QGET -- Scenarios AnalysisQuality Growth Efficiency Tools November 14, 1998
November 15, 1999
Strategy Analysis
Prepared for:
Envision Utah
Prepared by:
Quality Growth Efficiency Tools (QGET)Technical Committee
QGET -- Scenarios AnalysisQuality Growth Efficiency Tools November 14, 1998
November 15, 1999
Overview
ContributorsLimitationsContext
MotivationsChallenges
Strategy Analysis
QGET -- Scenarios AnalysisQuality Growth Efficiency Tools November 14, 1998
November 15, 1999
Contributors
• 88 Cities• 10 Counties• 2 Metropolitan Planning
Organizations• 5 State Agencies• Psomas Engineering• Fregonese Calthorpe
Associates
QGET -- Scenarios AnalysisQuality Growth Efficiency Tools November 14, 1998
November 15, 1999
Limitations• Work in progress• Conservative estimate of benefits• Prepared at the regional scale
– Site or project specific inferences should not be made
• Limited scope– Transportation, air quality, land use,
water, and infrastructure costs
QGET -- Scenarios AnalysisQuality Growth Efficiency Tools November 14, 1998
November 15, 1999
Quality Growth Strategy
Insert FREGOs last slide - 3D QGS
Layers:
Constrained LandsCritical LandsInfrastructureCenters and CorridorsNew Developed LandsRe-Developed Lands
QGET -- Scenarios AnalysisQuality Growth Efficiency Tools November 14, 1998
November 15, 1999
QGET -- Scenarios AnalysisQuality Growth Efficiency Tools November 14, 1998
November 15, 1999
QGET -- Scenarios AnalysisQuality Growth Efficiency Tools November 14, 1998
November 15, 1999
QGET -- Scenarios AnalysisQuality Growth Efficiency Tools November 14, 1998
November 15, 1999
Baseline
• Salient Characteristics– Refinement of past work (2nd revision)– Includes the addition of approximately
one million more people by 2020– Snapshot of the future based on state
and regional plans– Based on trends of the past 20-30 years
Depicts how the region is likely to develop based on
recent plans
QGET -- Scenarios AnalysisQuality Growth Efficiency Tools November 14, 1998
November 15, 1999
Strategy
• Salient Characteristics– Includes addition of approximately one million more people– Depicts impacts of voluntary, interjurisdictional
cooperation– Reflects market-based housing mix– Requires additional water conservation and telework– Consistent with previously expected population and
employment trends at the county-level– Requires incremental changes from current development
patterns
Depicts how the region is likely to develop based on adherence to Envision
Utah’s goals and strategies
QGET -- Scenarios AnalysisQuality Growth Efficiency Tools November 14, 1998
November 15, 1999
The pursuit of this strategy is motivated by the common and regional nature of many of our challenges. We share the same roads, airshed, water resources, and natural assets. We have an enviable quality of life, but we have major challenges.
QGET -- Scenarios AnalysisQuality Growth Efficiency Tools November 14, 1998
November 15, 1999
Challenge #1: Congestion
Seattle34%
San Diego58%
Portland33%
Las Vegas64%
Salt Lake City59%
Denver27%Los Angeles
29%
San Francisco32%
Dallas32%
Boston21%
New York17%Chicago
31%
St. Louis27%
Atlanta36%
Miami28%
Minneapolis47%
Percent Increase in Roadway Congestion: 1982-1996
*Congestion levels are estimated based on cars per road spaceSource: Texas Transportation Institute. Urban Roadway Congestion: 1998
QGET -- Scenarios AnalysisQuality Growth Efficiency Tools November 14, 1998
November 15, 1999
Challenge #2: Air Quality
16
22
5
20
9
24 4
9
1
0
5
10
15
20
25
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Nu
mb
er
of
Un
he
alt
hfu
l D
ays
SLC-Ogden Metro Area
QGET -- Scenarios AnalysisQuality Growth Efficiency Tools November 14, 1998
November 15, 1999
Challenge #3: Housing Prices
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Utah U.S.
Housing Price Index for Repeat-Sales of Existing Homes
Source: Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight
QGET -- Scenarios AnalysisQuality Growth Efficiency Tools November 14, 1998
November 15, 1999
Challenge #4: Loss of Farm Land
-0.3%
-6.6%
-15.8%
-9.9%
12.0%
-25.0% -15.0% -5.0% 5.0% 15.0%
Weber
Utah
Salt Lake
Davis
State
Ch
an
ge
in Ir
rig
ate
d C
rop
lan
ds
1982-1997
Source: 1982 & 1997 Census of Agriculture
QGET -- Scenarios AnalysisQuality Growth Efficiency Tools November 14, 1998
November 15, 1999
Challenge #5: Infrastructure Costs
Infrastructure Costs
Collector $6 Million/Mile
Arterial $16 Million/Mile
Light Rail $20 Million/Mile
Water
Transmission $690 Thou/Mile
Sewer
Transmission $70 per Foot
State of Utah appropriated$955 Million in FY 2000for Transportation and
Water Projects
QGET -- Scenarios AnalysisQuality Growth Efficiency Tools November 14, 1998
November 15, 1999
Strategy Analysis
Land Use -- Conserves More LandHousing -- Provides More Choice, Market DrivenTransportation -- More Efficient, Less CongestionAir Quality -- Lower EmissionsWater Demand -- Reduces ConsumptionInfrastructure Cost -- Requires Less Money
QGET -- Scenarios AnalysisQuality Growth Efficiency Tools November 14, 1998
November 15, 1999
Land Consumption
370 370
695
524
325
154
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Baseline Strategy
Sq
uar
e M
iles
Current Developed Area Developed Area: 2020
New Developed Area Since 1998
QGET -- Scenarios AnalysisQuality Growth Efficiency Tools November 14, 1998
November 15, 1999
Agricultural Land Converted to Urban Use
143
27
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Baseline
Strategy
Square Miles
QGET -- Scenarios AnalysisQuality Growth Efficiency Tools November 14, 1998
November 15, 1999
Housing Mix: Current and 2020
71% 73%67%
9% 9% 11%
20% 18%22%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
Current Baseline Strategy
Per
cen
t o
f T
ota
l H
ou
sin
g
Single Family Townhouse/Duplex Apartment/Condo
QGET -- Scenarios AnalysisQuality Growth Efficiency Tools November 14, 1998
November 15, 1999
Vehicle Miles of Travel Per Day:Current and 2020
40.7
79.2 76.8
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Current Baseline Strategy
Mil
es i
n M
illi
on
s
QGET -- Scenarios AnalysisQuality Growth Efficiency Tools November 14, 1998
November 15, 1999
Transportation Investment: 1997-2020
$15.6
$12.2
$0.3
$1.7
0
6
12
18
Baseline -- $15.9 Strategy -- $13.9
Bil
lio
ns
of
Do
llar
s
Regional and Sub-Regional Roads Regional Transit
QGET -- Scenarios AnalysisQuality Growth Efficiency Tools November 14, 1998
November 15, 1999
Population Within 1/2 Mile of Rail Transit: 2020
45,557
608,490
0
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
700,000
Baseline Strategy
Po
pu
lati
on
QGET -- Scenarios AnalysisQuality Growth Efficiency Tools November 14, 1998
November 15, 1999
Transportation Comparison
Percent Difference Between Strategy and Baseline: 2020
37.5%
-5.2%
12.5%
-3.4%
-3.0%
-10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
Transit Trips
Average Trip Time
Average Peak Speed
VMT/Capita
VMT
QGET -- Scenarios AnalysisQuality Growth Efficiency Tools November 14, 1998
November 15, 1999
Total Emissions: Current and 2020
1,869
2,634 2,541
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
Current Baseline Strategy
To
ns
Per
Day
QGET -- Scenarios AnalysisQuality Growth Efficiency Tools November 14, 1998
November 15, 1999
Emissions ComparisonPercent Difference Between Strategy and
Baseline: 2020
-7.3%
-3.5%
-8% -7% -6% -5% -4% -3% -2% -1% 0%
MobileEmissions
Total Emissions
QGET -- Scenarios AnalysisQuality Growth Efficiency Tools November 14, 1998
November 15, 1999
Water Demand: Current and 2020
1,008,800915,600
698,800
0
200,000
400,000
600,000
800,000
1,000,000
1,200,000
Current Baseline Strategy
Acr
e F
eet
QGET -- Scenarios AnalysisQuality Growth Efficiency Tools November 14, 1998
November 15, 1999
Per Capita Water Use: Current and 2020
Current Baseline Strategy
319298
267
Gallons Per Day
QGET -- Scenarios AnalysisQuality Growth Efficiency Tools November 14, 1998
November 15, 1999
Total Infrastructure Costs: 1998-2020
$0
$5
$10
$15
$20
$25
$30
Baseline Strategy
Bill
ion
s 1
99
9 D
olla
rs
Roads Transit Water Other (Sewer, Utilities)
$26.5
$21.9
QGET -- Scenarios AnalysisQuality Growth Efficiency Tools November 14, 1998
November 15, 1999
Quality Growth Commission and Envision Utah
• Dedicated to preserving quality of life present in Utah
• Jointly funded six quality growth demonstration projects
• Envision Utah will benefit from Commission’s work in the coming months to define quality growth
• Continued collaboration is essential