1 / 29

growth policy

growth policy. 2003-2005. what is growth policy?. growth policy is… a biennial resolution adopted by the montgomery county council aimed at managing growth to match the adequacy of public facilities. historically, growth policy has focused on the adequacy of roads and schools.

gianna
Download Presentation

growth policy

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. growth policy 2003-2005

  2. what is growth policy? growth policy is… a biennial resolution adopted by the montgomery county council aimed at managing growth to match the adequacy of public facilities. historically, growth policy has focused on the adequacy of roads and schools. does it matter? the timing of development, in coordination with the provision of public facilities, attempts to keep road congestion and school crowding to a minimum.

  3. growth policy - current • currently, an applicant must mitigate site impacts related to transportation and schools: • transportation - • local area transportation review (latr) • policy area mobility review (pamr) • schools - • projected school enrollment vs projected capacity

  4. growth policy - pamr current PAMR requires mitigation in 16 policy areas

  5. growth policy - latr current latr examines intersection capacity near each development site • objective: make sure development does not overwhelm nearby intersections. • applied to all projects generating 30 or more peak hour trips. • if intersection fails, developer can make improvements, mitigate trips, or in limited cases – make a payment to the County. • intersection congestion standards vary by area.

  6. growth policy - latr local area transportation review (latr) congestion standards by growth policy area

  7. growth policy – transportation mitigation • priority is trip reduction, non-auto, then roads • pamr and latr can be satisfied concurrently • payment in lieu opportunities • non-auto facilities apply to pamr and latr • current table derived from latr • rates based on old cost data

  8. growth policy - schools current school test compares projected 2014 enrollment with 2014 classroom capacity for each of the 25 high school clusters at the elementary, middle and high levels. if projected enrollment at any level exceeds 105% of program capacity, residential subdivisions in the affected cluster will be required to make a school facility payment. if projected enrollment at any level exceeds 120% of program capacity, residential subdivisions in the affected cluster will be under moratorium

  9. 2009 growth policy - why change? does it work? with just 4 percent of its land area available for development, which requires more infill and redevelopment – the tests for the adequacy of our facilities must evolve. what do we do next? provide a framework for the provision of facilities that contribute to a sustainable community.

  10. 2009 growth policy - study • review of smart growth initiatives nationwide, leednd and california sb375:

  11. 2009 growth policy – what is changing? • growth policy only affects APFO

  12. 2009-2011 growth policy

  13. 2009-2011 growth policy ___________________________________________________________________________ eleven recommendations • primary changes • smart growth criteria • adequate mobility • apf transferability for transportation and schools • grandfathering completed applications 12 months prior to moratorium

  14. 2009-2011 growth policy recommendation 1. spatial coverage of bus and metro stops within ½ mile • smart growth criteria • close to transit • mixed use • uses density in zone • energy efficient • affordable housing • PAMR offset to MPDU

  15. 2009-2011 growth policy recommendation 1.

  16. 2009-2011 growth policy recommendation 2. • adequate mobility • balance between land use and transportation – establish symmetrical treatment of transit and arterial level of service (LOS) standards

  17. 2009-2011 growth policy recommendation 2. continued • how does LOS D or LOS E compare to current conditions? E D

  18. 2009-2011 growth policy recommendation 3. • apfo transportation • non-auto facility values – expand the range of candidate non-auto facility types eligible for impact mitigation and set values at $11,000 per vehicle trip

  19. 2009-2011 growth policy recommendation 4. • apf transfer: transportation • apf transferability – allow vested apf rights to be transferred into an urban area from within the parent policy area

  20. 2009-2011 growth policy recommendation 5. • apfo transportation • TOD trip generation rates – lower the residential trip generation rates in MSPAs by 18% based on MWCOG survey data used in other urban areas

  21. 2009-2011 growth policy recommendation 6. • apfo transportation • white flint apf approval process – replace LATR and PAMR with designated public entities and other funding mechanisms, in white flint

  22. 2009-2011 growth policy recommendation 7. • policy area boundary changes – change appropriate policy area boundaries as recommended in draft sector plans including establishment of a life sciences center policy area and revision to white flint, germantown town center and r&d village

  23. 2009-2011 growth policy recommendation 8. • apfo schools • school facility payment threshold – set the threshold for application of a school facility payment at projected enrollment greater than 110% of projected program capacity at any school level by cluster

  24. 2009-2011 growth policy recommendation 9. • apfo schools • moratorium threshold – retain the threshold for moratorium on residential subdivisions at projected enrollment of 120% of projected capacity at any school level by school cluster

  25. 2009-2011 growth policy recommendation 10. • apfo schools • grandfather completed applications – grandfather all applications completed within 12 months prior to a moratorium on residential subdivision as a result of school capacity projected deficits. all grandfathered projects would be required to pay the school facility payment.

  26. 2009-2011 growth policy recommendation 11. • apf transfer: • schools • apf transferability – allow vested apf rights to be transferred within a school cluster (sfp transfers with apf)

  27. 2009-2011 growth policy recommendation 12. • future studies • biennial growth policy report • compact subdivision development • LEED classification as a component of growth policy • using carbon offsets as an element of sustainable growth • dedicated transit revenue • land use impact on vehicle miles travelled • retail impacts on vmt • impact tax issues • highway mobility report funding • fiscally sustainable development • options to latr

  28. 2009-2011 growth policy fall schedule • september: • county council public hearing 9/22/09 • october: • worksessions with the PHED committee • possible worksessions with the MFP committee • worksessions with the full council • november: • growth policy resolution must be adopted by 11/15/09

  29. 2009-2011 growth policy errata • page 36. recommendation 1: transportation and land use-related recommendations • “within Metro Station Policy Areas” should be deleted • page 37. first paragraph • “fifty percent of the transportation impact tax” should read “seventy-five percent of the transportation impact tax” • page 38. heading of graphic • “metro station policy areas” should read “areas with transit proximity” • page 26. population figures by decade • 2010 population should be 954,400 • 2030 population should be 1,122,300 • page 45. recommendation 7: new life sciences center policy area • life sciences center policy area is within the current R&D village policy area

More Related