Upload
mvrpc
View
345
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Citation preview
Phase III Preferred Scenario Review Meeting
Steering Committee and
Planning Advisory Committee
August 9, 2011
Agenda
Preferred Scenario Development and Assessment
Draft 2040 Regional Growth Framework
Public Open Houses Preparation and Preview
Planning Process and Scope
February 2011 – December 2011
Phase III Work Tasks
Identify, develop, and evaluate a preferred scenario
Develop and build consensus around the 2040 Regional Growth Framework
Seek approval from the MVRPC Board of Directors
Seven Alternative Scenarios
Identifying a Preferred Scenario
How People Voted
Three ways to vote:At the Open Houses – October and November, 2010
Online – Between November, 2010 and April, 2011
Via mail survey – April, 2011
Other inputPhone survey – February through March, 2011
Total Votes – 1,226 Votes
Asset-Based Development
22%
Business-As-Usual Development
3%
Infill/Conservation Development
30%Radial Corridor Development
1%
Unrestricted Development
4%
Mixed-Themes Development
30%
Jobs & Destinations Development
8%
Multiple Scenarios
2%
Asset-Based Development – 273 Votes
People chose the Asset-Based Development scenario because… They liked the positive notion of building on the Region’s existing
assets They liked the results of the performance indicator analysis
Below-average score for traffic congestion Above-average score for open space accessibility
They saw the potential for increased accessibility to parks and jobs, resulting in decreased commute times
They saw the potential for increasing the number of jobs in the Region They like the concentration of new development in areas with existing
infrastructure They liked the potential for open space preservation
Infill/Conservation Development – 362 Votes
People chose the Infill/Conservation Development scenario because… They liked the emphasis on redevelopment They liked the emphasis on the preservation of open space –
particularly the preservation of agricultural land They liked that some of the highest concentrations of new population
and jobs would be centered on the City of Dayton They saw the concentration of development efforts in areas with
existing infrastructure as more cost-effective They saw the potential for increased public transit options They liked the increase in accessibility – especially to parks and
employment centers They liked the results of the performance indicator analysis
Mixed-Themes Development – 365 Votes
People chose the Mixed-Themes Development scenario because… They liked having an option that mixed aspects from several different
scenarios They wanted to see more preservation of open space – particularly
agricultural land They saw an increased potential for the redevelopment of already
developed and underused areas They liked the scenario’s future development pattern – which spreads
concentrations of people and jobs throughout the Region and mainly along major transportation corridors
They saw the potential for an increase in alternative transportation methods
They saw the concentration of development efforts in areas with existing infrastructure as more cost-effective
To identify the values of the residents of the Miami Valley Region as they relate to the future of land development in the region
401 citizens were surveyed via a telephone survey of residents in Montgomery, Greene, Miami and northern Warren Counties. Random digit dial (RDD) sampling and Quota sampling method used
to closely approximate sample with demographics of area 95 % confidence, +/- 5 % margin of error region-wide
Survey conducted from February 10, 2011 through March 30, 2011
53 question survey developed by CUPA in partnership with MVRPC
Phone Survey
Scenario Priority Selection
Respondents were presented with 12 paired statements and asked to indicate which was closer to their views
Results showed: Support for strategies that reused/revitalized existing structures for
business/residential Support for development around regional assets Living in areas with established infrastructure more important than
parks/green space Easy access to roads more important than ability to walk, bike or take
transit
The Infill/Conservation Development scenario has the highest degree of support. Supportive of maintaining farmland, reusing existing space, promoting
urban development
Next highest level was for Asset-Based, though not nearly as high as Infill/Conservation.
The Business-As-Usual and Jobs and Destination Development scenarios have little support among residents.
Conclusions
Preferred Scenario: Concentrated Development
Methodology
Land Holding Capacity Assessment: The level of land capacity (theoretical) to
accommodate land use activities, expressed in dwelling units, households, or number of employees
Land Development Suitability Assessment: Locations within the planning area that are
best suited to accommodate land development
2007 Existing Land Use Pattern
D-Zone 1: Areas with the least dense development and the least amount of development diversity
D-Zone 2: Areas with a moderate density level and small-to-moderate levels of development density
D-Zone 3: Areas that may be either less dense with a higher diversity or more dense with a lower development diversity
D-Zone 4: Areas with higher density levels and higher levels of development diversity
D-Zone 5: Areas that are both dense and diverse, containing least two types of development
Change in Population
Population in the Region is expected to grow by 3%, from 834,717 in 2000 to 859,063 in 2040
Change in Jobs
Population in the Region is expected to grow by 3%, from 834,717 in 2000 to 859,063 in 2040
The number of jobs in the Region is expected to grow by 5%, from 436,929 in 2000 to 458,384 in 2040
Change in Population and Jobs
Population in the Region is expected to grow by 3%, from 834,717 in 2000 to 859,063 in 2040
The number of jobs in the Region is expected to grow by 5%, from 436,929 in 2000 to 458,384 in 2040
The increase in population and jobs along with an increase of the density and diversity of land uses will occur in the Region’s more urban areas, in existing communities
Preferred Scenario: Concentrated Development
Development will be concentrated around regional assets and in areas that already have the infrastructure to support it.
The rehabilitation and/or repurposing of vacant and underused structures would be encouraged, along with a more broad commitment to infill development – whether it makes use of existing structures or vacant lots.
The preservation of agriculture land and other open space would be a priority as well as encouraging more connection and cooperation between the Region’s communities
Concentrated Development Scenario vs. Local 2040 Plans
New Population New Jobs
A Living Region: 2040 Regional Growth Framework for the Miami
Valley Region
The 2040 Regional Growth Framework is more than a map. It is the Miami
Valley Region’s land development vision that represents our core values,
principles, and characteristics in the Miami Valley
2040 Regional Growth Framework Overview
Not to assign traditional land use designations such as residential, commercial, or industrial areas
Define areas according to what is “appropriate” (Phase I Land Development Suitability Assessment and Land Use Demand Assessment) and/or “preferred” (Phase II Future Land Use Scenarios) for future development, redevelopment, and preservation
Serve as a resource, providing a regional perspective on land use issues for local communities in their future land use policy and plan development efforts
2040 Regional Growth Framework Development
PRESERVED OPEN
SECTOR
RESERVED OPEN
SECTOR
LIMITED GROWTH SECTOR
CONTROLLED GROWTH SECTOR
INTENDED GROWTH SECTOR
INFILL GROWTH SECTOR
SPECIAL DISTRICTS
DEVELOPED NA No No No No Yes NAPROTECTED Yes No No No No No NA
SUITABLE NA Yes No Yes Yes Yes NA
ZONED FOR DEVELOPMENT NA No Yes Yes
Yes (zoned) / No (not zoned)
Yes NA
PREFERRED NA NoYes
(preferred) / No
No Yes
Yes (context or compact) /
No
NA
Based on 5 dimensions of land classification – land development and protection status, development suitability, zoning status and land development preference
Typologies for the 2040 Growth Framework
PRESERVED OPEN SECTOR - This sector represents open spaces under environmental protection by law or regulation as well as land acquired for conservation through purchase or by easement (Protected). This sector also represents areas that are not currently zoned for development and have land development constraints identified in the land suitability analysis from Phase I.
RESERVED OPEN SECTOR - This sector includes open spaces that do not have land development constraints and are therefore suited for future development. However, the areas in this sector are currently not zoned for development nor are they considered to be preferred locations for development. This area could be developed, however, beyond the year 2040.
LIMITED GROWTH SECTOR - This sector represents areas that are not currently developed and have limitations for future development but are zoned for development. There are areas in this sector that are more preferable for future development than others (Preferred).
CONTROLLED GROWTH SECTOR - This sector represents areas that are not currently developed and are not considered to be preferable locations for development. However, the areas in this sector are suitable for future development and are already zoned for development.
INTENDED GROWTH SECTOR - This sector represents areas that are currently undeveloped but suitable and preferable for future development by virtue of their proximity to existing infrastructure or existing regional assets. Some areas in this sector are already zoned for development (Zoned), while others are not (Not Zoned).
INFILL GROWTH SECTOR - This sector represents currently developed areas –including areas that are partially developed. Areas that are adjacent to regional assets are considered to be preferable for future redevelopment at a current level of density and intensity (Urban Context), or at a higher level of density and intensity with more diverse mix of land uses (Urban Compact). Infill areas are designated “Urban” or “Rural” depending upon if they within either of the 2000 Census Urbanized Area and the 2000 Federal Highway Administration transportation urbanized areas.
SPECIAL DISTRICTS - Special Districts represents areas that serve special function and are not subject to local or regional policy.
Phase III Policy Roundtable Workshop
Workshop was to gather the opinions of a variety of local public officials, planning professionals, and other interested parties about the priorities of the implementation concepts for the Going Places initiative
A total of 12 potential implementation concepts were organized into three – High, Moderate, and Low Importance –categories
Potential Implementation ConceptsPriority Ranking
Result
Encourage development around the Region’s assets. H
Focus on the maintenance of existing infrastructure (roads, water, sewer, etc.). H
Foster a sense of connection and cooperation between the Region’s communities. HRevive the Region’s older communities. HRevive the Region’s core city – the City of Dayton. H
Encourage the rehabilitation and/or repurposing of existing structures. MPreserve prime farmland and support agricultural enterprise. MIncrease the number and quality of transportation options (walking, driving, biking, rail, bus service, etc.). MLocate any new development in areas with existing infrastructure (roads, water, sewer, etc.). MEncourage the rehabilitation/reuse of vacant industrial sites. MUse land in a way that builds a sense of community. MMaintain and expand the Region’s parks, natural areas, and recreation amenities (recreation centers, bikeways, rivers, etc.). M
Discourage greenfield development. LEncourage the development of quality, realistic affordable housing throughout the Region. L
Improve the quality of educational opportunities throughout the Region. LEncourage energy-efficient building practices and the retrofitting of older structures for energy efficiency. L
A Living Region: 2040 Regional
Growth Framework
Encourage development around the Region’s assets
Focus on the maintenance of existing infrastructure (roads, water, sewer, etc.)
Foster a sense of connection and cooperation between the Region’s communities
Revive the Region’s older communities
Revive the Region’s core city – the City of Dayton
Public Open Houses Preparation Briefing
Public Outreach
5 open houses in 4 counties
Getting the word out…
Public Outreach
The Going Places Website
The Open Houses
Troy RecWednesday, Aug 10, 4-6 PM11 N Main, Troy 45373
Friendship VillageTuesday, August 16, 4-6 PM5790 Denlinger, Dayton 45426
Centerville Police DepartmentWednesday, August 17, 4-6 PM155 W Spring Valley, C’ville 45458
Center for Regional CooperationThursday, August 18, 4-6 PM1100 W Third, Dayton 45402
Greene Co. J&FS BuildingTuesday, August 23, 4-6 PM541 Ledbetter, Xenia 45385
Current Efforts and Next Steps
Identify, develop, and evaluate a preferred scenario (completed in July 2011)
Develop 2040 Regional Growth Framework (Draft version developed)
Compile, evaluate and make recommendation on 2040 Regional Growth Framework implementation policies(currently underway)
Consensus Building
Public open houses (Aug 2011)
Presentations and input solicitations (Aug – Nov 2011)
Endorsement and formal review from local jurisdictions (Aug – Nov 2011)
Approval from MVRPC Board of Directors (Dec 2011)
Questions?
Comments?
Next Committee Meeting
Going Places Wrap Up meeting
November 2011Formal Invitation will be mailed to you
Thank You!