CM10 Visualizing Better Futures Bill McGowan

234 views
206 views

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
234
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

CM10 Visualizing Better Futures Bill McGowan

  1. 1. University
of
Delaware
Team
 Bill
McGowan,
Ed.D,
County
Agent,
Community
Development

 Carol
Bason,
Program
Manager,
CommunityViz®
 Richard
Kautz,
Land
Use
Planner
 Chuck
Donley
–
Donley
Associates

  2. 2. Context
(Delaware/Sussex
County)
  2nd
smallest
state,
3
counPes
  Top
10
people
per
square
mile
  Top
10
percent
rural
land
area
  Within
4
hour
drive
of
45
million
people
  Sussex
County
48%
of
land
area
  25
towns
  Largest
broiler
producing
county
in
the
country!

  Ag/residenPal
zoning
allows
2
DU’s
per
acre
  Town
and
county
interface
is
where
we
work

  3. 3. Principles
  Community
First
  Public
Talk,
Real
Choices
  Benefits,
costs,
consequences,
tradeoffs
  Elephants
in
the
room
  People
can
figure
it
out
  Public
Work
  The
visible,
creaPve
efforts
of
a
mix
of
people
that
produces
 things
of
last
importance
to
our
communiPes
and
Society.

 S.
Peters

  4. 4. Process

  5. 5. Partners
  Office
of
State
Planning
CoordinaPon
  Local
Government
  County
Government
  Community

  6. 6. The
Land
Use
“Crayons”

  7. 7. Land
Use:
Rural
 







T100A‐Rural:
1
DU
 







T20A‐Rural:
5
DU

 







T5A‐Rural:
20
DU
 







T1‐Village:
100
DU;
Mixed

  8. 8. Land
Use:
SubUrban
and
Urban
Mixed
 









T2‐
SubUrban:
200
DU
 









T4‐
SubUrban:
400
DU
 









T4‐Mixed
SubUrban:
400
DU/Mixed
Use
 









T6‐Urban
Mixed:
600
DU/Mixed
Use
 









T8‐Town
Center:
800
DU/Mixed
Use
 









T16‐High
Density
Mixed:
1600
DU/Mixed

  9. 9. Land
Use:
Non‐ResidenPal
 








TM:
Highway
Commercial/Mixed
Use
 









T30:
Employment
Centers/
InsPtuPonal
 









T200:
Retail/Shopping
Centers

  10. 10. The
100
Acre
Grid

  11. 11. Land
Use
Model
Parameters/Analysis
 •  ResidenPal
Dwelling
Units
 •  NonresidenPal
Floor
Area
and
Employees
 •  ResidenPal
and
NonresidenPal
Demographics
 •  “Out‐of‐Play”
Unbuildable
Areas
from
State
Policies


 •  “Build”
Efficiency
Factors

 NOTE:


Model
unit
sta:s:cs
are
derived
from
Sussex
County‐specific
tax,
engineering,
and
Census
data

  12. 12. Cape
Region
Study
Area
Scenarios

 ExisPng
Use
&
Comprehensive
Plan
 Example

  13. 13. The
Cape
Region
Study
Area
 Demo
Boundary
on
Google
Earth
 The
GIS
RepresentaPon
 The
100A
Grid
ExtracPon

  14. 14. Cape
Region
Study
Area
Grid

  15. 15. 
ExisPng
Land
Use
 Dwelling
Units
 27,000
 Residents
 67,000
 NonresidenPal

 Floor
Area
 9,800,000
 Employees
 14,400
 Profile:
 • 

Predominantly
rural
with


 agricultural
land
use
to
south
 and
west;
coastal
natural
 preserves
and
state
park
to
 north
 • 

Four
characterisPc
,

 seasonally
acPve
coastal
towns
 • 

Major
N‐S
highway
corridor
 with
associated

Mixed
Use
‐‐
 Retail,
Business,
Commercial
&
 MulP‐family
units
 • 

Scanered
single‐family
 subdivisions
off

 highway
corridor
DRAFT
Build‐out
May
25,
2010

  16. 16. 
Comprehensive
Plan
Land
Use
Scenario
 Dwelling
Units
 55,500
 Residents
 135,800
 NonresidenPal
 Floor
Area
 28,300,000
 Employees
 45,000
 Profile:
 • 

Predominantly
Suburban

 Mixed
land
use
‐‐
mulP‐family
 residenPal
and

nonresidenPal

 • 

Western
edge
of
study
area
 mainly
single
family
suburban
 • 
Coastal
natural
preserves
and
 state
park
to
north
remain

 • 

Four
seasonally
acPve
 coastal
towns
add
density
 • 

Dwelling
units
and
number
 of
residents
more
than

 double
across

study

 
area
 DRAFT
Build‐out
May
25,
2010

  17. 17. Benefits
of
the
UD‐SCC
Land
Use
Model
   Stakeholder
interests

visualized
and
analyzed
   Public

deliberates
and
makes
land
use
choices
   “On‐the‐fly”
impact
analysis

idenPfies
consequences
   “What‐if”
process

provides
implementaPon
opPons
   IteraPve
tradeoff
&
visualizaPon
process

leads
to
consensus
   Ready‐to‐go
Model

at
State,
Local,
and
Regional
Planning

  18. 18. Challenges
  Visual
  Heart
&
Soul
Versus
Hammer
&
Tongs
  IniPal
setup

  19. 19. Public
Work
 Milford,
Del.
–
“Southeast
residents
speak
out
on
planning”
 




ARer
hours
of
hearing
professional
planners
talk
about
 the
op:ons
for
development
in
their
neighborhood,
 residents
of
southeast
Milford
got
a
chance
to
draw
their
 own
vision
of
the
future
on
Oct.
15.
“We’re
having
our
 vote
now,”
neighborhood
resident
Wesley
Barrows
said.

 




ARer
state
planner
David
Edgell
and
Milford
City
Planner
 Gary
Norris
spoke
on
the
op:ons
they’d
come
up
with
for
 zoning
and
development
southeast
of
town,
almost
50
local
 residents,
farmers
and
businesspeople
took
their
turn
as
 planners,
laying
out
their
own
maps
of
the
southeast
 neighborhood
in
100‐acre
blocks.
Each
group
of
five
got
a
 set
of
:les,
color‐coded
from
green
for
the
lowest
density
to
 red
for
the
highest,
to
arrange
however
they
liked.


 




Bill
Pfaffenhauser
said
he’d
like
to
see
more
areas
 like
the
mix
of
stores
and
housing
in
downtown
 Milford,
rather
than
blocks
designated
for
nothing
but
 housing
or
nothing
but
commercial.

.
“I
like
the
idea
of
 small
business
with
apartments
upstairs,”
he
said.

 Apartments,
to
me,
provide
not
low‐income
housing
but
 more
reasonable
housing.”
 SE
Neighborhood
Public
Workshops

 Source:
David
Ross,
Milford
Beacon,

October
22,
2009

  20. 20. Why?
  Why
grids?
  Why
a
100
acres?

  21. 21. Milton
Bradley
‐
1962

  22. 22. My
Wayward
Youth….


×