small towns, rural developments, Indian Reservations, and Indian Trust Lands. It is expected that this area will still have the same general characteristics in 2015 as today. The principal growth area will be in the vicinity of Bernalillo and Placitas. Most of the growth can be explained by natural increase, in-migration appears to have been a major factor only in the Bernalillo/Placitas area. The growth will be accommodated by small subdivisions or large lot subdivisions where each home is served by an individual well. Subareas 1, 2, and 3, Rio Rancho and Corrales, by contrast have been growing rapidly primarily from in-migration. It is anticipated that the majority of the projected 1990-2015 growth for Sandoval County will go to these three subareas. Most of this growth will be in urban style subdivisions served by central water and sewer systems. The Sandoval County control totals produced by UNM-BBER used a demographic forecasting methodology. The principal variables for the methodology were births, deaths, and migration. In the case of Sandoval County it is natural increase (births minus deaths) and net migration (in-migrants minus out-migrants). Births and deaths are recorded and can be counted. Net migration, however, is not counted and typically is obtained as the difference between total population change and the change which can be explained by natural increase. An analysis of Sandoval County showed that both natural increase and net migration were necessary to explain the population growth in Subareas 1, 2, and 3. However, the population growth in Subareas 4 and 27 could largely be explained by natural increase. Clearly, migration is important to local areas of subareas 4 and 27, in- migration is fueling the growth in the Placitas area while other areas are experiencing out-migration; but overall, net-migration for these two subareas was relatively low. Net migration for Subareas 4 and 27 also fits a predictable pattern, there appears to be a net out- migration of persons in their late teens and early 20's. This out- migration is more than compensated by a net in-migration of adults in their middle 20's and 30's, many of whom are bringing children so that there is also a net in-migration of children under 15. MRGCOG staff tested a demographic model for Subareas 4 and 27 for the period 1980 to 1990. Starting with the 1980 population by 5-year age cohorts and adding births and subtracting deaths using age specific fertility and death rates, an age specific 1990 hypothetical population was created. The total hypothetical 1990 population was somewhat lower and distributed differently than the actual 1990 population. The addition of theoretically reasonable net migration factors balanced the constructed population cohorts as well as the total population for 1990. MRGCOG staff acted on the premise that the population of Subareas 4 and 27 could be reasonably projected with a simple cohort-survival demographic model. Further, the population of Subareas 1, 2, and 3 could then be forecast by subtracting the Subareas 4 and 27 forecast from the county forecast. The tenets underlying this thesis are: 1) The age specific fertility rates for Subareas 4 and 27 can be expected to remain somewhat constant; the basis for this hypothesis will be explained in the following discussion. 2) Large scale suburbanization is not expected in these subareas; net migration is expected to be somewhat of a constant. 3) The migration pattern is expected to continue where persons leaving school often leave the area while adults, often with families, more in and commute to jobs in Albuquerque or Santa Fe. 4) There is an expectation of some constance in the growth in Subareas 4 and 27 while Subareas 1, 2, and 3 are considered to be more dynamic. By forecasting the area expected to be relatively constant in growth patterns, the other area can be projected through subtraction. Since most of the migration impact is expected in Subareas 1, 2, and 3, this process allows most of the migration computed in the county level forecast by UNM-BBER to be isolated in the area of Subareas 1, 2, and 3. The historical population growth of Sandoval County and the two relevant component parts are reported in TABLE 2. The average annual compound rate of growth for Subareas 4 and 27 has been fairly consistent between one and two percent since 1950. The only exception was during the 1970's, probably as a result of gas, oil, and coal mining in northwest Sandoval County and subdivision activity in the Placitas area. TABLE 2 HISTORICAL POPULATIONS FOR SANDOVAL COUNTY AND TWO COMPONENT PARTS Click HERE for graphic. * 1950 data is estimated from the 1950 Census precinct data. The precincts do not match the division between Subareas 1, 2, and 3 and Subareas 4 and 27. Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census Fertility rates for Subareas 4 and 27 were estimated from age- specific rates by racial/ethnic groups for New Mexico. The mean of the 1980 and 1989 rates for each group was calculated. An estimated composite rate for each age cohort was computed based on the proportionate share of each racial/ethnic group. Nationally, as well as in New Mexico, the trend for fertility rates has been downwards. However, when fertility rates are broken into racial/ethnic component parts, a different story emerges. Since 1980, the New Mexico fertility rates for American Indians have steadily risen. During the same time period the rates for New Mexico non-hispanic Whites have steadily declined. The rates for New Mexico Hispanics have remained fairly constant during the 80's. The racial/ethnic makeup of Subareas 4 and 27 in 1990 was: Indian 45%, Hispanic 34%, and others (primarily non-Hispanic White) 21%. given the racial/ethnic trends and the racial/ethnic distribution, it is not likely that the fertility rates in Subareas 4 and 27 will decline. On the other hand, a sizeable share of the in-migrants to Subareas 4 and 27 are non-Hispanic Whites producing an increasing proportion for this group. Consequently, the downward trend for the increasing group of non-Hispanic White females may offset the rising trend for Indian females. Therefore, the fertility rates for Subareas 4 and 27 were forecast as a constant of the average 1980 and 1989 rates. There were age-specific death rates by racial/ethnic group for New Mexico and age-specific death rates for Sandoval County, published by the New Mexico Department of Health. The 1987-89 averages for Sandoval County were similar to the computed rates for Subareas 4 and 27 when the racial/ethnic proportions were applied to the appropriate rates. Therefore the 1987-89 Sandoval County averages were used. There was no compelling reason to alter the rates for the forecast period. A summary of the data inputs for this relatively simple cohort survival model are presented in TABLE 3. 1990 Census data provides the base age/sex specific data. Fertility rates apply only to the female population. The migration is an actual amount rather than a percentage reflecting the belief that migration will not correlate to population size but are somewhat independent of population. The death rates and migration amounts are applied to the population for each sex. Migration into the Albuquerque area as well as the counties surrounding Albuquerque has varied over time. To a large extent, migration is influenced by economic growth; but at the county and subcounty level, there are other factors which also affect migration. An attempt to develop a complex migration model for a county subarea was rejected in favor of using population adjustments which accounted for the 1980-1990 result of net migration. Net migration was computed as the population change which could not be accounted for by the natural population change (births and deaths). The computation of migration was done for each age cohort. The migration adjustments also needed to make sense in terms of available data about the area. Given the lack of a model for future migration trends, the adjustments based on 1980-90 data were held constant. TABLE 3 DEMOGRAPHIC DEL INPUTS FOR SUBAREAS 4 AND 27 Click HERE for graphic. Sources: 1990 Census, NM Department of Health, and MRGCOG Migration calculations Out-migration is present in the input data for persons aged 15- 24. This is a pattern that is typical of rural and small town areas. In-migration is present for adults aged 25-39. This represents the group that is principally migrating into the Bernalillo/Placitas areas. As would be expected, some are bringing along their children which accounts for the in-migration of persons aged 5-14. Population was forecast for each year from 1990 to 2015. The forecast populations for selected years are presented in TABLE 4. Populations for Sandoval County are the control totals obtained from UNM-BBER. Population for Subareas 1, 2, and 3 were calculated as the differences between the County populations and the forecast Subareas 4 and 27 populations. TABLE 4 FORECAST POPULATION FOR SANDOVAL COUNTY AND TWO COMPONENT PARTS Click HERE for graphic. Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census and MRGCOG. Allocation of Population to Subareas 4 and 27: The historical distributions of population between Subareas 4 and 27 are shown in TABLE 5. Consistent with expectations, Subarea 4 has increased its proportion of the Subareas 4 and 27 population since 1970. This is the Subarea that has been the primary recipient of in-migration. TABLE 5 HISTORICAL POPULATIONS FOR SUBAREAS 4 AND 27 Click HERE for graphic. Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census The growth in Subarea 27 is largely driven by natural increase, the result has been a very constant rate of growth over the past 40 years. Since 1970, the Subarea 27 growth rate has been declining, consistent with expectations that in general a growth rate will decline as the population base increases. Subarea 4, on the other hand, is more affected by migration. Around 1970, the growth of the Albuquerque area began to impact on Subarea 4. The migration into this Subarea, and hence its rate of population growth, seems to be mirroring growth in the Albuquerque area. The decade of the 60's was a relatively slow growth period for the Albuquerque area and also Subarea 4. The 1970's were a period of rapid growth both in the Albuquerque area and Subarea 4. The 1980's, in terms of growth for the Albuquerque area, fell between the 60's and 70's; the same relationship was true for the Subarea 4 growth rates. Despite, the different growth rates, the percentage of the Subarea 4 and 27 population in Subarea 4 has grown slightly over the past 40 years. It is expected that the Subarea 4 proportion will continue to increase. A trend line based on the 40 year relationship between Subareas 4 and 27 was used to project to years 2005 and 2015. This assumes that the long term relation between these subareas will continue and that the variations in growth in Subarea 4 will even out over a 25-year period. The forecasts for Subareas 4 and 27 are provided in TABLE 6. TABLE 6 FORECAST POPULATIONS FOR SUBAREAS 4 AND 27 Click HERE for graphic. The projected growth rates for Subarea 27 are consistent with the long term growth rates and also the trend for the rates since 1970. Subarea 4 projected growth rates are consistent with the growth rate for the 1980's. Given the type of development in Subarea 4, the addition of 4,454 persons over the next 40 years will probably require the absorption of 3,000-5,000 acres. Bernalillo County East Mountain Area Forecast The east mountain area of Bernalillo County has become an increasingly popular residential destination over the past 30 years. Population increase in this area is largely driven by in-migration rather than natural increase. While the number of migrants into the area has been increasing, the rate of migration has stabilized or perhaps even declined. In terms of the overall rate of increase, the growth rate for the east mountain area has been substantially higher than the growth rates for either Bernalillo County or District 3 in each of the past 3 decades. There are questions about the ability for growth to be sustained over a long period of time in the east mountain area. Most of the questions center around water issues, both quantity and quality. Water is already being imported to the area from the neighboring Estancia Basin. There are also increasing problems of water contamination, especially as a result of concentrations of septic systems and soils that are often marginally acceptable for the release of sewage. Increasingly, development is being limited unless the availability of water can be proven and sewage can be properly disposed. It is likely that constraints on individual septic systems will increase. The MRGCOG has published a study of Regional Water Planning in District 3. Part of this study contained an analysis of water availability in the east mountain area written by Lee Wilson & Associates. MRGCOG staff have also reviewed the new East Mountain Area Plan. This forecast was based on the above considerations, documents and historical data over a 40-year period. A summary of the demographic data is presented in TABLE 7. Total District 3 populations and growth rates are included for comparative purposes. TABLE 7 BERNALILLO COUNTY EAST MOUNTAIN POPULATION GROWTH Click HERE for graphic. Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census The east mountain area of Bernalillo County has experienced strong growth for 40 years. Interstate 40 was completed in the late 70's through Tijeras Canyon. In the early 80's, major improvements were completed on NM 14 north of Tijeras and NM 337 south of Tijeras. These improvements clearly made the east mountain area more accessible to Albuquerque area jobs and probably affected the increased growth rates of the 1970's and 80's. Currently a project is underway to install a pressure sewer force main in Tijeras Canyon, from Tijeras to Albuquerque. The increased availability of water and sewer in the east mountains may overcome a major obstacle to future growth. An analysis of water rights and water availability by Lee Wilson & Associates, for the MRGCOG, showed water for at least some additional growth. Although, the analysis cautioned that there was likely to be increasing problems of localized water shortages. Available land is not a constraint on growth through the year 2015. Even if future requirements prohibit lots smaller than 2 acres where there is not a water system, there is more than enough land to support a high 2015 forecast. There is sufficient land already subdivided or in development areas to support well over 40,000 persons. Four projection methods were used to project the future population of the east mountain area. Traditional cohort-survival methods were not viewed as especially helpful given the high rates of migration into the area. Instead, there was an effort to identify historical trends that had been stable over long periods of time which would provide a reasonable basis for forecasting. Method 1 was a linear trend based on the east mountain populations from 1950-1990. The least squares equation for this 40 year period had an r=.933 and B=247.94. The forecast years were computed from the actual 1990 point and were: 2005 = 16,199 2015 = 18,678. Method 2 used a linear trend controlled by projected growth elsewhere in District 3 and county control totals. Each subarea in Bernalillo County was projected by use of a least squares trend for 1970-90 data. The projections for all subareas were adjusted to the county control total. This method had the advantage of using historical trends for all areas in Bernalillo County and controlling those trends with a county control total. The resulting projections were: 2005 = 16,408 2015 = 18,440. Method 3 also used the population data from 1950-90, however, the independent variable was converted to a log scale to reflect the accelerating rate of increase in the east mountain proportion of the District 3 population growth. The log conversion yielded an r=.986. The B value was log .18822. The resulting population projections were: 2005 = 23,908 2015 = 36,878. Method 4 used the 40-year history of compound annual growth rates. The rate of growth in the east mountains had grown rapidly over 3 decades and then declined during the 1980's. Even in the low growth years of the 1960's, the east mountain area still had a growth rate of over 3 %. The average (mean) annual growth rate for the period 1950-90 was 4.38%. UNM-BBER forecasts that the growth rate for District 3 will decline in the future from the 1950-1990 average rate. The mean annual growth rate for District 3 for 1950-1990 was 3.06%. The forecast 1990-2005 District 3 growth rate is 1.44% and the 2005- 2015 forecast growth rate is projected at 0.99%. If equivalent reductions are applied to the historical 40-year average growth rate for the east mountain area, the 1990-2005 east mountain growth rate would be 2.05%. The 2005-2015 east mountain growth rate with the same constraint would be 1.41%. When these growth rates are applied to the 1990 east mountain population, the resulting forecasts are: 2005 = 16,930 2015 = 19,480. Forecast Methods 1 and 2 were variations on a linear trend, both produced similar results. Method 3 used a log transformation to simulate the increasing rate of east mountain growth. Method 4 used a 40 year mean growth rate controlled by the forecast of a lower future growth rate for the District. Methods 2 and 4 both had constraints for probable growth for District 3. A determination was made to average the four projections. This allowed for the possibility for major water and sewer systems which would allow for continued high growth, but weighted the forecast against this very expensive possibility. The mean of the four projections were: 2005 = 18,361 2015 = 23,369. This forecast assumes that an increasing amount of water will be imported to the east mountains. In addition, to support over 20,000 persons, there will need to be several sizable communities in the area. It is likely that there will be multiple significant commercial areas. Clearly, many areas will experience some degree of urbanization. A strong growth scenario is forecast for the east mountains, but not an unrealistic forecast. The forecast growth rates are 2.61% for the 1990-2005 period, and 2.44% for the 2005-2015 period. It is also projected that the east mountains will capture 5.0% of the District 3 growth during the 1990-2015 period. By 2015, the east mountains will contain 2.9% of the District 3 population, up from 2.1% in 1990. The east mountain projections for 2005 and 2015 are consistent with the 1950-90 data. A summary is provided in TABLE 8. TABLE 8 POPULATION FORECASTS FOR EAST MOUNTAIN AREA Click HERE for graphic. Isleta Reservation Forecast Population on the Isleta Reservation increased from 2,412 in 1980 to 2,915 in 1990. The increase can be explained by natural increase (births minus deaths) with net migration at zero. Starting with 1980 data, such a cohort-survival model produced a 1990 population that was different from the actual 1990 population by only 11. It is expected that population growth for Isleta will continue to be a result of natural increase. Given the location of the Pueblo, there is no reason to expect significant out-migration. The fact that it is an Indian Reservation limits the possibilities for in-migration. A projection of zero net migration into the future appears to be a reasonable assumption. Age specific fertility rates were based on the average of fertility rates for New Mexico American Indians for 1980 and 1989. Given that the fertility rates for American Indians in New Mexico have been rising in recent years, this may be a conservative projection. Age specific mean death rates (1987-89) by sex were estimated from available published life expectancy tables for New Mexico American Indians. The calculated number of births and deaths were compared to the actual number of historical births and deaths for Isleta obtained from the Indian Health Service; the two sets of numbers were reasonably close. The results of the cohort-survival model projection for the Isleta Reservation are presented in TABLE 9. TABLE 9 FORECAST OF ISLETA RESERVATION Click HERE for graphic. This population was divided into two subareas: Subarea 24 in Bernalillo County and Subarea 25 in Valencia County. The historical populations of the two subareas are provided in TABLE 10. TABLE 10 POPULATION OF THE ISLETA RESERVATION BY SUBAREA Click HERE for graphic. Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census Subarea 25 has increased from 19% of the population total in 1970 to over 25% in 1990. It is likely that Subarea 25 will increase its percentage somewhat more by 2015. Continuing the population trend of the past 20 years to the year 2015 would produce the results presented in TABLE 11. TABLE 11 POPULATION BASED PROJECTIONS FOR SUBAREAS 24 AND 25 Click HERE for graphic. A trend analysis may also be done based on the percentage share for each subarea. In TABLE 12, the projected share for each subarea is projected based on the 1970-90 trend. The respective shares are converted to population forecasts. TABLE 12 SHARE BASED PROJECTIONS FOR SUBAREAS 24 AND 25 Click HERE for graphic. The forecasts for Subareas 24 and 25, comprising the Isleta Reservation, were the mean of the two forecast methods. These forecasts are presented in TABLE 13. TABLE 13 FORECAST OF SUBAREAS 24 AND 25 Click HERE for graphic. Forecast of Canoncito/Subarea 9 Nearly all of the population of Subarea 9 resides on the Canoncito Navajo Reservation. In 1990 the population for Subarea 9 was 1,102; the population of the Bernalillo County portion of the Canoncito Navajo Reservation was 1,072. Likewise, 90 percent of the population of the Canoncito Navajo Reservation resided in Subarea 9. Most of the land area of Subarea 9 is included in either the Canoncito Reservation or the Laguna Reservation. The Laguna Reservation is generally unpopulated and expected to remain vacant. Reasonably, population growth in this subarea is tied to growth on the Canoncito Reservation. The historical populations for Canoncito and the portion of the Canoncito Reservation in Bernalillo County (Subarea 9) are provided in TABLE 14. The remainder of the Canoncito population resides in Cibola County which is outside of District 3. The small portion of the Canoncito Reservation in Sandoval County is currently unpopulated. TABLE 14 POPULATION OF THE CANONCITO NAVAJO RESERVATION AND THE BERNALILLO COUNTY PORTION Click HERE for graphic. Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census Since, only 30 inhabitants of Subarea 9 do not reside on the Canoncito Reservation and this is not expected to change, a forecast of Subarea 9 is essentially a forecast of the Canoncito population residing in Bernalillo County. A cohort-survival model was tested by inputting 1980 age/sex data and comparing the 1990 calculated results with the actual 1990 age/sex data. Birth and death rates were the same as those used for the Isleta Reservation. The results of natural increase over the ten years were very close to the actual 1990 data. Net migration was close enough to zero to assume that in-migrants balanced with out-migrants. Subarea 9 was forecast by a cohort-survival model beginning with 1990 Census data. The resulting population forecasts were: 2005 = 1,417 2015 = 1,714. Subarea 9 will probably not have employment opportunities to support 1,700 persons in 2015. In fact, the Subarea does not support the 1,100 persons who live there, today. The Subarea will become more accessible to Albuquerque area employment as Albuquerque urban development moves west. The Canoncito Reservation, which will contain most of the population of Subarea 9, will be attractive enough to Canoncito Navajos to maintain a zero net migration rate. The natural increase among the Canoncito Navajos will be sufficient to increase the population by about 600 persons over the 25-year period of this forecast. Kirtland Air Force Base Forecast The future military force assigned to KAFB is unknown and subject to decisions made in the military and political hierarchy. There does appear to be considerable certainty that the Base will not be closed and there appears to be reasonable probability that the Base will expand. However, the population living on the Base is not necessarily a reflection of the size of the military component assigned to the Base. There is not sufficient housing to house all personnel currently assigned to the Base, some personnel either by choice or necessity currently live off of the Base. Currently, the Base contains 2,120 family housing units and 2,503 dormitory beds. Generally the occupancy rate of the family housing units is very high. In addition, the household size for the family units also tends to be high since these units are generally not occupied by single persons. In 1990, the Census reported an average household size of 3.78 persons for the family housing units, considerably higher than the average for all of Bernalillo County of 2.6 persons per household. At present there are no plans to build additional housing on KAFB. If the household size remained constant and all housing units were filled and all beds were used, the base would have a theoretical capacity of 10,500. The actual number of persons living on KAFB at previous points in time are shown in TABLE 15. TABLE 15 RESIDENT POPULATION AND HOUSING OCCUPANCY FOR KAFB Click HERE for graphic. Sources: U.S. Bureau of the Census and KAFB INSERT FIGURE In forecasting the resident population of KAFB, several assumptions were made: 1) There will not be additional housing units built on KAFB; 2) The household size for the family housing units will remain constant; and 3) The future occupancy rate for family housing units may be estimated from the mean of the rates for the past three census data points. Household size can reasonably be projected as constant since this is a household size for family housing units and recent information indicates that the long term national trend of declining family sizes has slowed or ceased. The mean occupancy rate for the three measurement points is 94.2. Based on a 94.2 percent occupancy rate and a household size for family units of 3.8, the projected number of residents of family housing units is 7,549. If the population in the quarters is also projected to be the mean of the 3 census counts, the projected quarters population would be 1,076. Combined, the forecast KAFB population would be 8,625. Allocation Forecasts Variables: Acreage for developed residential land and available developable land was required for input into two of the four allocating equation variables. Household size and median housing price came from 1990 Census data. Travel time to the CBD was based on the 1986 Travel Time Study by the MRGCOG. Some modifications were made to account for the new Paseo del Norte bridge. Production of the required land use variables required considerable effort by MRGCOG staff and the willingness of City of Albuquerque staff to share data. The procedures to produce a land use data set are discussed in the following section. Developed and 2015 Available Developable Land: An analysis has been conducted to tabulate the acreage of developed land and land with a reasonable potential for development by 2015. Developed acreage by land use category was for the Year 1990. Primary interest was in projecting available developable 2015 land for the vacant developable residential variable. The projected 2015 available developable residential land is a tabulation of acreage that, based on available data and staff analysis, could reasonably be available for development by 2015. The acreage tabulations by subareas are presented in FIGURE 7. Detailed acreage tabulations by Data Analysis Subzones (DASZ) are presented in APPENDIX D. Tabulations of 1990 acreage came from data that was obtained and consolidated from the following sources: 1) Albuquerque Geographic Information System (AGIS) Land Use Information System (LUIS), September 1991; 2) Rectified aerial photography for March 1989; 3) Building permit data located to lots for 1990 and 1991 for Albuquerque and Bernalillo County; 4) Miscellaneous aerial photos from summer 1991 of the Rio Rancho area and other areas north of Paseo del Norte; 5) Total building permits for Rio Rancho and Corrales for 1989; 6) 1990 Census zoning atlases for Albuquerque and Bernalillo County; and 7) Current zoning atlases for Albuquerque and Bernalillo County; and 8) 1991 Cole Directory for Albuquerque, Rio Rancho, and the Vicinity which contains 1990 data. The AGIS data was obtained by DASZ. The data was reviewed by viewing each DASZ on screen with the land parcels color coded by land use. Adjustments were made if any of the following conditions were met. 1) A DASZ boundary split a parcel, in such case the portion of the parcel in each DASZ was measured. 2) A coded land use in the AGIS data set did not match with the 1989 aerial, in such case the actual land use was verified by researching the Cole Directory and the zone atlas. AGIS was notified of cases where the land use was incorrect or had changed. 3) A large parcel was coded as developed, however a portion of the parcel was clearly available for future development, i.e., a single family residence on a tract much larger than what was typical in the neighborhood of the residence, or a mobile home park where a section had not been developed, or an apartment complex where land had been reserved for future buildings. Adjustments were made for the undeveloped sections. Note, adjustments were not made for vacant developed spaces in mobile home parks, such spaces were considered as developed residential in the same manner as vacant housing units or apartments. Also, no adjustment was made for larger lot residential property where aerial photography showed that the residence was centered on the lot or that the entire lot was in use. The MRGCOG had a copy of the LUIS data set for spring 1990 that had resided on the City of Albuquerque IBM mainframe. AGIS personnel recommended using the 1991 LUIS data from AGIS since it had been updated considerably after being loaded on the AGIS. After reviewing the two data sets, MRGCOG staff concurred. Use of the 1991 LUIS data set with the 1990 Census data created an obvious problem. This problem was solved by removing the land developed between the time of the Census and July 1, 1991. In the opinion of AGIS staff, the LUIS data set obtained by the MRGCOG was approximately current to July 1, 1991. Acreage was removed from the 1991 developed land data set utilizing building permit data to identify recently developed land. 1990 City of Albuquerque building permits were on the AGIS located to lots. The acreage of this construction was easily subtracted from the 1991 data set. City of Albuquerque building permit data for the first half of 1991 resided on the IBM mainframe. These were moved to the AGIS, matched to lots and tabulated in terms of acreage for each DASZ. A review was conducted to ensure that the 1991 permits were included in the 1991 developed acreage before the DASZ tabulations were modified. Bernalillo County building permits were not in an automated system. MRGCOG staff obtained a copy of the County log of permits and coded the permits to DASZs. The number of County permits was relatively small which allowed for manual processing. DASZs which had county building permits for this period were reviewed to determine if the LUIS data set included the new construction as developed acreage. Where the permitted construction appeared to be included, modifications were made to the DASZ tabulations. The LUIS data set did not extend into Sandoval County. Land use in the Rio Rancho and Corrales areas was planimetered from 1989 rectified aerial photography. Adjustments to the planimeter results were made by examining 1989 building permit data, 1990 Census block data and aerial photography from 1989 and 1991. In the area covered by the AGIS, land areas were computed for actual lots. Land for residential streets, drainage rights-of-way, and utility easements were generally excluded. There were 32 DASZs in the AGIS coverage area that were fully developed with no vacant land. The proportion of developed acres to total acres was computed for each DASZ. The proportions for developed lands excluding various rights- of-way to total land ranged from.430 to .894. Given the distribution, the median of .758 was selected as an amount that could be assumed to be developable from a gross acreage amount. This implied that about a fourth of the land area would be required for street right-of-way and various other rights-of-way. Since the Rio Rancho and Corrales planimetering included rights-of-way, the sums were reduced by 24 percent to be compatible with the AGIS based data set. AGIS land use data did not extend into the east mountain area of Bernalillo County. There are, however, December 1989 rectified aerial photographs of the east mountain area. MRGCOG staff used this aerial photography along with the Bernalillo County zone atlas, which contains lot lines, to estimate the developed acreage. It was not possible to estimate available developable land in the east mountain area in a manner that would be consistent with the urban areas of Bernalillo County. The subarea forecast of the east mountain area was handled in a manner consistent with the other rural areas of State Planning and Development District 3. The east mountain area is omitted from FIGURES 7 and 8. The estimated developed acres for the east mountain DASZs are included in APPENDIX D. The land use data was used to allocate the forecast east mountain area growth to east mountain DASZs. These modifications produced a data set for 1990 current development. Simultaneous to modifying a 1990 developed acreage data set, a 2015 available developable acreage data set was also constructed. The projected acreage tabulations came from the following sources: 1) The LUIS file in the AGIS; 2) The Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Comprehensive Plan and supporting Area Plans and Sector Plans; 3) The Rio Rancho Comprehensive Plan; 4) Interviews with developers; 5) Current zoning and platting for vacant lands; 6) Facilty Plans such as the Long Range Major Street Plan; 7) Plans for open space, the Petroglyph National Monument, and other proposed parks; 8) Proposed new or expanded facilities such as Double Eagle II Airport, the planned general aviation airport in Sandoval County, and the relocation of the Hawk Missile Training facility; and 9) Rectified aerial photography showing the topography, 1986 photography extending to NM 44 and the Rio Puerco was available. Vacant and nonresidential land in the LUIS data set was aggregated into general categories by grouping the assigned land use codes. The grouping of LUIS codes is presented in TABLE 16. The resulting data set contained 6 categories of nonresidential (current) acreage. These categories were reviewed at the same time as the visual review of residential land. In most cases rights-of-way were excluded from LUIS. In some cases, however, right-of-way was included under one of several codes; for example, 6313 was electric transmission line right-of-way. For consistency, land included in LUIS with codes such as 6313, 6323, and others were deleted; these deletions can be noted in TABLE 16. In addition, it was noted that right-of-way sometimes occurred under other codes. For example, some private streets were coded 6100. For consistency, the acreage for private streets and other rights-of- way coded to these categories were excluded, since rights-of-way were generally excluded from the LUIS data set. Lands categorized as commercial/industrial or recreational were reviewed to ensure a correct classification. Adjustments for 1990 and 1991 development was made by use of the building permit files. These classifications remained part of the created 1990 DASZ data set. Agricultural land was reviewed to determine whether to consider the land as probable agricultural land in 2015 or to reclassify the land as available for development. The agricultural land was considered available for development if each of the following 4 criteria were met. 1) The agricultural activity is primarily grazing or annual crop planting. 2) The agricultural land is a) within an area designated by the Comprehensive Plan or other plans as being available for urban development or, b) within an area where urban development is currently occurring even though the Comprehensive Plan designation may be for rural. 3) The agricultural land is either a) subdivided onto lots of 1 acre or less or, b) is near residential subdivision activity where the lots are generally 1 acre or less. 4) The land is not part of a large commercial agricultural enterprize. TABLE 16 CATEGORIZATION OF CITY LAND USE CODES Click HERE for graphic. Agricultural land that was judged to be available for development was reclassified into various categories. Any residential areas on these LUIS coded agricultural lands were recorded as developed residential. The remaining acreage was recorded as either vacant residential or vacant commercial/industrial using the same rules that were applied to vacant land, described below. Vacant land was categorized into one of three classes: 1) unsuitable or unlikely for development by 2015; 2) reasonably available for residential development by 2015; or 3) reasonably available for commercial/industrial development 2015. The rules for assigning vacant land to one of these three categories are listed. 1) If the land was in an approved sector plan area, the land use plan in the sector plan was used. 2) If the land was not in a sector plan area but was held by a development company, the views of the developer were generally used as a guideline for assigning land, especially if the developer had prepared some type of master plan. 3) If the land did not meet either rule one or two, then the location of the land was compared to the location or boundaries of land reserve areas such as the City of Albuquerque Open Space, the Petroglyph National Monument, and proposed parks. Lands inside these boundaries were categorized as unavailable for development. Lands on Indian Reservations, including Trust Land, and Military Reservations were also considered unavailable for development unless specific development proposals were in process. 4) If the land did not meet rules one through three, the topography was examined. Lands located on steep slopes and in drainage channels or basins were classified as unavailable for development. 5) For lands that were not allocated to a category by rules one through four, the current zoning was consulted. In general, land zoned in a residential category was classified as vacant residential and land zoned for non- residential purposes was classified as vacant commercial/industrial. Unzoned or 'A'-zoned lands did not meet this condition. 6) For vacant lands not allocated by rules one through five, MRGCOG staff allocated the vacant lands using the following guidelines. a) The Long Range Major Street Plan was consulted, land near future major intersections was generally classified as vacant commercial/industrial. b) Ownership patterns were examined, larger parcels were generally considered to have a higher probability of development by 2015. c) The character of development in nearby areas was considered so that vacant land judged likely for development could be allocated in a residential to commercial ratio similar to the ratio in nearby areas. d) The proximity of the vacant land to current development and proposed development was considered. Land that was remote, or not in the general path of urban development, or not likely to be served by utilities was generally classified as unavailable for 2015 development. e) The character of any development in nearby areas was considered. f) The rate of development in nearby areas was also considered. The land allocations made using the above rules were done by MRGCOG staff working on line on the AGIS. There were not sufficient staff or equipment resources to create a permanent record of the allocations of individual parcels. The acreage reported for each variable in the data set represents the results of an interactive process of judgements made while viewing the coded parcels on a computer monitor, the area as shown on an aerial photograph, and considering other data. Land coded as vacant residential and vacant commercial/industrial in the LUIS data set was reviewed by MRGCOG staff. Generally these classifications were not altered unless one of the rules one through five, above, were clearly violated. In such case the land was reclassified according to the appropriate rule. Land that had been removed from the developed classification as a result of either the building permit analysis or the lot size analysis was added to the appropriate category. The nature of the building permit or existing development determined the category to which the land was assigned. Lands developed in 1990 or later were considered to be vacant developable lands in the 1990 data set. Bulk land that was classified as available for development was generally reduced in acreage by 24 percent to account for land required for rights-of-way, drainage, and utilities. In some cases, this reduction was not applied for bulk commercial/industrial land, depending on the circumstances of the land and neighboring development. A subarea summary of developed and developable commercial/industrial acreage is provided in FIGURE 8. A DASZ distribution is provided in APPENDIX D. The relationship between available developable commercial/industrial acres and forecast employment in the 2015 data set was not as high as the relationship between available residential acres and residential growth. Residential growth was allocated through a process where available developable residential acres was an input variable. The allocation of employment depended more on other variables rather than available developable commercial/industrial acres. The assignment of commercial/industrial acres had three principal purposes: 1) To reserve land for nonresidential development and thereby limit the land available in any DASZ for residential development; and 2) To generate an employment capacity for each DASZ to be used as a constraint during the employment allocation; and 3) To be used for allocating forecast employment that was not part of specific developments or plans. In regards to the recreational acreage category, a qualification is required. Acreage coded on LUIS for recreation is generally preserved as recreation acreage in the DASZ data set. In some cases, there is employment on these lands, for example, golf courses. Where parks were identified in sector plans, these were incorporated as recreation lands. In the east mountain area, where it was a simple estimation process, MRGCOG staff added to the recreation category the National Forest and Bureau of Land Management lands. In general, however, MRGCOG staff did not add to the recreation category since the MRGCOG had no interest in forecasting recreational lands as separate land uses. Lands, such as those intended for the Petroglyph National Monument, which at the time, were on the LUIS data as various types of vacant land, was simply deleted from the data set. Given the limitations on staff time, this was the most expedient procedure. Small parcels of land that will be used for future neighborhood parks were generally handled by the 24 percent reduction applied to bulk land. The DASZ and Subarea data sets were circulated to planners in the affected local governments for review and comment. Comments made by planners were incorporated in the final data. It was emphasized that the forecast of a number of acres of land available for development did not imply that all of the available land would be forecast for development by 2015. Population Allocation: The population allocating regression equation was used to generate subarea forecasts in 19 subareas. The forecast growth for Bernalillo County, to the year 2015, was reduced by the sum of the amounts of growth forecast for subareas 9, 22, 23, and 24. The available growth from the UNM-BBER forecast, after this reduction, was allocated to 16 subareas within Bernalillo County. A similar procedure was followed for 3 subareas within Sandoval County. The allocation is summarized in TABLE 17. The 2015 forecasts for all subareas were displayed with the 1990 populations in FIGURE 4. insert figure 8 The forecast generated by the regression equation for subarea 3, Corrales, was adjusted downward. There are efforts to maintain a rural atmosphere in Corrales, therefore, certain actions may be expected which will maintain low density development. The forecast for subarea 3 was revised based on the history of building permits since 1980. Subarea 21, Mesa del Sol, was also constrained. There is no land, in this subarea, currently ready for major residential development. An assumption was made that residential development of Mesa del Sol would not begin until the late 1990's. Therefore, the Mesa del Sol forecast was adjusted to account for a time delay. A year 2005 forecast for these 19 subareas was derived from historical data and the 2015 forecast. The 2005 forecast was also constrained by the county control totals from the UNM-BBER forecast. The point for 2005 on a projection line from 1990 to 2015 was identified. The number was adjusted based on the 1970-90 growth trend for each subarea. Subareas with strong growth from 1970 to 1990 would be expected to have relatively stronger growth in the 1990 to 2005 time period than subareas which had relatively weaker historical growth. A summary of the 2005 and 2015 forecasts along with historical populations is provided in TABLE 18 for all District 3 subareas. The 2005 forecasts for subareas not forecast by the regression equation were previously discussed. Allocation to DASZs Data Analysis Subzones with land use data in APPENDIX D were allocated population using the regression equation that was used for most of the subareas. Allocations were made to 2015. The 2005 projections were interpolated with some adjustments for DASZs which are currently developing. The results of the 2005 allocations are provided in APPENDIX B. Results of the 2015 allocations are displayed in APPENDIX C. Values for the regression variables were balanced to equal the subarea values from the subareas allocation. This negated the effects that constants would otherwise have on the outcome. Negative scores from the regression equation were evaluated first. Some adjustments were made for developments having a known number of units to be developed, such as the new dormitory at UNM. For DASZs without land use data, population growth was allocated using both qualitative and quantitative methods. Information provided by developers and land owners along with public information such as building permits and news stories were considered. Historical trends for each of these DASZs were considered. Land ownership patterns such as the typical parcel sizes were reviewed. Finally, the previous 2010 forecasts which had been prepared with the help of local planners were consulted. The various information was assembled and forecasts for TABLE 17 SUBAREAS FORECAST BY A POPULATION ALLOCATION MODEL-DATA SUMMARY Click HERE for graphic. TABLE 18 HISTORICAL AND FORECAST POPULATIONS BY SUBAREA Click HERE for graphic. 2005 and 2015 were produced for these 83 DASZs. One DASZ, 1001, was coincident with Subarea 9, therefore the allocation was the same as the subarea allocation. The 2005 and 2015 forecasts for these DASZs are also provided in APPENDIX B and APPENDIX C. In three Bernalillo County Subareas, 22, 23, and 24, several DASZ population allocation methods were used. In Subarea 22, which includes KAFB and the Albuquerque International Airport, the population growth was allocated to three DASZs based on the proportion of housing units and quarters in each DASZ. In the east mountain area, Subarea 23, estimates were made for vacant developable acres based on existing subdivisions and proposed subdivisions; growth for DASZs was allocated using the regression equation. On the Isleta Reservation, Subarea 24, growth was allocated based on information previously provided to the MRGCOG by Tribal staff. Subareas 4 and 27 in Sandoval County were forecast in two stages. First, the 12 DASZs composed of Indian lands were forecast using birth and death rates for American Indians. In the second stage, the other six DASZs were forecast based on 1970-90 growth in the respective DASZs and other information available to the MRGCOG such as development plans, availability of water, and land ownership patterns. Torrance County DASZs were also forecast in two stages. DASZs 331, 441, 501, and 601 have each lost population since 1970. These four DASZs generally comprised Census Block Numbering Areas (BNA) 9631 and 9633. A cohort-survival model for these two BNAs was used to estimate a reduction factor for the area. In the first forecasting stage, the four DASZs were forecast using the reduction factor. In the second stage, the computed population to be allocated to the other 9 DASZs was allocated by a trend projection. The trend projection was based on historical growth in each DASZ from 1970 to 1990. Valencia County DASZs were forecast with a qualitative methodology. The forecasts were based on four types of data: 1) Interviews with selected developers and realtors; 2) Extensive input from planners and community representatives was obtained by MRGCOG staff during a previous Valencia County forecasting effort in 1989 and early 1990; 3) The MRGCOG building permit file for Valencia County beginning with 1980 data; and 4) Historical development trends for each DASZ. The resulting forecast of Valencia County DASZs was based on a qualitative merging of the four types of data. MRGCOG staff made judgements as to how to weight data for these 41 DASZs. The DASZ allocations were reviewed by staff representatives of each of the local governments in Valencia County. PART III 2015 EMPLOYMENT FORECAST METHODOLOGY Overview Nonagricultural jobs and armed forces personnel were projected for District 3 for 2005 and 2015. UNM-BBER projections were used for 2005. The 2015 projections were based on an extension of UNM-BBER projections from 2010 to 2015 along with labor force participation projections extended from 2005 to 2015. Employment sectors for District 3 and each county were derived from the District control totals. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) projections were used to project future growth or decline in the proportion for each sector. Certain assumptions about development in the various counties were also introduced based on current observations. Subarea forecasts were derived from county forecasts. Growth for each employment sector was allocated based on available land, current and anticipated development patterns, and proximity to forecast population. The latter was applicable to population serving employment such as most retail and some services and government. Data Analysis Subzone (DASZ) forecasts were handled similar to subarea forecasts. Growth forecast for a subarea was allocated to the DASZs within the subarea. Available land, zoning, sector plans, and development proposals were considered in allocating employment. District 3 Employment Forecast UNM-BBER has forecast nonagricultural wage and salary employment by county to the year 2010. The county projections are reported in TABLE 19. The historical Department of Labor (DOL) estimates are also reported. The departure point for this forecast was 1987. To date, the forecast has been reasonably close to the annual DOL estimates at the District level. There are mixed results at the county level; the 1991 estimate for Bernalillo County differs from the projection by only 300 while the 1990 Sandoval projection differs by about 900. The 2005 UNM-BBER projections were used as the District total for nonagricultural wage and salary employment. However, MRGCOG staff made some adjustments in the forecasts for the individual counties. TABLE 19 NONAGRICULTURAL JOBS, ESTIMATES AND PROJECTIONS Click HERE for graphic. * UNM-BBER did not forecast 1991, the projection for this table was produced by using the mean compound annual growth rate for the projected 1990-1995 period. Sources: Population and Employment Projections for New Mexico Counties 1985-2010, Bureau of Businesss and Economic Research, the University of New Mexico, February, 1989. New Mexico Department of Labor (NMDOL) MRGCOG employment data and forecasts have been for two types: total employment and jobs (wage and salary plus military). The UNM- BBER projection was for civilian wage and salary jobs. To convert the District 3 projection (UNM-BBER)to an employment projection equivalent with the MRGCOG jobs data, Kirtland Air Force Base (KAFB) military personnel needed to be added. Finally to obtain a projection for total employment, self employment and unpaid family employment were added. For purposes of this study, an assumption is made that the military component at KAFB will remain constant. There are differing scenarios which increase or decrease the military personnel at KAFB. Over the past 20 years, military personnel at the Base has increased from 4,992 in 1970 to 5,622 in 1990. It would, however, be questionable to project an increase in military personnel at a time when major cutbacks in defense are expected. Similarly, it is not reasonable to project a decrease in the military personnel since it appears that Kirtland will be the beneficiary of at lease some of the consolidations necessitated by defense reductions. Given the uncertainty regarding decisions to be made by the Department of Defense, a determination was made to project Kirtland at its 1990 level of 5,622. Jobs is an estimate or projection of persons receiving a paycheck, in this case the sum of nonagricultural workers and military personnel. Total employment is an estimate which includes not only job holders but also self-employed persons, including proprietors and farmers, and unpaid family workers who may be employed in a family business. An estimate of the percentage of the total employed persons who are self-employed or unpaid family workers is provided in TABLE 20. TABLE 20 HISTORICAL RATES OF SELF-EMPLOYMENT AND UNPAID FAMILY WORKERS AS A PERCENTAGE OF ALL EMPLOYED PERSONS Click HERE for graphic. Source: Bureau of the Census A summary of the 2005 forecast is provided in TABLE 21. Jobs plus military was the control total for employment (jobs) to be distributed to counties, subareas, and DASZs. Total employment was calculated by adding a component for self-employed persons and unpaid family workers based on the mean percentage calculated in TABLE 20. TABLE 21 SUMMARY OF 2005 EMPLOYMENT FORECASTS Click HERE for graphic. The reasonability of this forecast is checked by projecting the 2005 labor force, labor force participation, and employment (employed persons). In producing a forecast of employed persons, a control total is created for the variable employed residents. The total employed persons should be close but not necessarily equal to the forecast total employment since some persons do hold more than one job. It is also possible, on the other hand, given the use of monthly or annual averages to effectively count multiple employed persons for the same job in cases of jobs with high turn-over. Additionally, some area residents hold jobs outside the District while some non-residents work in the District. The forecast of employed persons is summarized in TABLE 22. The computed number is compatible with the forecast 2005 total employment in TABLE 21. TABLE 22 SUMMARY OF 2005 FORECAST OF EMPLOYED PERSONS Click HERE for graphic. Forecast civilian population is produced by removing the armed forces personnel projection from the total projection. The civilian labor force is projected by use of age and sex specific labor force participation rate projections. Labor force participation projections are periodically developed by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). The forecast 2005 population by age/sex cohorts and the projected BLS participation rates are provided in TABLE 23. TABLE 23 FORECAST 2005 CIVILIAN POPULATION 16 AND OVER AND LABOR FORCE Click HERE for graphic. Sources: UNM-BBER; MRGCOG; and Monthly Labor Review, U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, November 1991. The New Mexico Department of Labor estimates an annual labor force, employed persons (employment), and unemployed persons (unemployment) for each county. The mean employment rate for the years 1970-90 for District 3 was 92.818% with a standard deviation of 1.224. Applying the 21 year mean to the forecast 2005 labor force yields a forecast employed persons of 361,318 (TABLE 22). Forecasting to 2015 required several assumptions regarding the continuation of trends. The UNM-BBER projection ended at 2010, requiring an extension of 5 years. The BLS labor force participation rates projection ended at 2005 requiring a 10-year extension. An extension of the UNM-BBER forecasts was accomplished by projecting the compound annual growth rate trend from 2010 to 2015. The trend is for a slowing of the growth rate which matches with the demographic forecast of an increasing share of the population over age 55. Employment, however, is projected to grow at a faster rate than population, a result of increasing rates of labor force participation. The rate of labor force participation has been growing rapidly over the past several decades, however it appears that the future rate will be slower. Still, the increase should be sufficient to keep the rate of growth in employment at least equal to the rate of population growth. The extension of the UNM-BBER forecast is displayed in TABLE 24. TABLE 24 INITIAL FORECAST OF 2015 NONAGRICULTURAL EMPLOYMENT Click HERE for graphic. The initial 2015 forecast of nonagricultural civilian workers was 377,026. This total was increased by factoring in self employed persons and unpaid family workers which added 30,314. The armed forces projection of a constant 5,622 was also added. The initial 2015 total employment projection was 412,962. Labor force participation rates were extended to 2015 for each age/sex cohort. The history and projection of each cohort was examined along with the historical and projected rates for each age group. A forecast 2015 participation rate for each age/sex cohort was derived (TABLE 25). In all but three cases the 2015 cohort rates were higher than the 2005 rates. The declines were for men in the 25-54 age groups which were consistent with observed trends from 1975-90 and projected trends for 1990-2005. However the demographic shifts placed a larger proportion of the population in the over 55 brackets which have lower labor force participation rates. Applying the 1970-90 rate for employment (employed persons) of 92.818% to the civilian labor force produced an initial projection of 400,975 employed persons. The addition of the constant for armed forces personnel raised the forecast to 406,597; somewhat less than the UNM-BBER extended forecast. The two initial forecasts (employment and employed persons) were both based on the extension of trends. Given the nature of extending beyond a forecast range, a difference of about 6,000 should be considered indicative of compatible forecasts. Therefore, the two forecasts were rectified by computing a mean to be used for both employment and employed residents. A summary of the resulting 2015 forecast is presented in TABLE 26. TABLE 25 INITIAL FORECAST 2015 CIVILIAN POPULATION 16 AND OVER AND LABOR FORCE Click HERE for graphic. TABLE 26 SUMMARY OF 2015 FORECAST OF EMPLOYMENT AND EMPLOYED PERSONS Click HERE for graphic. Employment Sector Forecasts Regional projections by the U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) were used to allocate the nonagricultural jobs to sectors for 2005 and 2015. The departure point for the BEA forecasts was 1988. Sectors were based on the Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes. The Albuquerque Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), forecast by BEA, contained 93% of the District 3 employment in 1988. In forecasting District 3, the Albuquerque MSA forecast was considered to be equivalent, for trends, to the District. By 2015, the Albuquerque MSA will probably contain an even higher percentage of the District jobs and include 3 of the 4 counties. The BEA projections were for total employment. An assumption was made that the ratio of jobs to total employment in each nonfarm employment sector would remain constant. The proportionate change forecast by BEA for each sector could then be applied to the 1988 District 3 data. Proportionate shares for each sector were calculated and applied to the District control totals. The proportions for each sector including the BEA to District 3 conversion is provided in TABLE 27. The District 3 forecasts by employment sector are displayed in TABLE 28. TABLE 27 BEA FORECAST APPLIED TO DISTRICT 3 Click HERE for graphic. 1 Transportation, Communications, and Utilities 2 Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate 3 Agricultural services (such as landscaping workers and veterinarian employees) and mining are included in Services since both categories are very small. In addition, most of the 1988 District 3 mining jobs are best described as mining services. The Service category should be referred to as Services and Miscellaneous. Sources: BEA Regional Projections to 2040, Volume 2: Metropolitan Statistical Areas, U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, October 1990. New Mexico Department of Labor data TABLE 28 NONAGRICULTURAL JOBS BY SECTOR TO 2015 Click HERE for graphic. County Control Tables Jobs by County for both sectors and total jobs were forecast by trend and shift-share techniques. The county control totals were developed in this manner to allow the employment allocation to be more sensitive to recent trends and concentrations of population. The UNM- BBER forecast was acceptable at the District level, however, Sandoval and Valencia Counties both appear low given the size of the forecast population in those counties. To account for the projected population gains, a special consideration was given to locating population serving employment near forecast population. The initial step was to project the proportion of the nonagricultural jobs in each county for 2005 and 2015 based on 1980- 1990 data. Historical data for jobs in District 3 is not available prior to 1980 due to the division of Valencia County. The Cibola County portion of old Valencia County is no longer part of District 3. Proportions and projected proportions for each county are provided in TABLE 29. The r correlation coefficient and the B coefficient produced by a linear regression analysis is provided for the data for each county. To conserve space, data for the years 1982-1985 are omitted. The proportion of jobs in Bernalillo County has continually declined since 1980. Sandoval County, during the same decade has increased its proportion of jobs since 1981. Much of the increase in jobs in Sandoval County have been in manufacturing, retail, and services; the projected strong growth in services would be consistent with the projected strong employment growth for the County. Torrance and Valencia Counties both gained jobs during the decade of the 1980's, but at a slightly slower pace than the overall District. Both of these counties have a large government sector; in general, the government sector has grown at a slower pace than the overall economy. TABLE 29 PROPORTION OF JOBS IN EACH COUNTY BY YEAR Click HERE for graphic. Source: New Mexico Department of Labor The 1988 distribution of jobs by county and sector is provided in TABLE 30. The sectors for each county were adjusted to the BEA forecast data presented in TABLE 27. The results are reflected by the 2005 and 2015 proportions. A shift-share technique was used to produce the proportionate shares for each sector. An initial allocation of jobs in each sector is provided in TABLE 31. Some processing was required using a Fratar technique to balance the sector projections generated from TABLE 30 with the initial county proportions from TABLE 29 and the sector control totals shown in TABLE 28. Construction, manufacturing, and government sectors are initially projected in each county to account for smaller proportions in the future than in 1988. This is a direct result of the BEA forecasts for slower growth in these sectors. Services is initially projected, in each county, to have a larger proportion in the future than in 1988. Services was the fastest growing sector during the 1980's and is expected to continue to be the most rapidly growing sector. Based on the BEA forecasts, services should grow by 71 percent over the 27 year period from 1988 to 2015 and account for nearly a third of the District 3 jobs in 2015. The initial projections for Bernalillo County also show proportionately smaller sectors for TCU, wholesale, and retail. This result is due to the BEA forecast of slower growth in these sectors. Increases in these sectors in some of the other counties were due to either the internal relationships between the various sectors or rounding, including adjustments to force the total for each county to equal 100 percent. TABLE 30 INITIAL AVERAGE ANNUAL PERCENTAGE OF JOBS BY SECTOR Click HERE for graphic. TABLE 31 INITIAL ALLOCATION OF JOBS BY SECTOR AND COUNTY Click HERE for graphic. If jobs are divided into basic employment and population serving groups, it is possible to analyze the TABLE 31 distribution. The thesis is that workers will commute a reasonably long distance to work for basic employment jobs which may be located in urban centers, industrial corridors, or on a military base. However, population serving jobs must be near concentrations of populations. Population serving jobs include most retail jobs and significant portions of finance, real estate, and insurnce (FIRE) jobs (branch banks, local insurance and realty offices), services jobs (repair shops, recreational enterprises, etc.), and government jobs (public schools, police and fire stations, etc.). To determine a minimum number of population serving jobs required for individual counties, 1990 data was reviewed for each county (TABLE 32). TABLE 32 RATIOS OF POPULATION TO RETAIL, FIRE, SERVICES, AND GOVERNMENT JOBS FOR COUNTIES - 1990 Click HERE for graphic. In general, the retail, FIRE, services, and government jobs in Sandoval, Torrance, and Valencia Counties are serving the local populations. There are a few exceptions, the largest of which are the Los Lunas Training School and the correctional facilities in Valencia County. Firms with larger market areas and businesses not directly serving a local population are more likely to be located in Bernalillo County. It would be expected that Bernalillo County would have ratios closer to one than the other counties; TABLE 32 shows that this is the case for each of the four sectors. The ratios within each sector for Sandoval and Valencia are somewhat similar, except for government due to the afore noted facilities in Valencia County. Torrance County differs slightly for reasons that are unique to the County. The FIRE and services sectors, in Torrance, are far from one, probably because the County has a relatively small population. The Torrance retail ratio is closer to one due to the highway commercial activities along I-40. The government ratio for Torrance is also closer to one than might be expected, this is due to the Moriarty School District which serves most of southern Santa Fe County and part of eastern Bernalillo County with schools located in Torrance County. Examining the ratios which are noted as exceptions, the government ratio in Valencia County and the retail ratio in Torrance County are not entirely tied to local population growth. The retail ratio in Torrance County, however, appears acceptable since highway commercial activities should add a significant number of jobs by 2015 and may account for some of the population growth. Some portion of the Torrance retail sector is more of a basic employment and will produce population growth rather than respond to population growth. Consequently, the retail ratio in Torrance County should remain high and the 1990 ratio of population to retail jobs is an acceptable estimate of that ratio. Valencia County, however, is a different matter. The State facilities accounted for 1,125 jobs in March 1990. The future growth of these facilities, if any, is dependent on the State Government rather than the local population. Unlike the highway commercial activities in Torrance County, the State could choose to meet future needs for retarded persons in a different less centralized manner and the State could choose other locations for expansions of the prison system. Certainly growth of either of these State facilities could generate population growth, but at this point there is not sufficient reason to project major employment changes for these facilities. Therefore, the population to government ratio for Valencia County is adjusted to 21.39 plus 1,125 jobs. This ratio, which is similar to the Sandoval County ratio, was used to project the population serving government jobs in Valencia County. Then, 1,125 jobs were added to the government sector which accounted for the State facilities under a no growth scenario. The thesis was that the ratios for each of these four sectors in Sandoval, Torrance, and Valencia Counties in 2015 would be at least equal to the 1990 ratio. In the case of Valencia County, the adjusted government ratio was used. Employment in the counties around Bernalillo County in 2015 for these four sectors will need to be at least at the same level as the 1990 ratios in order to provide basic services to the resident populations. Ratios may be closer to one in 2015 than today since these three counties, as they grow, can be expected to attract other firms or expanded businesses which will serve larger market areas. In TABLE 33, a minimum number of jobs in each of the four population serving sectors was established (using the adjusted ratio of 21.39 plus 1,125 for government in Valencia County). These minimums were compared to the initial allocations in TABLE 31. Adjustments to the initial allocations are included in the data reported in TABLES 34 and 35, the county and sector forecasts for jobs. Adjustments consisted of moving employment from Bernalillo County. After the adjustments, the population to jobs ratios for Bernalillo County projected for 2015 were comparable to 1990 levels; in some cases, the 2015 ratios were closer to one than the 1990 ratios. An adjustment was also necessary for manufacturing jobs in Valencia County. There are several established industrial parks in Valencia County along with good rail service and an available work force. Since 1988, the last actual data point for the BEA based forecasts, the manufacturing sector in Valencia County has shown growth. The 1990 annual average was 286 manufacturing jobs in the County, slightly more than the initial 2015 forecast. More manufacturing jobs have been added in the past two years and all indications are that the County will continue to attract manufacturing in the future. To project Valencia County manufacturing, the proportion of District 3 manufacturing jobs in the County since 1980 were examined. In 1980, the average number of manufacturing jobs in Valencia County was 0.136% of the annual average for the District. By 1990, the Valencia proportion had increased to 0.664%. If this trend continued through 2015, the Valencia share in 2005 would be 1.456% and in 2015 the share would be 1.984%. These modifications are reflected in TABLES 34 and 35. The other counties were proportionately reduced to balance the increase in Valencia County. TABLE 33 MINIMUM 2005 AND 2015 RETAIL, FIRE, SERVICES AND GOVERNMENT JOBS BASED ON CURRENT RATIOS Click HERE for graphic. TABLE 34 FORECAST OF JOBS INCLUDING MILITARY BY COUNTY AND SECTOR - 2005 Click HERE for graphic. * Agricultural services are combined in the services category. In addition, since mining is a very small sector (244 jobs in 1990), and over half of the current jobs could be described as mining services, mining is also combined with services. TABLE 35 FORECAST OF JOBS INCLUDING MILITARY BY COUNTY AND SECTOR - 2015 Click HERE for graphic. *Agricultural services are combined in the services category. In addition, since mining is a very small sector (244 jobs in 1990), and over half of the current jobs could be described as mining services, mining is also combined with services. The forecast military enlistment (armed forces) associated with Kirtland Air Force Base (KAFB) is added to the job forecasts in TABLES 34 and 35. Other military enlistment which may be present in 2015, such as full-time National Guard, is assumed to be included in the projections for government employment. Subarea Control Totals Employment by sector was allocated to each subarea. In general, a shift-share technique was used. The results were reviewed and modified based on historical trends in each subarea and known development plans. For example, the proposed Cottonwood Mall in Subarea 5 could not be anticipated through either shift-share procedures or historical trend. In addition, major developments since the 1990 data set such as the location of Martin-Marietta were incorporated. The data was also reviewed to assure that there was sufficient population serving employment in each general geographic area to support the forecast population. Judgements were based on the data in TABLE 32. This technique was especially important for areas west of the escarpment, north of Northern Boulevard, and in Mesa del Sol. There were also assumptions regarding individual subareas which affected the forecast. These assumptions were: Bernalillo County 1) Construction yards will be displaced in part of the North I-25 Sector Plan Area, the near North Valley, and much of the Heights due to a combination of zoning pressure and rising land values. 2) Manufacturing will tend to concentrate in areas where it is already established including Subarea 8 where Martin- Marietta has located. 3) Transportation, Communications, and Utilities (TCU) will tend to concentrate in areas where it is established with the exception of two developing areas: Double Eagle II Airport and the west I-40 industrial areas. Coronado Airport and the General Aviation portion of Albuquerque International were used as guides for Double Eagle II. 4) Wholesale activities will increase on the west side in industrial areas and along south I-25. 5) Retail was held near constant in the established areas of the Heights, which appear to be currently at or near the saturation point. An allowance was made for the developing Cottonwood/Seven-Bar Area using the Coronado/Winrock Area as an example. 6) Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate (FIRE) was adjusted by examining ratios of population to FIRE employment on the westside of the Rio Grande, in Mesa del Sol, and east of the mountains. 7) Services and government employment was also adjusted by examining ratios. An allowance for the Double Eagle II Airport area was made for both services and government. 8) Estimated employment capacities for each subarea were computed, except Subarea 17, containing the Central Business District. The capacities were based on current densities of employment to commercial/industrial acreage applied to vacant commercial/industrial acreage. An assumption was made that future development would be similar in form to current development. Subareas 12, 15, 18, and 19 were constrained by the computed capacities. 9) An assumption was made that the proportion of the employment west of the Rio Grande would increase. The affect of applying ratios and capacities was to shift employment west of the river. In 1990, 6.4% of the non- military jobs in Bernalillo County were west of the Rio Grande. The forecast is that by 2005, 9.7% of the jobs in Bernalillo County will be west of the river. This percentage is forecast to increase to 12.2% in 2015. By comparison, 27% of the 2015 Bernalillo County population is forecast to be west of the river. 10) Subarea 22, containing Kirtland Air Force Base (KAFB) and Albuquerque International Airport, was allowed to increase in civilian employment but military enlistment was held constant. KAFB appears to be an attractive location for many defense and energy related jobs. Sandoval County 1) The proposed retail/commercial center at NM528/44 was forecast for 2005 by examining the existing Valencia "Y" area as a local example of an exurban commercial area. 2) Government employment sufficient to handle school employment was based on the existing Albuquerque area ratio of population to school employees working at school sites (excluding central office and other specialized staff). 3) Construction jobs were shifted into Subarea 1, northern Rio Rancho, to account for expected rapid construction in that area. 4) An allowance for the relocated Hawk Missile Battalion and a new general aviation airport were made in the government sector for Subarea 1. The above assumptions do not attempt or intend to delineate all known development proposals. Certain projects are mentioned in the assumptions because the identified projects are not adequately handled by the shift-share technique. Most proposed developments are assumed to be included in the projections derived from the initial shift-share allocations. The subarea control totals for nonagricultural wage and salary employment and military enlistment are provided in TABLE 36. Historical data is provided for each subarea to place the projections in a historical context. The sources of the historical data are MRGCOG files. The employment data was obtained in the respective years from the New Mexico Department of Labor (NMDOL), usually for the month of March, and allocated to DASZs. The overall total may vary from NMDOL annual averages for a variety of reasons. In addition, considerable variation, over time, is partly due to the nature of this data being point data rather than annual averages. The distribution of employment for each subarea by sector is provided in APPENDIX E. Military enlistment at KAFB is separate but other military employment is included in the government sector. Mining and agricultural services are very small sectors and are combined with services. The sector data by subarea is provided strictly for information. The only sector which is intended to be used for traffic forecasting purposes is retail. Historical data for employment by sector at the subarea level is extremely variable. It is reasonable to expect more variation in sector totals than in overall totals. Distributing employment by sector was used since it is a useful means of allocating employment forecasts. Forecasts for total jobs and retail jobs were the primary concerns. A forecast of manufacturing or wholesale jobs, for example, was not a major priority. The same building, at different times could support either manufacturing or wholesale jobs. Clearly this is true for many sectors, a particular type of land use usually does not correspond to a single employment sector. Therefore, any use of the tables in APPENDIX E should be geared to combining related sectors rather than specific sectors. A case in point TABLE 36 HISTORICAL AND FORECAST NONAGRICULTURAL AND MILITARY EMPLOYMENT BY SUBAREA Click HERE for graphic. Source: Middle Rio Grande Council of Governments would be the distribution of population serving jobs relative to the distribution of population or the distribution of basic employment relative to land reserved for major industrial/commercial uses. Employment Allocation to DASZs Employment growth was added to the 1990 data set to arrive at 2005 and 2015 forecasts. Allocations were made by a manual process distributing growth for each sector. Allocations were made in cooperation with local government planning staff. Some of the local government input came from work done on the 2010 forecast in 1989 when there was a very extensive process. City of Albuquerque Planning Department staff did participate in the current allocation. All local governments did review the allocations. Allocations were based on the following considerations: 1) Type of existing employment in the DASZ; 2) Known development plans: 3) Amount of vacant commercial/industrial land; 4) Zoning for the vacant commercial/industrial land; 5) The presence of existing streets and utilities; 6) The Long Range Major Street Plan; 7) Transportation improvement plans for the Albuquerque area, Valencia County, and State Highway and Transportation Department; 8) Plans for extensions of utilities; 9) Existing commercial/industrial buildings that were vacant in 1990; and 10) Development since March 1990. PART IV 2015 FORECAST METHODOLOGY FOR OTHER VARIABLES Dwelling Units Dwelling Units (DUs) were forecast from the projected population divided by the forecast persons per dwelling unit (PDU). Use of PDU is in lieu of using household size which would require a forecast of population in households. An assumption was made that PDU and household size are related and that the relationship would remain fairly constant. The average household sizes and PDUs for District 3 since 1970 are reported in TABLE 37 along with the relationship between the two variables. TABLE 37 HOUSEHOLD SIZE AND PERSONS PER DWELLING UNIT FOR DISTRICT 3 Click HERE for graphic. The ratio of PDU to household size has declined slightly over the past 20 years, however, over the past 10 years, the ratio has been essentially constant. This relationship allowed the use of recognized forecasts of changes in the average household size. A factor of .93 was applied to the forecast of household size to project PDU. The Bureau of the Census projects household size as a part of their population projections (Series P-25, U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census). Typically, these projections are done with alternative series, each series has a high , low, and medium projection. MRGCOG staff reviewed the historical trend for household size and the assumptions related to the various scenarios. The selected Census scenario was for an average national household size of 2.56 in the year 2000. The projection was advanced to 2015; the results were: a 2005 household size of 2.54 and a 2015 household size of 2.51. Comparisons of national and local average household sizes are displayed in TABLE 38. TABLE 38 AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD SIZES Click HERE for graphic. Household sizes have declined in every case, but the rate of decline is slowing. Reasonably, the rate of decline should slow as the average household size declines, since the lowest realistic average would probably be above two. The rate of decline for each county and District 3 was compared to the national rate of decline. In TABLE 39 the ratios of the County and District rates to the national rates are displayed. By analyzing these ratios, it can be seen whether the County or District rate is declining faster or slower than the national rate. TABLE 39 RATIOS OF COUNTY AND DISTRICT HOUSEHOLD SIZES TO THE NATIONAL HOUSEHOLD SIZE (The U.S. ratio is defined as 1) Click HERE for graphic. From 1960 through 1980, each of the counties had a decline in household size proportionately greater than the national decline. During the last decade, however, 3 of the 4 counties had a decline which was slower than the national decline. The fourth county, Bernalillo had a decline only slightly more rapid than the national decline. Given the data in TABLE 39, it is a real possibility that the ratio between the District 3 household size and the national household size may not be much different in 2015 than in 1990. A ratio of .996 for the 2005 and 2015 District 3 to national household size was used to generate projected District 3 household sizes. The projected household sizes are reported in TABLE 40. Also reported in Table 40 are the corresponding PDU projections. TABLE 40 DISTRICT 3 PROJECTED AVERAGES FOR HOUSEHOLD SIZE AND PERSONS PER DWELLING UNIT Click HERE for graphic. The decline in PDU to 2005 was approximated by multiplying the 1990 PDU in each DASZ by .97. Likewise, the forecast 2015 PDU was approximated by multiplying the 1990 PDU by .96. An initial projection of DUs for each DASZ was produced by dividing the forecast populations by the calculated future year PDU. Some DASZs that have a significant proportion of non-household population may have skewed results from the above technique. To correct for problems associated with large numbers of institutionalized residents or residents of group quarters, all DASZs having more than 5 percent of the population not living in households were reviewed. The reviewed DASZs are listed in TABLE 41. Each DASZ listed in TABLE 41 was reviewed for its unique circumstances. A determination of the appropriate PDU was made based on the type of non-household population, the DASZ projection, and the expected use of the 1990 vacant land. MRGCOG staff made these qualitative assessments. In addition, DASZs that had a small population base in 1990 could also have a skewed PDU. All DASZs with fewer than 10 housing units in 1990 were assigned a PDU. The assigned PDU was equal to the expected average PDU for the appropriate subarea. The 1990 average PDU for the subarea was multiplied by the same factors used to generate the overall PDU in TABLE 40. Finally, the District 3 total DUs were adjusted to calculated control totals based on TABLE 40. These control totals were: 2005 DUs = 315,899 2015 DUs = 351,529 TABLE 41 DASZS HAVING OVER 5% NON-HOUSEHOLD POPULATION IN 1990 Click HERE for graphic. Vehicles Available to Households The number of vehicles available to households, prior to 1990, has been an estimated variable. The 1990 Census, for the first time reported a total number of vehicles available to households. Consequently, there is not a true history for this variable. At the same time, there is not a strong reason to believe that the ratio of vehicles to persons aged 16 and over should change significantly over the next 25 years. District control totals were forecast based on a ratio computed by dividing the number of vehicles available to households by the number of persons aged 16 and over. A summary of this forecast is provided in TABLE 42. UNM-BBER projections were used to forecast the 16 and over populations in 2005 and 2015. Vehicles were distributed to DASZs by using the 1990 ratio of vehicles to dwelling units. The DASZs listed in TABLE 41 were reviewed and in some cases adjusted. For any DASZ having fewer than 30 occupied housing units in 1990, the subarea average ratio of vehicles to dwelling units was used. For any subarea having too small a 1990 base, the 1990 District mean was used. An adjustment was also made for the dormitories at the University of New Mexico (UNM), KAFB, and Southwestern Indian Polytechnic Institute (SIPI); the 1990 ratios of vehicles TABLE 42 DISTRICT SUMMARY OF FORECAST OF VEHICLES AVAILABLE TO HOUSEHOLDS Click HERE for graphic. Source: U.S. Bureau of Census and UNM-BBER to population were used. Final adjustments were made to match the forecasts to the District control totals. Employed Residents The District control totals for employed residents were established in PART III. These control totals were: 2005 = 366,940 2015 = 409,780 Employed residents were distributed to DASZs by using the 1990 ratio of employed persons to dwelling units. The DASZs listed in TABLE 41 were reviewed and in some cases adjusted. For any DASZ having fewer than 30 occupied housing units in 1990, the subarea average ratio of employed residents to dwelling units was used. For any subarea having too small a 1990 base, the 1990 District mean was used. An adjustment was also made for the dormitories at UNM, KAFB, and SIPI; the 1990 ratios of employed residents to population were used. Final adjustments were made to match the forecasts to the District control totals. APPENDIX A DATA ANALYSIS SUBZONES FOR STATE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 3 APPENDIX A displays a series of maps locating the DASZs in State Planning and Development District 3. FIGURE A - 1: Greater Albuquerque Area Data Analysis Subzones FIGURE A - 2: Bernalillo County Data Analysis Subzones FIGURE A - 3: Sandoval County Data Analysis Subzones FIGURE A - 4: Torrance County Data Analysis Subzones FIGURE A - 5: Valencia County Data Analysis Subzones APPENDIX B 2005 FORECAST SOCIOECONOMICS FOR DATA ANALYSIS SUBZONES APPENDIX C 2015 FORECAST SOCIOECONOMICS FOR DATA ANALYSIS SUBZONES APPENDIX D DATA ANALYSIS SUBZONE LAND USE DATA SET FOR 1990 AND 2015 FORECAST The APPENDIX reports eleven variables at the DASZ level. These variables are defined in the following listing with an abbreviation key for the abbreviations used in the APPENDIX B table. VARIABLE VARIABLE DEFINITION DASZ Data Analysis Subzone number corresponding to the maps in APPENDIX A. ACRES Total number of acres in the DASZ. RESF Developed single family residential acres. RESMF Developed multifamily residential acres RESMF Developed mobile home parks, acres. RESOTH Acres developed for other residential construction. COMIND Developed commercial/industrial areas. FARM Acreage expected to be in agricultural use in 2015. REC Identified acreage expected to be reserved for recreational uses. This is not intended to be a projection of all land to be reserved for recreational purposes. VRES Vacant available developable residential acres. VCOMIND Vacant available developable commercial/industrial acres. APPENDIX E NONAGRICULTURAL WAGE AND SALARY JOBS AND ARMED FORCES PERSONNEL BY SECTOR BY SUBAREA FOR 1990, 2005, AND 2015 BERNALILLO, SANDOVAL, AND VALENCIA COUNTIES APPENDIX F 2005 AND 2015 FORECASTS BY PLANNING INFORMATION AREA (PIA) For City of Albuquerque uses, this forecast is reported by PIA. The Pias are used by the City of Albuquerque for certain projects. A map of PIAs is provided.
