going places land use demand assessment

17
Miami Valley Land Use Demand Assessment Board of Directors April 2, 2009 Martin Kim, Director of Regional Planning

Upload: mvrpc

Post on 13-Jan-2015

1.250 views

Category:

Technology


1 download

DESCRIPTION

 

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Going Places Land Use Demand Assessment

Miami Valley Land UseDemand Assessment

Board of DirectorsApril 2, 2009

Martin Kim, Director of Regional Planning

Page 2: Going Places Land Use Demand Assessment

“Going Places” Planning Process

3 Phase process with an estimated timeline of 4 years Phase I – Existing Condition Assessment: Physical and

Non-Physical Condition Evaluation (Est. 1.5 Yrs: July 2007 – December 2008)

Phase II – Future Landscape Exploration: Future Land Use Scenario Development and Assessment (Est. 2 Yrs: January 2009 – December 2010)

Phase III – Building a Clear and Shared Regional Growth Framework (Est. 6 months: January 2011 – June 2011)

Page 3: Going Places Land Use Demand Assessment

Purpose

To be the culmination of the non-physical existing conditions evaluation of “Going Places – An Integrated Land Use Vision for the Miami Valley Region”

To present the results of the 2040 population and employment forecasts

To estimate future 2040 land use demand based on the continuation of existing population, demographic, and development trends

Page 4: Going Places Land Use Demand Assessment

Data Sources

U.S. Census Bureau Ohio Department of Development Ohio Department of Jobs and Family Services Ohio EPA, Division of Surface Water National Center for Education Statistics Local Sources including:

County Auditors Local School Districts Local Water Facilities Correctional Facilities

Page 5: Going Places Land Use Demand Assessment

Introduction Methodology

Socio-Economic Projections Land Use Demand Projections

Socio-Economic Projections Population Employment

Land Use Demand Projections Base Data and Assumptions Results

Report Structure

Page 6: Going Places Land Use Demand Assessment

Methodology – Population Forecast

County level projection from 2000 to 2040 The population projections from 2010 to 2030 are

taken directly from the Ohio Department of Development’s county-level population projections

MVRPC extended these projections to 2040

Page 7: Going Places Land Use Demand Assessment

Methodology – Employment Forecast

Two employment projections were calculated – one high, one low – for Greene, Miami, and Montgomery counties

Lower level projection is from the Long Range Transportation Plans, extended to 2040

Upper level projection calculated in two stages Short-term to 2010 Long-term to 2040

For the three cities in Warren County, projections to 2030 were obtained from OKI, extended to 2040

All projections were made at the county level, then divided into SIC categories

Page 8: Going Places Land Use Demand Assessment

Population Forecasts

Between 2000 and 2040, the Region’s population is expected to grow by less than 3%

Page 9: Going Places Land Use Demand Assessment

Employment Forecasts

At the upper end of the range, regional employment could increase by almost 19% between 2000 and 2040

At the lower end of the range, employment could increase by only 5% between 2000 and 2040.

Page 10: Going Places Land Use Demand Assessment

Methodology – Land Use Demand

Followed methods presented in Planner’s Estimating Guide: Projecting Land-Use and Facility Needs by Arthur C. Nelson

Based on the assumption that development would continue at the same densities and intensities that were represented in 2007

Projections calculated for 5 categories: Residential Employment Facilities Education Water and Wastewater Utilities

Page 11: Going Places Land Use Demand Assessment

Base Data and Planning Assumptions: Residential Land Use

Projections calculated separately for multi-family and single-family housing

All 2007 densities, persons per household, and vacancy rates were held constant to 2040

Housing Units AcresVacancy

Rate

Estimated Household

SizeSingle Family<1 Units Per Net Acre 36,116 (10.7%) 80,740 6.61% 2.651-2 Units Per Net Acre 86,769 (25.8%) 46,140 6.61% 2.663-5 Units Per Net Acre 92,659 (27.6%) 23,756 6.61% 2.586+ Units Per Net Acre 59,666 (17.7%) 8,344 6.61% 2.55Subtotal Single Family 275,210 (81.9%) 158,979 6.61% 2.61Multi-FamilyTotal Multi-Family 61,026 (18.1%) 8,466 18.96% 2.81Total Residential 336,236 (100%) 167,446 9.36% 2.64

Page 12: Going Places Land Use Demand Assessment

Base Data and Planning Assumptions: Employment Related Land Use

Since two employment projections were calculated, two land use projections for land related to employment was calculated

2007 Square footage per employee, floor area ratios (FARs), and vacancy rates were held constant to 2040

Facility Sq. Ft.

Sq. Ft. Per Employee

(Lower Projection)

Sq. Ft. Per Employee

(Upper Projection) Acres

Vacancy Rate FAR

Total Industrial 80,045,176 958.9 1,029.8 10,712 19.3% 0.1715 Manufacturing 79,007,280 1,250.5 1,341.8 9,990 19.3% 0.1816Total Commercial 147,116,302 397.8 426.4 24,596 14.6% 0.1373 Retail 56,877,180 676.1 723.7 6,527 12.7% 0.2000 Office* 32,560,782 149.0 160.0 3,169 18.2% 0.2359Total 227,161,478 501.2 537.4 42,969 16.8% 0.1477

Page 13: Going Places Land Use Demand Assessment

Base Data and Planning Assumptions: Public Facility Land Use

Future land use demand for fire/emergency medical services, and police facilities were based on projected functional population and current levels of service

All other public facilities were not projected but held constant to 2040

200724/7 Functional Population

sq ft acresPublic Safety Facilities Fire/EMS Facilities 674,108 127.8 Police Facilities 518,177 122.9 Jail and Detention Facilities n/a 244.2Government and Leisure Facilities 3,766,533 534.7Major Community Facilities 1,186,306 386.5Parks and Open Space n/a 37,039.9Private Land-Extensive Land Uses n/a 4,781.7Miscellaneous Support n/a 1,793.9Religious n/a 3,464.4

Region700,083

Page 14: Going Places Land Use Demand Assessment

Base Data and Planning Assumptions: Educational Land Use

Only public primary & secondary schools’ acreage was projected to 2040 Enrollment data for primary, secondary, and post-secondary

schools was obtained from National Center for Education Statistics

Building square footage data was obtained directly from the school districts

Levels of service for facility space/student came from lower range of Ohio School Facilities Commission’s guidelines

Regional Public Primary & Secondary Schools, 2007Number of students

Facility square footage Acreage FAR

Grades K-5 (Elementary School) 58,212 6,600,909 1,431.1 0.1059Grades 6-8 (Middle School) 30,001 4,501,305 939.7 0.1100Grades 9-12 (High School) 41,211 6,420,978 1,545.6 0.0954Total Public Primary & Secondary School Acreage 129,424 17,523,192 3,916.4 0.1027

Page 15: Going Places Land Use Demand Assessment

Base Data and Planning Assumptions: Water and Wastewater Utilities Land Use

Capacities for water and wastewater at the county level were determined to be sufficient for future demand, therefore additional land for these types of facilities was not allocated in projections for 2040

Local demands may differ and so additional future land may be needed

Capacity, mgd, 2008

Demand, mgd, 2008 Acreage

Capacity, mgd, 2007

Demand, mgd, 2007 Acreage

Region 238.04 101.93 633.25 182.87 132.95 1,586.15

Water Supply Wastewater

Page 16: Going Places Land Use Demand Assessment

Land Use Demand Projection Overall, the Region could need between 7,544 and

16,412 additional acres of development by 2040, approximately one to two times the area of WPAFB Warren County is expected to see the largest increase in need Montgomery County is expected to increase only by between

0.2% and 3.0%

Total Developed

Acreage 2007

Lower Level Total Acreage Needed 2040

Percent Change

2007-2040

Upper Level Total Acreage Needed 2040

Percent Change

2007-2040Region 275,709 283,253 2.7% 292,121 6.0%

Greene 73,696 77,799 5.6% 78,958 7.1%Miami 63,512 67,080 5.6% 68,394 7.7%Montgomery 130,715 130,956 0.2% 134,593 3.0%Warren* 7,786 13,038 67.5% 13,038 67.5%

Page 17: Going Places Land Use Demand Assessment

For More Information

Martin Kim, Director of Regional Planning at [email protected]

Katy Bowman, Research Associate at [email protected]