Observations on the “Outside” Game: Townships, Regions, and Agriculture

1. Observations on the “Outside” Game: Townships, Regions, and Agriculture Presentation to 1000 Friends of Central Ohio Columbus, OH September 15, 2004

2. Jeff Sharp Associate Professor Dept. of Human & Community Resource Development Sharp.123@osu.edu Jill Clark Program Manager Exurban Change Project Exurban@osu.edu Contact Information

3. Introduction • The Exurban Change Project focuses on understanding the rural and exurban side of the regional change question. • Repository of data pertinent to communities at the R-U interface • Custom analysis available on request • Project is part of larger effort at OSU • Other programs at OSU include—Swank Program for Rural-Urban Policy; OSU Extension Land-Use Team; Center for Urban and Regional Analysis (CURA)

4. Outline of Presentation • Review “rural” population trends in Ohio and Central Ohio • Examine interconnections among Rural and Urban areas of the Central Ohio Region • Review challenges associated with farming at the interface • Discuss Planning & Zoning needs of townships

5. Ohio Population: Return of the Township

6. Nation, State and Regional Population Growth by decade, 1970-2000

7. Ohio Township Government • Townships are administrative units of the State of Ohio • Townships were created to facilitate the distribution of land • They possess only the powers that are provided them through the Constitution of Ohio and the Ohio Revised Code • In contrast to Home Rule of municipalities

8. Population of Ohio Townships, Villages and Cities, 1960-2000

9. Source: US Census Bureau

10. Changes in Central Ohio Townships

11. Population of Central Ohio Townships, Villages and Cities, 1960-2000

12. Population Density, 1970 Source: US Census Bureau

13. Population Density, 2000 Source: US Census Bureau

14. Population Change, 1970 - 2000 Source: US Census Bureau

15. Regionalism: Appreciating the Columbus MSA shadow

16. Connecting the Dots: The Importance of Roads • Historic Settlements at the crossroads • Urbanization and transportation have always been interrelated. • The first suburbanization occurred in the mid-1800’s as railroads and streetcar lines were built from central city to outskirts of city. • Persistent “rural” pockets of low density settlement

19. 73% of all urban land cover in Ohio is located within 5 miles of a highway. (Reece and Irwin, 2002)

20. Major Urban Center Persistent Rural Pockets Historic Settlements

21. Major Urban Center Persistent Rural Pockets Historic Settlements

22. Major Urban Center Persistent Rural Pockets Historic Settlements

23. But it’s not just people who follow the roads… • Road building also spurs firms to move outward and leads to the development of “edge cities” around the central city. • This allows people to move even further out and maintain the same commute time.

25. Job Growth by County, ‘94 – ‘01 Ohio Average = 12.01%

26. Selected Commuting Facts • Columbus MSA core counties: Franklin, Licking & Delaware • Between 1990 and 2000, commuters into Delaware County increased from 9,068 to 22,083. • Morrow County commuters into core counties of the Columbus MSA increased from 3,260 (26.7% of workforce) to 5,173 (34.5% of workforce). • 30,386 workers commuted into core counties from outside the Columbus MSA

27. Percent of Workforce Commuting in toCore Columbus MSA Counties, 2000 34.5% 31.5% 46.0% 50.2% 44.8%

28. Soon to Join the Party? • Counties surrounding the Columbus metro area are poised to join the MSA based • Current threshold of 25%+ of the county’s employed population commuting to the core MSA counties necessary to join.

29. Percent of Workforce Commuting in toCore Columbus MSA Counties, 2000 10.4% 20.7% 18.1% 8.2%

30. Issues at the Edges • Road development and business location within the Columbus MSA impacts a very large region • Many counties & townships outside (and even inside) the Columbus MSA may not understand their stake in the Columbus MSA. • What, if anything, needs to be done to develop a regional identity beyond Franklin County and the immediately adjacent counties?

31. Agriculture: A possible partner

32. Significance of Ohio Metro and Columbus MSA Agriculture (2002)

33. Three Ag. Issues other than Farmland Preservation • Farming vs. Farmland • Selected Farming Issues • Farm Succession • Landscape Fragmentation • Enterprise Adaptation Options

34. Farm Succession • Desperately seeking young farmers • Total # of Ohio farmers declined 1.2% between 1997 and 2002 • 32.2% decline in metro farmers LT 35 • Farmers LT 45 comprised 30.6% of metro farmers in 1997, down to 25.2% in 2002 • Part-time, retired, and hobby farmers of special concern

35. Farmland Fragmentation • Who will farm a fragmented landscape? • Part-time/hobby farming vs full-time • Impermanence Syndrome • Gradual disinvestment and exit from farming due to negative assessment of social and physical changes in community or landscape

36. County Level Farm Attributes

37. Farm Enterprise Adaptation • Urban opportunities • Off-farm employment • Urban-oriented Agriculture-Greater Columbus Food Shed Project • Road frontage development • Urban Limitations • Compatibility of livestock and residential • Landscape fragmentation • Loss of critical mass of farm services

38. Ohio Average = Crops 54% 46% Livestock Crop and Livestock by sales

39. The Columbus MSA Farming Buffer • Some areas may repel nonfarm development • Madison & Pickaway; parts of Union and Licking • Possible Development/Policy needs: • New farmer recruitment • Zoning that preserves unfragmented landscapes • Zoning that limits incompatible land-uses (e.g. livestock and people) • Community Economic Development efforts that include agriculture

40. Planning and Zoning Options for Ohio Townships

41. Ohio’s Public Policy • The laws governing land use in Ohio were established when development was highly centralized in major cities. • Policies designed for metro areas may not serve local townships and small communities who are facing development decisions. • In Ohio development is, for the most part, a local matter. From Sustainable Growth and Development for Ohio “Education for Public Policy Decisions” Ohio State University Extension

42. Handling Growth and Change in Ohio Townships • Fundamental approaches for handling growth and change are planning and zoning • Comprehensive Land-Use Plan** • 77% of metro townships have a plan (township or county) • 61% of nonmetro townships have a plan • Zoning • Almost all townships in the Columbus metro area have zoning (fewer than ½ of Morrow County townships are zoned) • Across Ohio, only about 50% of all townships have zoning **From a survey study by Meghan Gough and Jennifer Evans-Cowley Results in the upcoming Ohio Township Association magazine

43. Zoning by Exurban Stage

44. Township Zoning** • #1 problem for administering zoning is zoning resolution enforcement • Part-time inspectors • #1 land use or zoning issue is sprawl • #2 economic development **From a survey study by Meghan Gough and Jennifer Evans-Cowley Results in the upcoming Ohio Township Association magazine

45. Cutting Edge 1930’s Planning & Zoning in the 2000s • Possible changes in current legislation: • Planning--questions about ability to adopt a plan • Changes in Township & Count Zoning Enabling Legislation • “Health, Safety and Morals” • Addition of “General Welfare” • Subdivision regulations—5 acre exemption • New tools for local governments • Enable impact fees for unincorporated areas • Enable transfer of development rights See Section 4 Growth and Change at the R-U Interface Exurban Change Project, 2003

46. Agricultural Zoning in Ohio Townships • Three approaches to agricultural zoning in Ohio: • Agriculture is a preferred use, but one of many permitted uses in a zone (Central & NW) • Agriculture is an incidental or ignored use (NE & SW) • A more aggressive strategy: Agriculture is the primary (exclusive) use • Exclusive agricultural zoning (voluntary or mandatory) or agricultural zoning where residential development is conditional

47. Challenges for Ohio Townships • Do Ohio townships at the R-U interface have the capacity to manage changes associated with exurbanization? • Does sufficient “social capital” exist within and between communities at the R-U interface to collectively respond to the changes? • Do local governments have the professional and technical capacity to manage changes? • Do local governments have the fiscal capacity?

48. Future Directions of our Project • Ohio Research • Exurban Typological Analysis • Continued Analysis of Ohio township zoning • Continued Analysis of Ohio’s Urban Agriculture • National Research • USDA funded national study: “Agriculture Adaptation at the Rural-Urban Interface: Can Communities Make a Difference.” • Spatial patterns of exurbanization in the U.S.

49. For More Information on Population and Land Use Trends and Data in Ohio: Visit the Exurban Change website at http://aede.osu.edu/programs/exurbs/index.htm

50. Sign up here for the latest in from the project.