working paper ii

8/7/2019 Working Paper II

1/71


2/71

Table of Contents

Section: 01 02

Data Gathering Efforts

06

Task 2 Overview

06Data Collection Efforts to

Date

07Reports and Studies

Collected to Date

16Data Gaps

Appendices

A

List of Data Collected to

Date

BCase Studies of

Biotechnology Parks

2 May 2010Working Paper 2 Table of Contents


3/71

3

Acknowledgement

The AECOM team would like to acknowledge the

GNOBEDD Board and staff as well as all of the

individuals, groups, agencies, and other entities that

supplied the team with data that will be vital to the

planning process. This report has also been developed

in coordination with the entire AECOM team. The team

includes: EDAW / AECOM, AECOM Economics, AECOM

Transportation, Bright Moments, Canon Design, CBRE,

Chester Engineers and The Ehrhardt Group.


4/71

Section 01:

Data Gathering

4 May 2010Working Paper 2 Data Gathering


5/71

5


6/71

Data Collection Efforts

Task 2 Overview

The purpose of Task 2 is to collect all information,

reports, and mapping relevant to the Greater New

Orleans Biosciences Economic Development District

(GNOBEDD). This data will be the foundation for

the Teams analysis and plan development used in

subsequent tasks.

Data Collect ion Efforts To Date

The collection of base data started immediately upon

kickoff of the project. The connections established

through the stakeholder interview process in Task 1

were also benefi cial to the data collection effort. Team

members were able to contact interviewed stakeholders

for additional information pertinent to their specifi c scope

and expertise, as well as general information pertinent

to the entire project. Efforts were made to collect data in

a usable format, such as GIS or CAD, which allows it to

be incorporated into base maps and graphics that will be

developed in future project tasks.

Data collected during this task will assist the Team in

understanding the physical and natural characteristics of

the Biosciences District, and the regulations and existing

and proposed developments that will impact how the

Biosciences District is developed in the future. Specifi c

information collected to date includes:

Biosciences District boundary;

2009 aerial; Property ownership information, including city,

state, and institution;

Existing utilities/infrastructure, including sewage,

power, water, gas, and storm water drainage;

Building footprints;


Roadways and evacuation routes;

Transit, including streetcar and existing and

proposed bus and bike routes;

Natural resource information such as soils,

topography, and hydrology;

Floodplain information, including fl ood depths just

after Katrina and Advisory Base Flood Elevations

(ABFE);

Regulatory framework information, including

existing and future land use as proposed by the

2030 Master Plan, and applicable building and

zoning codes or design requirements;

Historic districts and landmarks as identifi ed by

the New Orleans Historic District and Landmarks

Commission (HDLC) and the National Register of

Historic Places;

Existing and proposed residential and retail

developments within the Biosciences District;

Existing institutional boundaries, including existing

hospital and medical school locations;

Proposed campus boundaries for the

University Medical Center (UMC) and Veterans

Administration (VA) hospitals, as well as the

Louisiana Cancer Research Center and New

Orleans BioInnovation Center, both currently unde

construction; and

Blighted property information, including properties

designated as blighted by the New Orleans

Redevelopment Authority, properties considered

blighted pre-Katrina, and properties defi ned as

blighted by Chapter 28 of the New Orleans City

Code.

A full list of collected data can be found in Appendix A.


7/71

7

Reports and Studies Collected To Date

Numerous plans, studies, and reports have been

developed and written that are relevant to the

Biosciences District and its larger context area. There are

many still that are currently being studied or developed.

These documents can be regulatory in nature, related

to proposed real estate or infrastructure developments

in or around the Biosciences District, or related to the

biosciences industry and its establishment in New

Orleans. Below is a brief summary of the reports, plans,

and studies collected to date.

GNOBEDD Strategic Plans:

Greater New Orleans Biosciences Economic

Development District & Blue Ocean: Shared

Initiatives for Louisianas Future. GNOBEDD.

The presentation reviews how GNOBEDD goals are

aligned with several of Louisianas Blue Ocean Growth

Initiatives. They include (1) digital /media software

development; (2) next generation auto; (3) specialty

healthcare; (4) renewable energy and energy effi ciency;

and (5) water management. The Blue Ocean initiative

was established by Louisiana Economic Development to

set the state apart for new markets not fully exploited

by other states by identifying, recruiting, and cultivating

high-growth industry segments, while building on the

states existing strengths.

Act 487 of 2005 & Act 239 of 2008 Greater New

Orleans Biosciences Economic Development District

Act. Louisiana Revised Statutes.

The Legislative Acts establishing the Greater New

Orleans Biosciences Economic Development District. The

acts describe the Biosciences District boundaries, board

membership, and general powers of GNOBEDD.

City, Regional, State, and Federal Plans:

Historic District Design Guidelines. City of New

Orleans.

http://www.cityofno.com/pg-99-4-guidelines.aspx

The guidelines apply to projects that will affect the

exterior of a property located in areas under the

jurisdiction of the New Orleans HDLC. They are found

online and cover the following topics: building types;

lighting, paving, structural, and ornamental metal; new

construction; rooftop additions; roofi ng and associated

details; signs; wood fi nish materials; demolition; doors

and windows; fences, gates, and walls; and existing

masonry construction. Specifi c design guidelines are

also provided for the Central Business District.

Mid-City Neighborhood Planning District 4 Rebuilding

Plan. Lambert Advisory, LLC. SHEDO, LLC. On behalf

of the City of New Orleans. September 23, 2006.

The City Council charged the consultant team to assist

neighborhoods fl ooded by Hurricane Katrina in developing

revitalization plans that would be incorporated into a

citywide recovery and improvement plan to be submitted

to the State of Louisiana and federal funding agencies.

The neighborhoods within the scope of this report

included Treme / 6th Ward, 7th Ward, Fairgrounds /

Desaix, St. Bernard, Faubourg St. John, Mid-City, Gert

Town, and Tulane Gravier.

The report covers the following topics: a history of the

Mid-City neighborhood; the vision and goals specifi c

to the recovery effort; existing conditions in the

neighborhood prior to Katrina; the impacts of the storm;


8/71


a variety of neighborhood rebuilding scenarios; a detailed

recovery plan; and implementation and funding strategies

related to implementation of the recovery plan.

New Orleans Regional Biosciences Initiative:

Strategic Plan-2007. Eva Klein & Associates on behalf

of New Orleans Regional Planning Commission. April

2007.

This strategic plan outlines a vision to Build a globally

competitive Innovation Economy for the New Orleans

region by building on the regions knowledge institutions

to: perform globally competitive biosciences research;

grow and attract entrepreneurial companies; create good

jobs, a highly skilled workforce, and wealth for citizens;

and anchor a vibrant urban community at the regions

core.

This report identifi es the need for the development of a

New Orleans biosciences district which will be the core

of the regional biosciences development initiative, thus

creating the foundation for the Biosciences District.

The plan lays out a four part strategy to achieve the

vision: (1) an Innovation System Strategy that identifi es

specifi c goals for growth in regional biosciences; (2)

a Physical Development Strategy that identifi es goals

for urban place redevelopment; (3) a market strategy

and marketing plan outline; and (4) a leadership and

management strategy.

New Orleans Medical District: Strategic Integration

Plan. Final Report. N-Y Associates on behalf of the

Regional Planning Commission. December 2008.

This report is focused on how to improve the physical

environment comprising the Medical District in order to

help it reach its potential. As defi ned, the Medical District

(as outlined) includes the existing and proposed hospitals

within GNOBEDD.

The Medical District vision statement is to create a

vibrant, safe, urban Medical District that refl ects quality

education and research by creating a sustainable live/

work, mixed-use setting that delivers high quality

healthcare, while seamlessly integrating with downtown

New Orleans.

Plan recommendations regarding land use are to identify

existing and future institutional buildings that could

incorporate a mixture of uses; identify locations for stand

alone residential uses; ascertain the types of needed

support services and identify appropriate locations;

guide the density and design of land uses; and ensure

relationship to the larger Biosciences District.

Plan recommendations regarding transportation are

to develop changes to the transportation network to

support the future land use scenario; examine changes to

streets and street cross-sections; and ensure relationship

of transportation network to the larger Biosciences

District.

Plan recommendations regarding infrastructure are

to assess impacts of proposed land use scenarios

on streets and utilities and recommend capacity-

related improvements, if needed; establish standards

for streetscape design; address currently needed

improvements to streets and utilities; develop plans

for currently needed improvements to urban design

infrastructure; ensure urban design infrastructure is

compatible with efforts of the Downtown Development

District (DDD) and the larger Biosciences District; and

all major developments should conform to the DDDs

downtown urban design guidelines being developed in

conjunction with the City Planning Commission.


9/71

9

The study also recommended over $14m in utility

improvements and $50m in visual improvements for the

Medical District.

A Plan for the 21st Century: New Orleans 2030. New

Orleans Master Plan and Comprehensive Zoning

Ordinance. Goody Clancy on behalf of the City

Planning Commission. Draft. September 14, 2009.

The citywide plan establishes the goals and strategies

that will guide the Citys growth for the next 20 years.

The plan has been approved by the City Planning

Commission and is currently in the process of being

reviewed for adoption by the City Council.

The main themes of the master plan are livability,

opportunity, and sustainability. Goals established to

achieve the vision include making New Orleans resilient

in the face of storms and global climate change; creating

partnerships of nonprofi ts, the business community,

institutions, and others that work to expand the economy

and extend opportunity to everyone; and building an

effi cient and effective city government. Detailed goals

are provided for neighborhoods and housing; historic

preservation; green infrastructure; health and human

services; economic development; facilities, services,

and infrastructure; transportation; resilience; and

environmental quality.

The master plan establishes a future land use plan for

the City showing the desired distribution of land uses

(by category) with general density and intensity. The

map shows land uses that refl ect the long-term vision,

goals, and policies expressed elsewhere in this plan. The

Future Land Use Map is not a zoning map and it does not

govern design.

The creation of a new comprehensive zoning ordinance

(CZO) will be critical to the implementation of the master

plan. The CZO will include a zoning map that refl ects the

policies of the master plan.

New Orleans Redevelopment Authority Transition

Presentation. NORA. March 10, 2010.

The slide presentation was given to the City by Joyce

Wilkerson when she became the new Executive

Director of the agency. The presentation outlines why

neighborhoods matter; the large amount of funding

remaining for various recovery programs (e.g., Road

Home, Soft Second Program, Long-Term Community

Recovery); the coordination of housing investments

with investments in commercial, residential, hazard

mitigation, amenities, and public facilities; the use of

public subsidies and facilities to catalyze investment

and solve market failure; and why the Citys role in

implementation should be reduced and increased in the

areas of coordination, policy, and enforcement.

US 61 / Tulane Avenue Corridor Improvements:

Stage 0 Feasibility Study. Stakeholder Meeting

Memorandum. URS on behalf of the Regional

Planning Commission. April 8, 2010.

Minutes from the April 8, 2010 meeting regarding

proposed improvements to Tulane Avenue. The minutes

include the slide presentation given by URS describing

existing conditions along the corridor, proposed typical

sections, and an overview of the complete streets

concept.

The Unifi ed New Orleans Plan (UNOP): Citywide

Strategic Recovery and Rebuilding Plan. City of New

Orleans. 2006.

UNOP was written to identify the capital projects and


10/71

programs that would help guide the repair and rebuilding

of New Orleans in a way that creates stability and

paves the way for future growth and prosperity. The

District Plans, or Lambert Plans, created the foundation

for UNOP by identifying those recovery projects within

the District Plans that had citywide signifi cance. The

document also grouped similar types of projects

mentioned frequently in the planning district plans and

created a citywide project of that category of project.

The document identifi es a ten-year time frame to

achieve recovery, at which point the physical damage

of the storm would be removed, repaired, or rebuilt;

the major physical infrastructure serving the City would

be renovated; there is high quality essential social

infrastructure (schools, healthcare and public safety); the

economy is stable and growing; and there is a strong

quality of life.

The Unifi ed New Orleans Plan (UNOP): Districts 1 &

4. Goody Clancy on behalf of the City of New Orleans.

2007.

The District 1 plan provides a detailed assessment of the

lower portion of the Biosciences District area including

the existing medical center district. The District 4 plan

covers much of Mid-City and the remaining portion of the

Biosciences District.

Both District Plans detail existing building stock,

infrastructure, impacts from Katrina, redevelopment

scenarios and establish a specifi c vision and set of goals

related to the redevelopment of the area.

A number of helpful appendices are included in these

plans including specifi c economic and marketing

strategies specifi c to the medical district.

Institutional, Community, and Private Developer

Studies, Plans, and Projects:

Tulane University: Master Plan for Research Space

Downtown: School of Medicine and School of

Science and Engineering. RMJM Hiller on behalf of

Tulane University. May 30, 2008.

The purpose of the plan was to accommodate a state-

of-the-art, interdisciplinary, academic and translational

research laboratory facility for both existing researchers

and anticipated new hires as the university is seeking

to support collaborative work between health sciences

and biological and physical science, and to spur the

universitys research mission.

The plan encompasses a strategy to create a sense of

place and identity for the universitys downtown campus.

While land uses will continue to be primarily medical

and educational, new residential and retail uses are

encouraged to create a more attractive community.

Medical Center of New Orleans Charity Hospital:

Feasibility Study. RMJM Hiller on behalf of The

Foundation for Historical Louisiana. August 20, 2008.

RMJM Hiller was hired to provide an assessment on

the feasibility of reusing Charity Hospital as a hospital.

The analysis indicates that Old Charity has the fl oor

plates to accommodate a world-class hospital and can

be renovated in a few years at a reasonable cost. The

study indicates the critical factors needed for renovation.

It also provides a preliminary design for redesign of the

hospital.



11/71

11

Medical Center of Louisiana-New Orleans: Business

Plan Review. HPS Health on behalf of Downtown

Development District of New Orleans.

DDD hired HPS to review the Medical Center

of Louisiana New Orleans (MCLNO) Strategic

and Campus Master Plan Update, and provide an

independent assessment of the business plans

assumptions and recommendations as to whether they

were valid and/or reasonable within the framework of the

general conditions of New Orleans at the time they were

drafted.

The report fi nds there is a need for additional acute care

bed capacity in New Orleans, and the proposal to build

a new teaching hospital to meet that need is sound. The

study fi nds that the larger hospital proposed under the

Likely scenario in the business plan is more reasonable

than the smaller hospital proposed under the Baseline

scenario, from both a fi nancial and community healthcare

need standpoint.

LSU Health Sciences Center School of Medicine

Strategic Plan 2009-2013.

http://www.medschool.lsuhsc.edu/faculty_affairs/

som_strategic_plan.aspx

The strategic plan outlines the vision, mission, and

goals of LSU-HSC School of Medicine. Goals include

(1) promoting excellence and innovation in all School

of Medicine educational programs; (2) fostering a

culture of academic and investigative excellence; (3)

structuring existing and new clinical programs to fulfi ll

short and long-term goals, while strategically positioning

the School of Medicine and LSU HealthCare Network

for the completion of a new University Hospital; (4)

aligning goals and missions of core clinical entities; (5)

developing a cohesive mechanism for faculty orientation,

development, and evaluation; (6) establishing a clear and

standardized process for annual reporting and periodic

academic unit review; and (7) refi ning budget principles

for resource allocation, particularly as they related to

educational and clinical programs.

LSU Health Sciences Center Divisional Strategic Plan

2009-2013.

http://www.lsuhospitals.org/Documents/

strategic%20plan2009-2013v3.pdf

The strategic plan outlines the mission, vision,

philosophy, and goals of LSU HealthCare Services

Division (HCSD). Goals include (1) supporting teaching;

(2) supporting research; (3) maximizing limited revenue

to carry out the dual safety net and medical education

mission; (4) enhancing access to patient care; (5)

ensuring good medical outcomes that conform to

evidence-based standards; (6) meeting and exceeding

the standards in customer service with our internal

partners, external partners, and constituencies to

advance excellence in healthcare; (7) engendering

stakeholder satisfaction among all of their stakeholders

(patients and their families, providers, employees,

community groups, and leaders and government

offi cials); and (8) providing quality healthcare and clinical

education in safe, accredited environments.

The plan establishes a goal of 17% of the annual budget

for LSU HCSD to be derived from nonstate sources.

It also states that each medical center will strive to

maintain or enhance the 2.5% of annual budget derived

from grants.


12/71

Site-specifi c Environmental Assessment: Design,

Construction and Operation of the University Medical

Center (UMC) New Orleans, Louisiana. March 2010.

http://www.lsuamc.com/meetings/

FEMA will use the Site-specifi c Environmental

Assessment (SEA) to assess the design, construction,

and operation for the proposed UMC, and determine

whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement

(EIS) or a Finding of No Signifi cant Impact (FONSI).

Three design alternatives for the UMC are described in

detail: (1) Canal Street E-confi guration; (2) Canal Street

L-confi guration; and (3) Tulane Avenue L-confi guration.

The Canal Street L confi guration is the preferred

alternative.

No signifi cant environmental impacts were identifi ed.

LSU Academic Medical Center: Public Meeting NEPA

Presentation. Blitch Knevel Architects. NBBJ. April 29,

2009.

Presentation prepared for a public meeting reviewing

the UMC program and site design alternatives. A basic

site analysis and a detailed review of the three design

alternatives are provided.

Strategic and Campus Master Plan Update: Executive

Briefi ng. Adams, NBBJ, Phase 2 Consulting, Smith

Seckman Reid, Inc. April 2007.

Presentation for MCNLO, providing an overview of the

business plan for the proposed UMC medical campus.

Findings include projected number of medical and

surgical beds (416) as well as psych beds (68), and cost

estimates for a new campus meeting this demand($1.2b).

University Medical Center Traffi c Impact Analysis.

Urban Systems. March 2010.

Presents the fi ndings regarding the traffi c operation

of roadways and intersections that provide access to

the UMC. Also presented are projected future traffi c

volumes associated with the project and traffi c generated

by the proposed VA Hospital, the Louisiana Cancer

Research Center, and New Orleans BioInnovation Center.

Residential and commercial uses under construction

in the Tulane Avenue corridor were also included in the

projected conditions analysis.

Key conclusions are the following: (1) signalized

intersections that provide access to the UMC site and

other planned and proposed developments in the study

area can accommodate future traffi c demand; (2) internal

intersections that provide site circulation and access to

surface parking lots, emergency room, and truck docks

indicated acceptable traffi c operations under projected

volume demand; and (3) signifi cant delay and congestion

are expected at unsignalized external intersections that

provide access to site surface parking areas.

Recommendations: (1) install a traffi c light at the

intersection of Tulane Avenue and S. Roman Street; and

(2) coordinate the new traffi c signal with existing traffi c

signals.

Southeast Louisiana Veterans Medical Center Traffi c

Impact Analysis. Urban Systems. August 2009.

The document outlines (1) current traffi c volume and

fl ow conditions at the site; (2) existing public transit

routes that service the site; (3) traffi c volume estimates

for announced and planned developments in the area;

(4) an estimate of new traffi c that will be attracted to

and produced by the new VA Hospital; (5) capacity



13/71


14/71

Market and Economics Reports:

GNOBEDD has hired GCR to compile existing

demographic, market, and economic reports for the

Biosciences District. They will furnish this data to the

AECOM team as part of their scope of services. In the

interim, a few reports have been collected by the Team.

They are listed below.

Housing Production Needs: Three Scenarios for New

Orleans. Greater New Orleans Community Data

Center and The Urban Institute. November 2009.

This is the fi rst in a series of annual reports about

housing in the New Orleans metropolitan area. The

report assembles and analyzes the most current data on

housing conditions and trends.

Projections for the New Orleans area economy forecast

very slow job growth, which suggests slow population

growth for the next decade. If these trends continue,

New Orleans would only need 3,598 additional housing

units by 2012, a total of 9,153 additional housing units

by 2015, and a total of 25,911 additional housing units by

2020.

Demand for lower-cost housing remains high from the

estimated 20,019 current renter households earning less

than 80 percent of area median income, 9,994 homeless

individuals and families, and some portion of the new

households moving to the City in the coming years.

The document recommends that policy makers ensure

the completion of the subsidized housing in the

pipeline, and then implement policies that help low-

income households gain access to existing housing

and secondarily prevent and reverse blight. Suggested

strategies include strengthening the performance of

housing voucher programs, providing rehab assistance

to owners of existing rental housing in return for

more affordable rents, controlling the cost of property

insurance and utilities, involving businesses in helping

employees obtain affordable housing, and expanding

affordable housing options throughout the metropolitan

region.

Current Housing Unit Damage Estimates: Hurricanes

Katrina, Rita and Wilma. U.S. Department of Housing

and Urban Development. April 7, 2006.

The report provides detailed tables on the housing

damage from the hurricanes, including extent of damage

type of damage, tenure, insurance status, and housing

type. Detailed tables are provided for Orleans Parish and

the Mid-City Planning District where the Biosciences

District is located.

Creative Class Market Research. RDA Global on

behalf of the Downtown Development District (DDD)

of New Orleans. February 15, 2010.

Creative Class is defi ned by those who use creativity in

their work. They typically possess a university degree

and have signifi cantly higher than average earnings.

According to Richard Florida, author of The Rise of the

Creative Class, Places that succeed in attracting and

retaining Creative Class people prosper; those that fail

dont.

DDD is seeking to grow the Creative Class in New

Orleans by attracting and retaining those that are focused

on digital media, biosciences, and arts-based businesses

It will use the study to inform a strategic economic

development program and branding initiative for the City.

The study found that the Creative Class are interested



15/71

15

in the following: (1) mixed-use neighborhoods where

they are able to live, work, and do all their shopping in a

small compact place or neighborhood without the need

for a car; (2) places that are authentic; and (3) diverse

options, as they relate to work opportunities, cuisine,

neighborhoods, and social community experiences.

Canal Street Vision and Development Strategy.

Development Strategies on behalf of the Downtown

Development District of New Orleans. May 2004.

The study sets a vision for the future of Canal Street

and a strategy for implementing development activities

necessary to realize that vision. The area covered by the

plan is the one mile section of Canal Street between the

French Quarter and the central business district.

The study provides an inventory of the land uses and

assess traffi c and parking along Canal Street. A chapter

of the study is devoted to the medical center complex

relationship to the street and adjacent redevelopment.

STR: Trend New Orleans CVD- French Quarter. Smith

Travel Research. February 2010.

Report that provides data on occupancy rates, daily rates,

and revenue fi gures for hotels in the French Quarter from

September 2008 through February 2010.

Biosciences Industry Related Studies:

As part of the AECOM scope of services, CBRE has

prepared a summary memorandum on bioscience

trends and potential opportunities for GNOBEDD (see

Appendix B). The analysis benchmarks research and

technology real estate initiatives across the U.S. Nine

projects are presented that provide a precedent for the

type of use and organizational structure contemplated

for New Orleans. The analysis explores and documents

key characteristics of these projects, as well as lessons

learned and implications for the development of a joint

venture strategy for GNOBEDD.

Other:

Preservation Research Council of New Orleans: New

Orleans Architectural Types.

www.prcno.org/map/?architecture

Website provides an overview of the distinct architectural

styles found in New Orleans, including Creole cottage;

American townhouse; Creole townhouse; California style

bungalow; double gallery house; shotgun house; and

raised centerhall cottage.

Mid-City Historic District: Determination of Eligibility.

This is the formal application for the Mid-City Historic

District to be placed on the National Register of Historic

Places. The document includes: an architectural survey

listing the number of houses of each architectural style;

a list of key landmarks; the historical background of the

area; and the contributing elements that identify it as a

district.

Preservation Research Council of New Orleans: Mid-

City Brochure.

http://www.prcno.org/neighborhoods/brochures/

MidCity.pdf

The brochure provides an overview of the Mid-City

neighborhood, events, important landmarks, and

neighborhood organizations.


16/71

Greater New Orleans Community Data Center.

Various Documents.

http://www.gnocdc.org/

This website provides a variety of information on the

repopulation of New Orleans post-Katrina. Items that can

be readily accessed include block-by-block repopulation;

commuter patterns; benchmarks for blight; details on

public schools; and housing affordability, among other

topics.

Connecting America: The National Broadband Plan.

Federal Communications Commission. 2010.

In early 2009, Congress directed the Federal

Communications Commission (FCC) to develop a

National Broadband Plan to ensure every American

has access to broadband capability. Congress also

required that this plan include a detailed strategy for

achieving affordability and maximizing use of broadband

to advance consumer welfare, civic participation, public

safety and homeland security, community development,

healthcare delivery, energy independence and effi ciency,

education, employee training, private sector investment,

entrepreneurial activity, job creation and economic

growth, and other national purposes.

The report identifi es four strategies to encourage the

creation of a national broadband plan. They are to (1)

design policies to ensure robust competition and,

as a result, maximize consumer welfare, innovation,

and investment; (2) ensure effi cient allocation and

management of assets, government controls, or

infl uences (such as spectrum, poles, and rights-of-way) to

encourage network upgrades and competitive entry; (3)

reform current universal service mechanisms to support

deployment of broadband and voice in high-cost areas,

ensure that low-income Americans can afford broadband,

and support efforts to boost adoption and utilization;

and (4) reform laws, policies, standards, and incentives

to maximize the benefi ts of broadband in sectors that

government infl uences signifi cantly, such as public

education, healthcare, and government operations.

Community Resilience: Lessons from New Orleans

and Hurricane Katrina. Community & Regional

Resilience Initiative (CARRI) Research Report 3.

September 2008.

The report assesses the resiliency of New Orleans

before, during and after Hurricane Katrina. Resilience

is defi ned as a community or regions capability to

prepare for, respond to, and recover from signifi cant

multi-hazard threats with minimum damage to public

safety and health, the economy and national security.

The key strategies to improve community resilience are

to improve the citys capacity to: (1) anticipate signifi cant

multi-hazard threats; (2) reduce overall community

vulnerability to hazardous events; and (3) respond and

recover from such events when they occur.

The report details the efforts the city has undertaken to

date to improve its response to hazardous events in the

future. As part of these efforts, importance is stressed

on the integration of hazard mitigation and recovery into

ongoing planning processes for the city.

Data Gaps

While a tremendous amount of information has been

collected during this task, there are still substantial gaps

that need to be fi lled. Key missing data items that need

to be obtained include:



17/71

17

General Information:

Plans, preferably in a digital format, are needed for

the following developments:

New UMC and VA campuses

New detention facilities complex from SheriffGusman

New Orleans BioInnovation and CancerResearch Centers

BW Cooper Jung Hotel

The former Texaco Building on Canal Street

Common Grounds Plan for permanentsupported housing on Tulane Avenue

Blue Plate Loft development by JCHDevelopment

Domains retail development on Tulane Ave

Louisiana Superdome and ExpositionAuthority

Benson Tower Plan

3D buildings for future sketch-up modeling

TIF district boundaries or other overlay districts

Boston Consulting New Orleans Tourism Study for

New Orleans Convention and Visitors Bureau

LEDs Blue Ocean Strategic Plan

Existing plans for the Charity Complex and the

former VA

DDDs Parking Mgmt Study 2008

Enterprise Zone and Renewal Community maps

and program descriptions

New Congress plans and fi ndings for Claiborne

Ave. David Waggonner

Utilities:

Telephone lines, fi ber-optic cables, and other

communications related data have been

requested from telecommunications companies

in the area. However, they have not provided

information without a letter from GNOBEDD

authorizing the request. Such a letter has since

been provided to the Team and submitted to the

telecommunications companies; we are awaitingreceipt of the data.

Data regarding Entergys electrical distribution

system has been diffi cult to obtain. The Team is

trying a variety of avenues to obtain the data.

Estimate of future utility demand over the

next 20 or 30 years or other horizon. The time

period should be at least the life of the street

pavement to be installed with the Tulane Avenue

improvements. Such estimates of future demand

should consider what is currently possible underthe existing and proposed zoning code, what

GNOBEDD is planning, whatever defi ciencies are

known to exist, or a combination of these or other

indicators.

The Dutch Dialogues per David Waggonner

LONI Network and other high-speed cable lines

Traffi c & Transportation:

General idea of trip demand by Delgado Estimate of trips between the proposed hospitals

and medical schools and a methodology to make

the estimate. Many of these trips were formerly

pedestrian trips, as the facilities of the three

hospitals and two medical schools were adjacent

and, in some cases, intermingled. It will be an


18/71

estimated 10-15-minute walk in the future from

Miro and Cleveland (generally the location of the

VA front door) to Crozat and Cleveland (generally

the farthest extent of Tulane toward the river).

This estimate may be increased as there is no

direct route with Cleveland Avenue being closed

between Prieur and Galvez. More information

regarding the demand for these trips is needed,

even if it is anecdotal.

Current and 2014 needs and operations from allinstitutions

RTA is planning a major service revision in the

near future. We will need to obtain their plans

once they have determined what the new service

will look like, and/or when we have enough

demand information to discuss 2014 service

needs, depending what comes fi rst.

A copy of the new Loyola Avenue Streetcar plans

A copy of the Union Passenger Terminals plans

(UPT)

A copy of the current plans for a Downtown

Heliport (Darryl Saizan)



19/71

19


20/71

Section 2:

Appendices

20 May 2010Working Paper 2 Appendices


21/71

21


22/71

Appendix A:List of Data Collected

to Date


23/71

GNOBEDD!MASTER!PLAN 20"May"10

AECOM!Team!Consolidated!Data!Inventory!

Data!Requested

TypeData!Obtained!

(Y!/!N)Format!Requested Format!Obtained Source Year

Administrative!Boundaries

Parcels Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!New!Orleans 2007

Wards Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!New!Orleans 2006

Parish!Boundaries Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!New!Orleans 2006

Council!Districts Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!New!Orleans 2006

Planning!Districts! Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!New!Orleans 2006

Neighborhoods! Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!New!Orleans 2010

Study!Area Y GIS!or!CAD GIS EDAW 2009

Census!Tracts Y GIS!or!CAD GIS ESRI 2007

Traffic!Analysis!Zones Y GIS!or!CAD GIS RPC 2008

Transit!&!Transportation!Systems

Interstates Y GIS!or!CAD GIS RPC 2010

Highways Y GIS!or!CAD GIS RPC 2010

Streets Y GIS!or!CAD GIS RPC 2008

Rights!of!Way Y GIS!or!CAD GIS RPC 2010

Public!Transit

RTA!Bus!Routes Y GIS!or!CAD GIS RPC 2010

Existing!Street!Car Y GIS!or!CAD GIS RPC 2010

Proposed!Loyola!Street!Car!Line GIS!or!CAD DATA!GAP

Jefferson!Parish!Transit!(JeT) Y GIS!or!CAD GIS RPC 2010

Tulane!Shuttle!(promised!June!1) GIS!or!CAD DATA!GAP

Heavy!Rail Y GIS!or!CAD GIS RPC 2010

Bike!Routes Y GIS!or!CAD GIS RPC 2010

Utilities

Sewer!Lines Y GIS!or!CAD TIF Sewerage!&!Water!Board 2 01 0

Water!Lines Y GIS!or!CAD TIF Sewerage!&!Water!Board 2 01 0

Power!Lines N GIS!or!CAD DATA!GAP

Gas!Lines Y GIS!or!CAD paper!!map Entergy!Gas 2010

Communications/!IT!/!Fiber!Optics N GIS!or!CAD DATA!GAP

LONI!Network N GIS!or!CAD DATA!GAP

Natural!Resources

Soils Y GIS!or!CAD GIS

Topo!(2'!"!5'!contours) Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!New!Orleans 2010

Water!Bodies Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!New!Orleans 2010

Rivers/!Streams Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!New!Orleans 2010

Flood!Information

Floodplains Y GIS!or!CAD GIS RPC 1999

Flood!Depths!at!Katrina Y GIS!or!CAD GIS RPC 2010

Advisory!Base!Flood!Elevations!(ABFE) Y GIS!or!CAD GIS RPC 2010

Planning!&!Development

Land!Use Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!New!Orleans 2010

Zoning Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!New!Orleans 2008

City"Owned!Property Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!New!Orleans 2007

State"Owned!Property Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!New!Orleans 2007

Property!ownership!by!parcel Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!New!Orleans 2010

Detention!Facilities!Complex N GIS!or!CAD DATA!GAP

BW!Cooper N GIS!or!CAD DATA!GAP

Jung!Hotel N GIS!or!CAD DATA!GAP

Former!Texaco!Building!on!Canal!Street N GIS!or!CAD DATA!GAP

Blue!Plate!Loft!Developmnet N GIS!or!CAD DATA!GAP

Common!Ground's!plan!for!new!housing!on!Tulane!Avenue N GIS!or!CAD DATA!GAP

Domain's!retail!development!on!Tulane!Avenue N GIS!or!CAD DATA!GAP

Benson!Tower!Plan N GIS!or!CAD DATA!GAP

Union!Passenger!Terminal! N GIS!or!CAD DATA!GAP

Civic!&!Institutional

Colleges!&!Universities

Loyola! Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010

Tulane Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010

UNO Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010

Xavier Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010

Xavier!Area!of!Influence Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010

Hospitals

Children's!Hospital Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010

Delgado!Nursing!School Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010

LCRC!"!detailed!digital!plans!still!needed Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010

LSU!Dental Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010

LSU!Medical Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010

Delivery

5/21/201

Page!1!of!


24/71



Data!Requested

TypeData!Obtained!


Delivery

Oschner! Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010

Oschner!Baptist Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010

Touro!Infirmary Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010

Tulane!Area!of!Influence Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010

Tulane!Medical!School Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010

University!Medical!Center!(Proposed!Campus)!"!Digital!plans!needed Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010

VA!(Existing) Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010

VA!(Proposed!Campus)!"!Digitial !plans!still!needed Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010

BioInnovation!Center!"!Digital!plans!still!needed Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010

Schools!(primary) Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2004

Fire Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!New!Orleans 2010

Police Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!New!Orleans 2010

Church Y GIS!or!CAD GIS RPC 2010

Libraries Y GIS!or!CAD GIS RPC 2010

Recreation

Parks Y GIS!or!CAD GIS RPC 2010

Trails!/!Greenways N GIS!or!CAD DATA!GAP

Imagery

Aerial!

Photography!

(2009!"!

1!

ft) Y TIF!

or!

similar IMG RPC 2009

Misc!Data

Building!Footprints Y GIS!or!CAD GIS RPC 2010

Assessors!Data Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!New!Orleans 2010

Historic!Districts!&!Properties!(HDLC) Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010

Historical!Districts!&!Properties!(National!Register) Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!NO;!AECOM 2010

Enterprise!Zone Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!New!Orleans 2005

TIF!District!Boundaries N GIS!or!CAD DATA!GAP

Census! Y GIS!or!CAD GIS ESRI 2004

Any!existing!3D!modeling!of!the!study!area!or!vicinity N Sketch!Up DATA!GAP

Studies!&!Reports

New!Orleans!Architectural!Styles Y PDF PRCNO 2010

Campus!Maps

LSU!Medical!School Y PDF LSU

UNO!Downtown!Center!Location Y PDF UNO

Tulane Y PDF Tulane

Xavier Y PDF Xavier

Details!on!historic!properties Y PDF HDLC 2010

LSU!HSC!Strategic!Plan!2009"2013 Y PDF LSU

University!Medical!Center!Documents

Draft!Site"Specific!Environmental!Assessment Y PDF UMC!website Mar"10

LSU"VA!Basic!Facts!and!Goals Y PDF UMC!website Apr"07

LSU"VA!Strategic!and!Campus!Master!Plan!Update!!/!Pre"Design!Study Y PDF UMC!website Apr"07

LSU"VA!FAQ Y PDF UMC!website Apr"07

LSU"VA!Highlights Y PDF UMC!website Apr"07

UMC!Business!Plan! Y PDF UMC Apr"10

VA!Documents

Final!Site"Specific!Environmental!Assessment Y PDF Mar"10

Mid"City!Information

PRCNO!Mid"City!Brochure Y PDF PRCNO

Background!information!from!PRCNO Y PDF PRCNO

Lambert!Plan!Plus!Addendum Y PDF Dec"06

New!Developments

EcoPark!/!The!Building!Block Y PDF 2010

Providence!Community!Housing Y PDF AECOM 2010

Superdome!(Confidential) Y PDF 2010

List!of!Developments!in!Progress Y PDF DDD 2010

City!of!New!Orleans

2030!Master!Plan! Y PDF Goody!Clancy Sep"09

New!Orleans!Medical!District:!Strategic!Integration!Plan Y PDF NY!&!Associates Dec"08

United!New!Orleans!Plan!(Complete!and!Districts!1!&!4) Y PDF City!of!New!Orleans

NORA!Presentation Y PowerPoint NORA Mar"10

Public!School!Information Y PDF GNOCDC 2010

Map!of!School!Districts Y PDF GNOCDC 2010

Map!of!School!Enrollment Y PDF GNOCDC 2010

Map!of!School!Management!Type Y PDF GNOCDC 2010

Repopulattion!by!Block Y PDF GNOCDC 2919

Housing!Production!Needs:!Three!Scenarios!for!New!Orleans Y PDF GNOCDC Nov"09

Housing!Unit!Damage!Estimates!Hurricans!Katrina,!Rita!and!Wilma Y PDF Apr"06

Connecting!America:!The!National!Broadband!Plan Y PDF FCC

BioScience!Research Y PDF

Institutional!Development!Award!(IDeA)!Program:!Centers!of!Biomedical!Resesarch!Excellenc Y PDF Jul"08

Health!Care!and!Biotech!Workforce!in!the!Greater!New!Orleans!Area Y PDF 20095/21/201

Page!2!of!


25/71



Data!Requested

TypeData!Obtained!


Delivery

(Regional!Labor!Market!Areas)!Revised!Industry!Forecast!Changes!to!2016 Y PDF Loren!Scott

ICLEI!2009!New!Orleans!Carbon!Footprint!Report Y PDF

Hospitality!Trend!Information Y Excel STR 2010

GNOBEDD!Blue!Ocean!Strategy Y PowerPoint

GNOBEDD!Charter Y PDF

Canal!Street!Vision!and!Development!Strategy Y PDF DDD

Charity!Hospital!Reuse!Study Y PDF RMJM!Hiller

Regional!Biosciences!Strategy Y PDF Eva!Klein 2007

New!Orleans!Tourism!Study!for!New!Orleans!Convention!and!Visitors!Bureau DATA!GAP Boston!Consulting

LEDs!Blue!Ocean!Strategic!Plan DATA!GAP LED

Existing!plans!for!the!Charity!Complex!and!the!former!VA DATA!GAP

DDDs!Parking!Mgmt!Study!2008 DATA!GAP DDD

Enterprise!Zone!and!renewal!Community!maps!and!program!descriptions DATA!GAP

Congress!for!New!Urbanism!plans!and!findings!for!Claiborne!Ave.!!David!Waggonner DATA!GAP CNU

Future!utility!demand!(20""30!year!timeframe) DATA!GAP

Dutch!Dialogues!per!David!Waggonner DATA!GAP

Downtown!Heliport!Study DATA!GAP

5/21/201

Page!3!of!


26/71

Appendix B:Case Studies of

Biotechnology Parks


27/71

GNOBEDDDRAFTREPORT

TASK 2:

CASE STUDIES OF

BIOTECHNOLOGY PARKS

Submitted to:AECOM

Prepared by:CBRE

May 7, 2010


28/71

GNOBEDDDISTRICT PLAN DRAFT REPORT MAY,2010TASK2CASE STUDY ANALYSIS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

GNOBEDD TASK 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................... 2METHODOLOGY .............................................................................................................................. 2STRATEGIC ELEMENTS FORGNOBEDD ................................................................................................3AGENCY IMPLICATIONS......................................................................................................................4CASE STUDIES RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY PARKS ................................................................ 6TECHNOLOGY ENTERPRISE PARK,ATLANTA,GA ......................................................................................6CENTER FOREMERGING TECHNOLOGIES,ST.LOUIS,MO .........................................................................9NORTH CAROLINARESEARCH CAMPUS,KANNAPOLIS,NC ......................................................................13INNOVATION DEPOT,BIRMINGHAM,AL ..............................................................................................16DELAWARE TECHNOLOGY PARK,NEWARK,DE ......................................................................................19COLDSTREAM RESEARCH CAMPUS,LEXINGTON,KY ...............................................................................24UNIVERSITY OF IOWAOAKDALE RESEARCH PARK,CORALVILLE,IA ...........................................................28PIEDMONT TRIAD RESEARCH PARK,WINSTON-SALEM,NC .......................................................................33TRI-CITIES RESEARCH DISTRICT,RICHLAND,WASHINGTON ......................................................................38USCRESEARCH PARK......................................................................................................................44


29/71

GNOBEDDDISTRICT PLAN 2 DRAFT REPORT MAY,2010TASK2CASE STUDY ANALYSIS

GNOBEDD TASK 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARYThe analysis benchmarks research and technology real estate initiatives across the U.S. CBRE hasidentified nine projects that provide a precedent for the type of use and organizational structure

contemplated for New Orleans. The analysis explores and documents key characteristics of theseprojects, as well as lessons learned and implications for the development of a joint venture strategyfor GNOBEDD.METHODOLOGYAny case study analysis of this nature has important limitations, all of which are driven by thecentral precept that the each venture is unique in its specific characteristics, including its location,physical components and, perhaps most importantly, its potential participant partners. It ischallenging to identify comparable research and technology park experiences that include all ofthe same components as relevant to GNOBEDD. However, it is possible to identify similar

initiatives that, to a greater or lesser extent, share many of the similar fundamental characteristics.Important criteria utilized in identifying case study candidates included any or all of the following:! Joint venture approach to governance/operation and/or funding! Local and state agency involvement in funding, development and marketing economic

development framework! Public-private partnerships! Research university involvement Physical science/life science research focus! Participation by regional technology innovation/transfer entity! Second or third tier regional economy/real estate market! Urban fringe location! Presence of a business incubatorBased on our assessment of potential candidates, the following nine benchmark comparables wereidentified as the focus of the case study analysis:! Technology Enterprise Park, Atlanta, GA! Center for Emerging Technologies, Saint Louis, MO! North Carolina Research Campus, Kannapolis, NC! Innovation Depot, Birmingham, AL! Delaware Technology Park, Newark, DE! Coldstream Research Park, Lexington, KY! University of Iowa Oakdale Research Park, Coralville, IA! Piedmont Triad Research Park, Winston-Salem, NC! Tri-Cities Research District, Richland, WAThe research resources included the websites, related news articles, and primary phone interviewswith relevant administrative personnel of the individual research parks. Each case study analysishas been conducted utilizing a standardized analytical approach, with the results organized withthe following basic components a brief overview and history of conception of the research park,the governance and funding mechanisms, commercialization and technology transfer related


30/71


activity, performance including tenant base and development pattern, and the key outstandingcharacteristics of the park.

STRATEGIC ELEMENTS FOR GNOBEDD

Following section summarizes the key characteristics of the profiled research and technology parkcase studies, which while they are by their very nature unique ventures, do share a number ofcommon themes that have been instrumental in their implementation.VISION: Shared Vision among Multiple Entities All of the comparable initiatives analyzedinvolved multiple entities and public-private partnerships. They demonstrate that it is possible todevelop collective goals and objectives for the project that are consistent with those of thepartnering entities. The development of a shared vision for the initiatives was crucial to theirsuccess. Amalgamating what are oftentimes competing interests of the various entities involved inthe initiatives to a coherent and lucid vision for the park can be a lengthy and laborious process,but ensures commitment for successful implementation from a broad base of stakeholders.

LEADERSHIP: Strong Research University Presence The central involvement of a researchuniversity has been pivotal to the viability of all of these initiatives, invariably playing a leadershiprole. The proactive involvement of a research university committed to the commercialization ofintellectual capital was the key driver for a successful technology-based economic developmentinitiative. The technology transfer and commercialization emanating from this research base is thekey to leveraging intellectual capital, job generation and financial performance. Successful industrypartnering in the development and marketing of novel technologies is typically central to theuniversitys mission.

FUNDING: Broad Variety of Funding for Adequate Implementation All initiatives analyzed reliedon a broad base and depth of funding sources. These include direct investment in the form ofgrants and loans by federal, state and local government agencies, direct investment from privateresearch foundations such as Battelle, investment by local and regional business and economic

development organizations, and private sector investment through developers and angel investors.Identifying and securing adequate funding for up-front capital and ongoing operationalexpenditures is critical for success, as is the development of a detailed implementation strategyover time. Several initiatives stalled due to inadequate financial support for the projects,particularly adequate funding for site planning and infrastructure investments.COMMERCIALIZATION: Regional Technology-transfer Anchors The involvement of regionaltechnology commercialization organizations is important in generating seed and venture capitalfunding for start-ups and product development, and assistance in marketing new technologies.They also provide assistance with grant funding applications assistance with patenting andlicensing new discoveries. They can also provide purpose built space and shared facilities for start-ups and businesses that have graduated from incubators at competitive rents. Examples of suchpotential anchors include federal and state research institutes and facilities, regional technology

commercialization organizations, and private research foundations such as Battelle.INCUBATORS: Business Incubators and Accelerators The case study projects included a start-upincubator as a spawning ground for businesses engaged in innovative technologies and process,and act as a conduit for technology transfer from intellectual property to commercialization. Thesepurpose built facilities are typically designed to accommodate start-ups with just a handful ofemployees, and include shared equipment, meeting space and other facilities such asteleconferencing. The inclusion of shared facilities and space creates an environment conducive toscientific interaction, cooperation and knowledge-sharing.


31/71


ADMINISTRATION: Governance Structure It is critical to establish a workable governancestructure with a strong leadership, which is most often a research university, often acting as aconduit for state financial support. Governing bodies typically take the form a non-profit 501-(c)(3)research or technology park corporation under the control of the state or university researchfoundation, with a board comprised of individuals from the university, the park director, state and

local government, private sector business, regional economic development and technologycommercialization entities, private research foundations and private sector developers andbusiness leaders. In several of the initiatives, a major private corporation acted as a key driver.

SUPPORT: State and Local Government Involvement State and local government agencies haveplayed key roles in both the planning and establishment and funding of all of these initiatives.Their role has proven to be particularly important through investment in site development andinfrastructure costs, business and workforce development and funding key facilities such asbusiness incubators.

RESOURCES: Adequate Operational Resources The provision of adequate operational resourcesfor the initiative for ongoing park operations can be pivotal in maximizing their potential. The mostsuccessful initiatives include a full-time experienced park director with a proven track record, and

with responsibilities ranging from site development planning and park management oversight, tothe preparation of budgets and marketing strategies. Operational assistance could also be in formof real estate incentives such as discounted or free leases for the gestation period for small start-ups, or free rents through local government/economic development agency subsidies.STRATEGY: Long-term Strategic and Site Master Planning At some point in their evolution, all ofthe projects have been the subject of strategic planning studies, and most have engaged land useplanning and architectural firms to prepare site master plans. These plans provide a clearframework for a phased development strategy over time in a coordinated manner, and provide thebasis for the budgeting, financing and implementation of key capital expenditures, including trunkinfrastructure. They also provide the basis for the land use regulatory approval process. Inaddition, it is important to develop park strategies and plans that are flexible and can adapt tochanges in the parks research and development focus over time. Marketing plans need to bedynamic and evolve to reflect changes in economic conditions and research funding resources.

TIMELINE: Potentially long gestation period Establishing and growing biotechnology companiesis a slow and expensive process. Additionally, any industry cluster takes time to achieve a criticalmass. Biotechnology firms, in particular, may have a growth period of up to 10 or 15 years,compared to dot-com companies that often generate rapid growth and returns. The large up-frontfunding requirement and long product development to market timeframe presents risks andchallenges related to funding. Therefore, to mitigate such concerns, access and involvement ofventure capitalists and angel investors, who understand the biotech industry growth model and itsinherent risks, becomes crucial to ensure long-term sustainable viability of the park. An additionalstrategy could be to aim for a diversified tenant base outside of biotechnology sector as well.

AGENCY IMPLICATIONSThe case study analysis clearly demonstrates a number of common themes and requisitecomponents for their successful implementation. This analysis when coupled with the analysis ofexisting infrastructure and commitment from various stakeholders at GNOBEDD suggest that asuccessful life science cluster is fundamentally feasible.


32/71


!Universities: LSU and Tulane University Health Sciences Centers/Xavier University School ofPharmacy/Delgado College Funding, intellectual capital, sponsored research, governance,business incubator, technology transfer

!

Research Centers: South Louisiana Institute for Infectious Disease Research (SLIIDR), theLouisiana Vaccine Center (LVC), and the Clinical and Translational Research, Education andCommercialization Project (CTRECP), Tulane National Primate Research Center, PenningtonBiomedical Research Center Research, Technology development and commercialization,entrepreneurial assistance, research facilities and business accelerator governance

! Federal/State Agencies: State of Louisiana/National Institutes of Health/Small BusinessAdministration Funding, governance (leadership role through state and regional economicdevelopment agencies), marketing assistance and potential tenant, workforce training,business incubator governance

! Local Economic Development Agencies: Regional Planning Commission/City of New Orleans/Louisiana Recovery Authority Land use regulatory framework, infrastructure funding,governance, economic development incentives, Marketing,

!Hospitals: Academic Teaching Hospital, Veterans Administration Hospital, Cancer ResearchFacility - intellectual capital, research facilities

! Private Firms/Venture and Angel Investors potential direct and indirect funding assistance,ownership and management of environmental legacy, sponsored research, entrepreneurialassistance

While there are a number of fundamental challenges that will need to be overcome in order toestablish and implement a successful cluster, the case study research provides a potentialframework for how this can be achieved. Few challenges stand out as perhaps the greatestpotential obstacles to success:

!Collaboration and cooperation among all stakeholders! Securing adequate funding and operational involvement by key stakeholders! Prevailing market conditions impact on funding and financial support for biotech start-ups at

the parkAdditionally, CBRE conducted a secondary data search documenting the biosciences industrytrends in the US and the existing base in Louisiana. Attached along with this report is theBattelle/BIO State Bioscience Initiatives 2010 report from May 2010 that provides the nationalindustry overview. An addendum to this report profiles the industry and its performance metrics forthe state of Louisiana. Finally, a report from Battelle published in May 2009 Taking the pulse ofbioscience education in America: A State-by-State Analysis includes a summary of science and lifesciences student achievement and examples of bioscience education activities in Louisiana schoolsand colleges. These two documents, along with the relevant state addendums, are attached to thisdeliverable.


33/71


CASE STUDIES RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY PARKSTECHNOLOGY ENTERPRISE PARK,ATLANTA,GAOverview and HistoryThe Technology Enterprise Park is located in Midtown Atlanta. The park was established in 2006and is the only biotechnology park in the area.Location

The park is located on 11 acres at southern edge of the Georgia Institute of Technologys (GeorgiaTech) campus in Midtown Atlanta, approximately a mile northwest of the central business district.The park has excellent access, both in terms of its proximity to a major university as well asdowntown, and also enjoys regional access via US highways 75, 85 and 20.

Conception

Georgia Tech is one of the top-rated researchuniversities in the United States, with a studentpopulation of over 19,000. The university wantedexpansion space for the companies that graduatedfrom its incubator. In 2004, it began working onthe creation of the park. At that time, the mayor ofAtlanta, Shirley Franklin, was already encouragingthe Atlanta Development Authority (ADA) tosupport the growth of the biotechnology industry,by including it in her comprehensive plan for the City (in 2009, Atlanta hosted the 2009 BIOInternational Convention which was attended by over 15,000 industry participants).With help from the ADA, the park was established in 2006. Technology Enterprise Park wasdesigned integrate closely with Georgia Tech to achieve the following objectives:

! Create an environment where biotech companies can grow and be profitable! Promote the economic development of Atlanta and the State through creating jobs, new tax

revenues and a biotech cluster! Promote the seamless commercialization of Georgia Tech intellectual property!Maintain Techs competitiveness in recruiting/retaining faculty and students by creating a

dynamic technology & business environment and providing employment, consulting andsponsored research opportunities

! Provide financial strengthThe park provides state of the art bio lab infrastructure in place (plug-and-play), as well ascomplimentary shuttle services, and access to Georgia Techs athletic and recreational facilities,library, research equipment, Global Learning Center conference facility, Georgia Tech Hotel andConference Center.


34/71


Map of Technology Enterprise Park


35/71


Governance and FundingGovernance

Though the park does not have a governing board, there are three general partners: Georgia

Tech, The University Financing Foundation (TUFF), and Gateway Development. Georgia Tech hascreated an entity which oversees the operations at the park TUFF. Based on the financingmechanism, TUFF is technically the owner of the first building, and Gateway manages leasing.Additionally, St. Josephs Hospital made major investments in its own building. The ADA alsoprovided financial incentives to companies to relocate to the park.

Operations and Funding: Key Players

Georgia Tech University, the ADA and TUFF were the key financing players. The ADA facilitated a$65 million bond in order to make a loan to TUFF. TUFF, in turn leased the building (making it theultimate landlord) to a wholly owned subsidiary of Georgia Tech, called Technology EnterprisePark 1. These funds were used to build the first five-story multi-tenant building at the park. StJosephs hospital is an equity investor in the second building, having invested $20 million inimprovements and $15 million in equipment.Technology Transfer and Innovation ActivityThe park currently houses five tenants whose focuses are biotechnology, medical technology, andchemicals. Tenants are mostly derived from or associated with Georgia Tech and include: AlteaTherapeutics, which create transdermal (through the skin) delivery systems for water-soluble drugsand proteins; CardioMems, which develops wireless sensing and communication technology forthe human body; Kemira, a Finnish chemical group specializing in water & fiber management,whose national; the Georgia Tech Research Institute, theapplied research arm of the Georgia Institute of Technology;and St. Josephs Translational Research Institute, which is a

preclinical medical research facility.Research funding is primarily driven by venture capital. AsAtlanta is not a large venture capital base, companies relyon a national network of venture capital for funding.Though the park doesnt have an incubator onsite, theAdvanced Technology Development Center (ATDC) islocated on the adjacent Georgia Tech campus. Over 50companies based on technologies developed at GeorgiaTech have been created since 1990. CardioMems, one ofthe tenants at Technology Enterprise Park, graduated from

the ATDC. Park PerformanceAnchor Tenants and Space Concept

The parks anchor tenants are Altea Therapeutics, which occupies 50,000 square feet in the firstbuilding, and St. Josephs Translational Research Institute, which a collaboration of St. JosephsHospital and Georgia Tech, and occupies the second building.


36/71


Development Patterns

Currently, two buildings are complete, totaling approximately 250,000 square feet. The firstbuilding, with 125,000 square feet, was constructed in spring of 2007, and fully leased by 2009.The second building was originally a warehouse shell, which was converted into lab space by St

Josephs Hospital for its Translational Research Institute. At build-out, the park will have a total of600,000 square feet in four buildings.Lessons Learned

The park is one of a kind in the Atlanta area and has created employment as well as economicbenefits. The park employs over 300 with a $19 million annual payroll. At build-out, the park isexpected to employ 1,500, earning an aggregate $90 million. The park has also been able toprovide good integration between the university, park tenants, and private industry. St. JosephsTranslational Research Institute opened in May of 2009 and has already helped bring twocommerciality approved medical products to commercial use and helped two internationalpharmaceutical and medical device companies enter the U.S. market.

One of the major challenges faced was that, despite strong marketing efforts by local and stateofficials, the Atlanta area did not have a large biotechnology base at the time the park wasestablished, and absorption took more time and effort than was anticipated. In the currenteconomic environment, the park will not be able to build-out the rest of the site using its traditionalfinancing methods. The parks operators are aggressively looking for grants in order to completethe final two buildings.CENTER FOR EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES,ST.LOUIS,MOOverview and HistoryThe Center for Emerging Technologies (CET) is a biotechnology incubator located in Saint Louis,MO. The CET was established in 1999 and is collaboration between the public and private sectors,including three local universities: Washington University in Saint Louis, the University of Saint Louis,and the University of Missouri-Saint Louis.

Location

The CET is currently comprised of 92,000 square feet housed in two buildings at Forest ParkAvenue in the heart of Saint Louis. This is a prime location for an incubator, as it sits between twoof its university partners, Washington University and the University of Saint Louis, which helpedfound it. The University of Missouri Saint Louis is located approximately five miles northwest of thecenter. The site enjoys excellent regional access, with US highways 55, 64, 70 providing access toChicago, Indianapolis, Memphis and Kansas City.

Conception

The CET was born out of economic development study for the City of Saint Louis, whichrecommended the creation of a district focusing on the biomedical industries, including thecreation of an incubator. The area was already home to three universities with strong researchprograms, including two medical schools, Washington University and the University of Saint Louis,which were located within a mile of one another.


37/71


During the mid-1990s, the City of Saint Louis purchased a 40,000 square foot warehousestructure located between these two schools, with the intent of renovating it for use as an incubator.At the same time, an existing 501(c)(3) organization, which had been geared toward advancingtechnology in the area but had long since been stagnant, was restituted and re-positioned tospearhead the development of the center. In 2001, the center was expanded to include an

adjacent building, which was a 52,000 square foot historic structure and had to be extensivelyrenovated.Governance and FundingGovernance

The CET is operated as a non-profit 501(c)(3). Its board is comprised of representatives of allstakeholders, including the three university partners, Washington University in Saint Louis, theUniversity of Saint Louis, and the University of Missouri-Saint Louis, as well as the City of SaintLouis, corporate leadership, technology companies, and venture capitalists. The board hires staff tomanage day-to-day operations and marketing.Operations and Funding: Key Players

The CET is a public-private-academic partnership, with funding coming from several sources.Capital funding has come from the City of Saint Louis, the St. Louis Development Corp., theMissouri Development Finance Board, the U.S. Economic Development Administration (EDA), andthe three university partners.The City purchased andrenovated the first building,which required an $8 millioninvestment. The EDAprovided a $3 million grant,

the CET board itself provided$4 million, mainly from thethree universities, and theCity provided the remainder.The second building waspurchased and renovated foran additional $8 million. Funding was comprised of $1.5 million in Historic Tax Credits, $400,000in Tax Increment Financing (from the Missouri Development Finance Board), $230,000 inBrownfield Remediation Tax Credits (from the St. Louis Development Corp.), as well as HUDgrants,.Financial support for operations mainly comes from the state, via the Missouri Department of

Economic Development. The University of Missouri-Saint Louis provides some additional support,as do private donors.


38/71


Map of Center for Emerging Technologies


39/71


Technology Transfer and Innovation ActivityThe CET is in itself an incubator and serves as a place where the three university partners cantransfer local companies that have stemmed from their research programs. The centers research

focuses on the biomedical, biotechnology, diagnostics and therapeutics fields, though it also ishome to a few advanced technology companies.As much of the research is initiated within the universities themselves, research funding initiallycomes from university sources. As companies are spun off into the CET, funding is comprisedmainly of local and national venture capital. The center has programs in place to connect itscompanies with funding sources, including private capital and public grants.Park PerformanceDevelopment Concept and Activity

The CET is currently home to 27 companies, all but five of which are in the biotechnology fields.

The center has graduated 8 companies to date. The CET owns the land and buildings it occupiesand leases space to tenants at what would be considered the low range of market rent levels.Development Patterns

The first building at the CET, with 40,000 square feetof space, was leased up within a year of completion.The second building, opened in 2001 with 52,000square feet, took longer to lease up, however thecenter is now fully leased. In 2008, needing expansionspace for its tenants, the CET initiated a campaign toexpand into a third building. The CET purchased anadjacent site with plans to develop a 60,000 squarefeet of predominantly wet lab space. Though the sitewas purchased the existing structure demolished, plansfor the new building were put on hold due to a lack offinancing stemming from the economic downturn.

Lessons LearnedThe development of the CET was somewhat of a piecemeal approach. The City of Saint Louispurchased the site and married the CET organization with the site without an outlined plan for thecenter. In retrospect, this helped the center when renovating the buildings, because spaces werenot fully built-out from the beginning. Instead, the CET built each space out as it was leased, being

able to cater to each tenants requirements. As tenants tended to be long-term, the approachworked out to CETs advantage. By the same token, the development of the CET could have beenefficient had it resulted from further up-front planning.


40/71


NORTH CAROLINA RESEARCH CAMPUS,KANNAPOLIS,NCOverview and HistoryThe North Carolina Research Campus (NCRC) is a biotechnology research park which was

envisioned and funded by David H. Murdock, owner of Dole Foods Company, Inc. The BiopolisCampus is located at 201 North Main Street in Kannapolis, approximately 20 miles north ofCharlotte, 50 miles southwest of Greensboro, and 100 miles west of Research Triangle Park in theRaleigh-Durham area. The site is located near the US-85, which provides access to Charlotte,Greensboro, and Raleigh-Durham. Eight universities, including three University of North Carolina(UNC) institutions, have established their presence in the park:

! Duke University! UNC-Chapel Hill! North Carolina State University (NCSU)! UNC-Charlotte!

North Carolina Central University

! North Carolina A&T State University! UNC-Greensboro! Appalachian State University

In addition, the North Carolina Community College System provides work force training.The Campus is planned as live/work community and will cover 350 acres when completed. Plansinclude one million square feet of office and laboratory space, 350,000 square feet of retail andcommercial space and approximately 700 residential units. The NCRC is planned to form abiotech corridor that links the Research Triangle Park, the Triad, Asheville and Charlotte.Conception

David H. Murdock, owner of Dole Foods Company,Inc. created the vision for the NCRC to advancebiotechnology as a way to improve human health. Heinvested over one billion dollars of his own funds intodeveloping the campus, and employed Castle andCooke, a Dole Foods company, as developer. In2004, Murdock purchased a 250-acre formerCannon Manufacturing Company Mills site inKannapolis, and in 2005, announced plans to buildthe $1.5 billion NCRC. February of 2006 marked thegroundbreaking for first building at the Campus,which was completed that August. The campus now

also includes the 100-acre historic retail village, for which plans for renovation are under way.Governance and FundingGovernance

The NCRC is primarily governed by the board of the David H. Murdock Research Institute (DHMRI).Members of the board include Murdock, as well as representatives from Duke University, UNCChapel Hill, NCSU, and private industry.


41/71


Map of North Carolina Research Campus


42/71


Operations and Funding: Key Players

David H. Murdock provides capital funding, as well as ongoing financial support, for the NCRC.Castle and Cooke, a Dole Foods Company, is employed as developer, as well as manages andmarkets the Campus. The tenant universities provide human and intellectual capital, and manage

their own research programs. The State of North Carolina has also contributed funding to theuniversity partners.Technology Transfer and Innovation ActivityWith the presence of eight universities, research and technology transfer covers a wide span of thebiotechnology spectrum. At the UNC Nutrition Research Institute, UNC-Chapel Hills researchfocuses on the relationship between nutrition and cancer, obesity and the brain; at the Institute forFruit and Vegetable Science, NCSU researches and develops technologies that improve thenutritional content of fruits and vegetables and increase agricultural production; UNC-Charlotteexpertise in bioinformatics helps processes the research data generated at the campus; and theNorth Carolina Community College System provides work force training.Incubator

The DHMRI is located in 105,000 square feet of the David H.Murdock Core Laboratory Building, and is centrally located inthe heart of the NCRC. The DHMRI houses over $150 millionin laboratory equipment which is available for use by tenantsand university partners. Here, members of academia andindustry collaborate on advancements in health-related R&D.Research at the DHMRI is currently focused on severaldisciplines, including nutrition, wellness, obesity, heartdisease, diabetes, cancer, osteoarthritis, medical devices, andagriculture. Research at the DHMRI is funded by a grant from

Murdock.Park Performance

Anchor Tenants and Space Concept

Anchor tenants at the NCRC include the DHMRI and the University partners. The DHMRI is theanchor tenant in the David H. Murdock Core Laboratory Building, which is also home to UNCCharlottes campus operations. NCSU is the anchor tenant in the Plants for Human HealthBuilding, which also houses the Research and Development arm of Dole Foods and AppalachianState University. UNC Chapel Hill is the anchor tenant in the Nutrition Research Building, whichalso houses UNC Greensboro, NC A&T University, and NC Central University. Other tenantsinclude medical device developers, biotechnology and advanced technology companies, angel

investment funds.Other tenants include Anatomics, an international privately held medical devices company, thepublicly-owned Carolinas Healthcare System, Inception Micro Angel Fund (IMAF), LabCorp, one ofthe worlds largest biomed clinical laboratories that pioneered in genome testing, as well as otherbiomedical research and development companies and advanced technology companies. Tenantsat the campus lease space in the commercial buildings, which are developed and owned by Castleand Cooke. As an exception, the site for a future hotel may be sold to a hotel developer who willbe allowed to build according to the campus planning and architectural guidelines.


43/71


Development Patterns

Currently, a little over half of the planned million square feet of office and laboratory space, hasbeen completed, with two new structures in the pipeline. The first building, the 311,000 square footDavid H. Murdock Core Laboratory, was completed in August 2006 and houses the DHMRI. Two

new buildings have been constructed since 2006. The 130,000 square foot Nutrition ResearchBuilding was constructed in 2007, and is home to NC State University, Appalachian StateUniversity, and Dole Foods, while the 110,000 square foot Institute for Plants for Human HealthBuilding was constructed in 2008, and is home to the UNC, NC A&T University, and NC CentralUniversity. The university tenants occupy a majority of space in each building, and though the parkis majority leased, there is still availability in each.The campus continues to expand, as the 70,000 square foot Rowan Cabarrus Community Collegeis currently under construction and is slated fore completion in June of 2010. A fifth building,which will primarily be occupied by Duke University, is in the design process. In addition, plans callfor the renovation of the 100-acre historic retail village, as well as the construction of 700residential units.

Lessons LearnedThe North Carolina Research Campus benefitted greatly from the vision and funding of David H.Murdock, the single-most important private sector driver of the research park. The campuscurrently employs 300 and is planned to employ 5,000 scientists and up to 30,000 other auxiliarypersonnel at completion. A key idea has been the notion of a biopolis, with a comprehensivemixed use development including residential, office, retail, and public uses. It has become aneconomic generator in a city that at one time suffered the largest mass layoff in the state.INNOVATION DEPOT,BIRMINGHAM,AL

Overview and HistoryThe Innovation Depot is a business incubator that operates in partnership with the University ofAlabama at Birmingham, focusing on the development of emerging biotechnology and lifescience, information technology and service businesses. The park is the result of a public-privateeconomic development effort and is funded by the Birmingham regional business community, theCommunity Foundation of Greater Birmingham and other leading private foundations, the UAB,the City of Birmingham and Jefferson County. The 140,000-square-foot facility is located in theheart of Birmingham, just north of the University of Alabama Birmingham (UAB). The site enjoysexcellent regional access via US highways 20, 59 and 65. The site is also near the future RailroadReservation Park.Conception

In 2000, UAB contacted the Entrepreneurial Center, which was a successful incubator located neardowntown Birmingham, in order to hand off management responsibilities and explore partnershipideas for its own incubator, the Office for the Advancement of Developing Industries (OADI), whichwas located on its campus. In 2007, the partnership finally came to life when $18 million wasinvested to purchase and renovate a former Sears building, a downtown Birmingham landmarkbuilt in 1945 that had been vacant for 20 years. The OADI and the Entrepreneurial Centerrelocated to the 140,000 square foot facility to form the Innovation Depot.


44/71


Map of Innovation Depot