Chapter #3 LAND USE AND
TABLE OF CONTENTS 3.0 Land Use and Scenario Planning...3-1 3.1 Introduction IMAGINE 2040...3-1 3.2 Background...3-3 3.2.1 4D Analysis...3-3 3.3 Imagine 2040 Scenario Planning...3-7 3.3.1 Growth Scenarios...3-7 3.4 Growth Allocation Model...3-8 3.5 Model Results...3-9 3.6 Preferred Scenario...3-9 3.7 Land Use Coordination... 3-12 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 3.1 Imagine 2040... 3-1 Figure 3.2 Examples of Residential Density Across the Memphis Region... 3-4 Figure 3.3 Mixed-use Centers... 3-5 Figure 3.4 Harbor Town, Mixed-Use Center in Memphis, TN... 3-5 Figure 3.5 Place Type Examples... 3-7 Figure 3.6 Preferred Land Use Scenario: Base Growth Alternative... 3-11 LIST OF TABLES Table 3.1 Measures of Effectiveness... 3-10 Table 3.2 How to integrate the land use, urban form, and transportation elements of local sustainable initiatives... 3-13 i
3.0 LAND USE AND 3.1 Introduction IMAGINE 2040 In September 2009, the Memphis Urban Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) began the Imagine 2040 Midsouth Transportation & Land Use Plan (Figure 3.1), a regional visioning and scenario planning process. Imagine 2040 was initiated in advance of the 2040 LRTP to provide an opportunity for residents, business leaders and elected officials throughout the MPO Study Area to explore and debate regional growth visions, trade-offs and alternate growth strategies for the region. Scenario planning was utilized as a tool throughout the process to identify regional goals and values, and explore alternatives for growth, development, and transportation investment. Therefore, an extensive scenario planning effort was undertaken to coordinate the results from Imagine 2040 with the Direction 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan. Scenario planning is a process that considers multiple futures for an area based on competing development scenarios. Scenarios contemplated for the area are potential growth strategies for the future. They are not forecasts or predictions but represent an effort to tie land use planning into the needs and desires of the community. They represent possible futures that might occur based on what already exists, on trends that are evident, or on regional goals and community values captured throughout the planning process. The essential requirement for any development scenario is that it be plausible, within the realm of what exists and what could be developed. The scenario planning process helped the public and stakeholders visualize the interaction of new development, economic vitality, and the surrounding transportation system. Considering the tradeoffs and opportunities between competing development scenarios informs stakeholders and can lead to mutually beneficial outcomes for better linking land use, urban design, and transportation decision-making in the region. Scenario planning processes are widely used in communities ranging from small, newly incorporated towns to large regions. The MPO initiated Imagine 2040 to structure a public participation process that would dovetail with the preparation of the Direction 2040 LRTP and continue to build upon the educational efforts from the previous LRTP. Figure 3.1 Imagine 2040 3-1
Data Gathering Building the scenario planning tools for Imagine 2040 depended largely on the availability and quality of various technical and non-technical data for the region. The MPO staff coordinated a regional data collection effort by meeting with all local municipalities to ensure that the MPO received the most up to date land use and environmental data in a GIS format. It was important that this data accurately represented the base conditions in the region. By creating a reliable and accurate regional geodatabase based on existing conditions, the MPO was able to begin developing a base land use scenario for the region. The data collected for Imagine 2040 process included but was not limited to the following categories: Natural Environment Built Environment Supporting Infrastructure Jurisdictional Limits Local Plans, Policies and Ordinances Model Development After gathering all the necessary data, the MPO assembled a palette of place types the first step toward developing a regional land use model. This place type palette synthesized the land use information from all of the municipalities and counties into an easy to understand document containing information on the various types of land uses in the region. Place types in the palette ranged from low density uses, such as Rural or Estate Density Residential to higher densities, such as Urban Neighborhood, Central Business District and Mixed Use Development. The place type palette that was developed as a part of the Imagine 2040 planning process is included in Appendix B. MPO staff visited the local municipalities and met with the planners and engineers to make sure that the land use information collected for the place type palette accurately represent the jurisdiction. During the Road Show meetings, planners and engineers from the local jurisdictions identified the factors that limit development potential, and discussed trends and growth hotspots to help ensure an accurate, realistic land use model. The Imagine 2040 land use model was designed to represent a carefully devised set of assumptions on how land is developed (based on intensity, density, availability of the land as defined in the Place Type Palette in Appendix B ) and where development occurs (depending on the suitability factors). The suitability factors include water and sewer, adopted plans and zoning, proximity to network roads, proximity to schools and services, major intersections and interchanges, transit stations, retail density, bus routes, parks and amenities, etc. The four focus groups (Business and Development, Community and Civic, Government, Planning Department) formed for the Imagine 2040 process identified and ranked the suitability factors for the MPO study area. They were also asked to identify the factors that limit development potential along with trends and growth hotspots. Once a base model of current uses with input from the road show meetings and four focus groups was created, the MPO began an intense public participation process. Public Workshops & the Chip Game The MPO facilitated a series of public workshops to introduce the general public to scenario planning, describe the steps taken to date in developing the model, and demonstrate how the region could develop alternative land use plans. One tool used to engage participants was a development chip game - a hands-on, interactive opportunity to plan for the region s future. The chip game encouraged participants to manipulate key components of local and regional policies, deal with trade-offs associated with changing policies as they would in the real world, and realize the results that are the beginning of a potential development scenario. The role of each participant was to devise a scenario representing their version of the most livable region, while accommodating 3-2
3-3 CHAPTER # 3 LAND USE AND the expected population and employment change for the study area. Using a map as a worksheet, participants placed chips representing rural areas, neighborhoods, retail centers, employment centers, or mixed-use development and drew proposed transportation and infrastructure improvements. Participants also developed brief policy statements addressing specific issues important to the study area (e.g., economic vitality, walkable neighborhoods, housing choice, etc.). At the end of the event, each group of participants presented their scenarios to each other and received comments. Following the workshop, the development chip game maps were digitized and further evaluated by MPO staff to measure the trade-offs of each development scenario and better understand community values. Using the maps developed during the chip game, the MPO came up with a regional citizen scenario map. This map served as the basis of the alternative scenario evaluated during the Direction 2040 LRTP process. In addition to the traditional public meeting Imagine 2040 used Meeting in a Box kits for additional input to the process. The purpose of the Meeting in a Box kits was to provide neighborhood associations, interest groups, and other community members an additional opportunity to participate in the Imagine 2040 process and facilitate their own meeting. The kits included instructions, maps, surveys, and everything else that was needed to review the project and contribute input and ideas. After each meeting, the kit was returned to project staff so that the input can be used in the planning process. 3.2 Background The MPO s previous 2030 LRTP devoted an entire chapter (Chapter 4) to the topic of Land Use, Urban Form and Travel Behavior. Within this chapter, the relationship between land use intensities, development form, and the resulting impacts to the transportation system were explored. The chapter documented the relationship through demonstration focus areas located in four different context areas: the Urban Core (downtown), Suburban Realm, Greenfield Transition, and Rural context areas. Careful analysis of these focus area studies demonstrated the influence of different development-growth strategies, specifically the impacts that Density, Diversity, Design, and Distance have on the performance of the region s transportation strategy. Commonly referred to as the Four D s, these development characteristics represent the DNA of our communities. Variations in the mixture of these variables may lead to variations in the performance of the transportation network. 3.2.1 4D Analysis Reorganizing urban form in the region for a more efficient transportation system requires community leaders to evaluate the Four D s commonly associated with the relationship between urban form and transportation. By evaluating these factors, local communities in the region can determine how to shorten the commuting distance between complementary land uses, provide more travel choices, and create a more efficient transportation system. As described below, each of the Four D s plays a specific role in transportation behavior, and each was considered in developing the place type palette (Appendix B). For example, certain place types, such as Mixed- Use Developments and Town Centers, are denser, with more diverse land uses and less distance between compatible uses. Developments in these place types are also assumed to be designed to accommodate multi-story buildings with appealing street facades that create a welcoming pedestrian atmosphere and provide many different
destinations within a smaller area. By describing each place type in quantifiable details relative to Density, Diversity, Design, and Distance, the MPO was able to evaluate the tradeoffs between different scenarios that contained more uses that satisfied these characteristics versus typical suburban style uses that emphasize single use, automobile centered developments. Density In general, residential density refers to the number of housing units per area of land. It is most commonly reported in dwelling units per acre, but can also be reported in persons per acre using household size characteristics. Dense urban development projects sometimes measure residential density in floor-area-ratio (FAR), which is the ratio of gross building floor area to the total lot area. Non-residential density (e.g., commercial, office, or industrial uses) is commonly reported in floor-area-ratio for both suburban and urban conditions, and is sometimes referred to as intensity. Examples of different types of residential densities are illustrated in Figure 3.2. Figure 3.2 Examples of Residential Density Across the Memphis Region Location is often the main factor in determining density and intensity. The farther away an area is from the urban core, the more likely it is to have lower density and intensity. Exceptions to this pattern, however, can be found, particularly with the replacement of high-density multifamily housing with lower-density urban infill projects (e.g., Hope VI). Managing the location and magnitude of density within the built environment helps determine infrastructure needs and implementation costs, and allows impacts to be shifted away from environmentallysensitive areas. As stated in the December 2004 Trends and Conditions Report prepared by the Florida Department of Transportation and the Center for Urban Transportation Research at the University of South Florida, Independent of other factors, increased residential density and non-residential intensity create higher travel demand for a geographic area, but it also encourages shorter trip lengths and more mobility options (i.e., transit, bicycle, and walking) that more efficiently link complementary land uses within a concentrated area. Across the country, surveys of the impact of density and intensity on transit-oriented developments (TODs) reports a 5 20% vehicle trip reduction associated with this development pattern. For this to succeed, however, a healthy mix of complementary residential and non-residential land uses must be included within the development. The results of these surveys recommend a minimum residential density of 7 dwelling units per acre and a minimum employment density of 25 employees per acre to support TODs served by traditional bus service, and about twice these minimums for locations served by rail service. 3-4
Diversity One type of development gaining in popularity is mixed-use development. By creating places where people can live, play, work, and shop all in one general area, these developments are able to combine various public amenities with compatible land uses in a centralized location. Successful mixed-use developments noted around the country generally include residential uses and one or more of the following: commercial, office, light industrial, civic, hotel, public parks or plazas, and dedicated open space. Promoting a mix of land uses in new development is often associated with the initiatives of smart growth, new urbanism, transit-oriented development, and traditional neighborhood development. Examples of these mixed-use centers are shown in Figure 3.3. While mixed-use developments come in a variety of forms, they typically are categorized as either vertical mixed-use buildings or horizontal mixed-use sites. Both vertical and horizontal mixed-use developments contribute positively to the creation of places that enliven urban districts while meeting the everyday needs of the community. They offer Figure 3.3 Mixed-use Centers many advantages over single-use developments in fostering a more efficient, livable transportation system: shorter trip lengths, modal choices (i.e., automobile, transit, bicycle, and walking), convenient access, and internal trip capture. A local example of a mixed-use center is illustrated in Figure 3.4. Figure 3.4 Harbor Town, Mixed-Use Center in Memphis, TN 3-5
Design Urban design shapes the blocks, neighborhoods, and districts that give our cities identity and provides overall organization to the built environment. Various elements of urban design provide a three-dimensional physical form to the requirements for density and diversity established in locally adopted comprehensive plans or zoning ordinances. The emphasis for urban design is the public realm, which is created by public spaces (e.g., streets, plazas, open space) and the buildings that define them. Urban design looks at the various elements that influence these spaces and uses design elements to provide connections between people, places, and buildings. Specific elements of urban design street pattern, streetscape design, block size, building scale and massing, parking, and landscaping have a direct correlation with influencing travel mode choice and travel behavior when supported by appropriate minimum densities and diversity of land uses. These design elements provide context to the transportation system, and illustrate that the street network is a key element of the public realm. The orientation, scale, and massing of buildings on a site relative to the adjacent transportation corridor can reinforce those design elements that support a complete street or multimodal corridor concept. Literature from around the country cites safe, predictable connections between adjacent properties, the orientation of buildings with parking that favors a park once mentality, and elimination of excessive parking requirements as ways to promote a more balanced transportation system, which favors walking between nearby destinations once arriving to the site by automobile or regional transit. Distance The travel distance between an origin and a destination is a primary factor (along with travel mode choice) for influencing travel behavior. The physical distance between complementary land uses in more rural or suburban settings tends to promote automobile travel, particularly since safe, convenient facilities are not usually available for pedestrians and bicyclists. Mixed-use, higher-density urban environments may decrease the travel distance between complementary land uses, and support transit, bicycle, and walking as viable alternatives to the automobile for meeting daily travel needs. 3-6
3.3 Imagine 2040 Scenario Planning Scenario planning provides a forum, process, and set of tools to contemplate future possibilities. Scenario planning also can be used to engage key stakeholders; validate stated growth principles and values; and explore alternatives for growth, development, and investment in the region. These outcomes were accomplished by the MPO through a scenario planning process that allowed for the characterization of different development types, the consideration of the suitability of land for development, and the relative attractiveness of areas for growth. A key element of the scenario planning effort was the creation of the Place Type Palette to represent development in the scenarios prepared for Imagine 2040. The process resulted in the authorship of 18 unique place types that offered planners a uniform way to characterize the diversity of places found in the region. Many cities and counties throughout the country are switching from conventional land use designations to place types when developing their growth strategies. This is driven by a renewed interest in the interrelationship between land use and urban design for creating unique places. Generalized development characteristics used to describe different place types may include: land use pattern (e.g., mixed or stand-alone uses), residential density, non-residential intensity, prevailing building height, open space elements, block size, parking configuration, or street pattern. Equal emphasis on land use and urban design in the place type descriptions guides decisions about growth and development, land preservation, resource protection, viable transportation service, and the provision of community facilities and services. Figure 3.5 illustrates some examples of these place types and a complete copy of the Imagine 2040 Place Type Pallet can be found in Appendix B. Figure 3.5 Place Type Examples 3.3.1 Growth Scenarios Participating planners throughout the region collaborated on the identification of two alternative growth visions, a Base Growth Scenario and a Scenario. Both scenarios assumed the same transportation network, which included all existing facilities plus any committed transportation projects. No major expansion in the transit system or service was included in the transportation network. This conservative approach allowed for a true comparison of the impacts of different growth scenarios on the transportation system. A brief description of each scenario follows: Base Growth Scenario The Base Growth Scenario was based on existing plans, programs, and policies, and consistent with the existing adopted land use and comprehensive plans of the local jurisdictions. Adopted land use and/or zoning regulations were used when local plans and policies did not exist to guide growth. The Base Growth Scenario reflects projected population, employment, and demand for goods and services through the 2040 horizon year. Most importantly, this scenario offered planners an opportunity to examine the outcomes of their combined planning efforts as this scenario represents a quilting together of adopted local comprehensive plans. 3-7
(CAC)Scenario The Scenario was developed based on additional input from local planners, engineers, and members of the public to depict an alternative to the Base Growth Scenario. The intent of the Scenario was to depict a regional growth scenario in which a higher-than-expected percentage of new growth occurs within close proximity to existing development along key transportation routes () and established destinations (Centers). The physical pattern of development and distribution of projected growth in this scenario is described below. This scenario was developed with the help of local planners and engineers and was used in conjunction with the chip game results to illustrate an alternative development pattern. The Centers and Scenario map is included in Appendix B. Centers Centers anchor Preferred Growth Areas within Fayette, Shelby, and DeSoto Counties that will accrue continued growth. Included among these Centers are the existing and proposed urbanized areas delineated in the Base Growth Scenario. In this scenario, most existing centers are expected to attract some future growth through redevelopment. In addition, a new type of Center, Transit-Oriented Development (TOD), is introduced. It also accommodates growth but depending upon location, may combine new development with redevelopment. line key transportation routes in the region. Future growth was also concentrated along some of these transportation routes, but typically at a lower intensity than in the Centers. For the purposes of this alternative, the tend to follow major linkages such as major roads, including those that could eventually support rapid transit between Centers. Examples of these corridors included U.S. 72 (Poplar Avenue), U.S. 51, U.S. 61, and U.S. 70. Secondary linkages, or Preservation, connect smaller Centers within the study area or connect the study area to surrounding rural counties. Regional mobility, rather than accommodation of the region s growth, was the priority on these rural highways. 3.4 Growth Allocation Model A vital component of Imagine 2040 was a land use model that allocated growth. The purpose of modeling projected growth is to illustrate different possible development patterns within the study area through 2040, and to measure the impacts of this growth. These impacts were considered in the evaluation of growth alternatives with respect to effectively achieving stated goals, providing decision-makers with objective information by which to select a preferred alternative for the region, and preparing local and regional plans to manage growth. CommunityViz, an extension of ESRI s ArcGIS software, was used by the MPO to allocate projected growth in households and employment across the study area. The allocation utilizes parcels as units that can host households and jobs based on several factors, most notably land availability and suitability. Factors that influence the suitability of land include access to public infrastructure and proximity to jobs and services. Certain environmental constraints such as wetlands prevent allocation of growth to underlying parcels; in these cases, the fine-grained nature of the analysis allows only the unaffected portion of a parcel to receive growth. The model then allocates growth in order of most suitable to least suitable land. Additional information about the CommunityViz modeling effort is included in Appendix B. Another important factor that affects the rate of allocation is local land use policy. Local land use policy is the maximum development potential of parcels set by adopted land use plans or zoning in the absence of an adopted plan. Local governments throughout the study area adopt land use plans and administrate zoning to limit the intensity of site development. 3-8
3.5 Model Results The purpose of modeling growth for the study area was to evaluate the regional impacts of various potential growth scenarios. With an understanding of land suitability, the likely effects of the policies reflected in the Place Types, and the growth projections, the model was used to allocate future growth under both scenarios (Base Growth and CAC). The model was then used to evaluate the relative performance of both growth scenarios by comparing Measures of Effectiveness (MOE s). MOE s were developed to quantify and objectively evaluate the two growth scenarios. The MOE s are grouped into two categories, Land Use and Transportation. The following MOE s were used to compare the two growth scenarios. Land Use Development Infill/Redevelopment: Represents the percentage of new growth that occurs in underdeveloped areas or through the reuse of existing sites for new development - Table 3.1(a) Agricultural Land Consumed by Development: Represents the amount of existing agricultural land consumed by new growth - Table 3.1 (b) Development in Municipal Boundaries: Represents the amount of new growth that occurs within the corporate limits of existing towns and cities - Table 3.1 (c) Transportation Delay (Hours): A measurement of the amount of time spent in congestion (when compared to free flowing optimum conditions) - Table 3.1 (d) Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT): An expression of the total aggregate miles traveled on an average weekday. Higher numbers tend to indicate a greater separation between trip origin and destination (home and work) - Table 3.1 (e) Vehicle Hours Traveled (VHT): The aggregate amount of time experienced by all motorist on an average weekday. Higher numbers are attributed to both increased distance between origin and destinations as well as time spent in congestion (delay) - Table 3.1 (f) Transit Ridership (Boarding/Day): Average of projected boardings (individual trips) per day on public transportation - Table 3.1 (g) 3.6 Preferred Scenario The Imagine 2040 land use planning effort and the resulting Measures of Effectiveness (MOE) evaluation allowed the MPO s Engineering & Technical Committee (ETC) and Transportation Plan Advisory Committee (TPAC) to make an informed recommendation to the MPO Transportation Policy Board (TPB) regarding which alternative vision best reinforces the local goals and objectives of the region. The TPB, ETC, and TPAC reviewed the MOE results along with the public outreach activities, the established goals and objectives, and the vision statement (summarized in Chapter 1- Introduction), prior to concluding that the Base Growth Scenario more closely aligns with desired growth patterns than the Scenario. The Base Growth Scenario was approved as the preferred alternative for use in the development of the LRTP by the Transportation Policy Board (TPB) on July 28, 2011. This decision allowed the MPO to move forward with the development of a long range transportation plan that responds to the allocation of growth described in the Base Growth Scenario. This preferred land use scenario is illustrated in Figure 3.6. 3-9
Table 3.1 Measures of Effectiveness Region (a) Development Infill/Redevelopment Employment Base Households Base Shelby County 75.17% 75.17% 72.16% 72.57% Fayette County 8.79% 8.78% 14.82% 14.09% DeSoto County 4.70% 4.70% 7.20% 6.51% Study Area Total 14.70% 14.70% 18.50% 17.10% Region (b) Agricultural Land Consumed by Development Employment Base Households Base Shelby County 54.01% 54.01% 72.16% 72.57% Fayette County 0.32% 0.32% 14.82% 0.44% DeSoto County 13.96% 13.96% 7.20% 7.09% Study Area Total 3.06% 3.06% 2.91% 2.95% Region (c) Development in Municipal Boundaries Employment Base Households Base Shelby County 78.51% 78.51% 72.56% 74.27% Fayette County 91.90% 91.90% 85.86% 87.82% DeSoto County 64.17% 64.17% 60.23% 62.68% Study Area Total 73.40% 73.40% 67.70% 69.50% Region (d) Delay (Hours) Base Shelby County 291,400 341,600 Fayette County 30,700 57,500 DeSoto County 354,500 379,300 Study Area Total 676,600 778,300 Region (e) Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Base Shelby County 14,462,900 15,881,600 Fayette County 1,380,000 2,639,700 DeSoto County 20,840,100 21,238,400 Study Area Total 36,683,000 39,759,700 Note: Collector and above roadways only. No local roads are included. Region (f) Vehicle Hours Traveled (VHT) Base Shelby County 598,300 675,500 Fayette County 55,100 104,800 DeSoto County 817,800 852,000 Study Area Total 1,471,200 1,632,300 Note: Collector and above roadways only. No local roads are included. (g) Transit Ridership (Boarding/Day) Region Base Shelby County 56,060 55,920 Fayette County N/A* N/A* DeSoto County N/A* N/A* Study Area Total 56,060 55,920 Note: Collector and above roadways only. No local roads are included. * No transit routes in these counties. 3-10
Figure 3.6 Preferred Land Use Scenario: Base Growth Alternative 3-11
3.7 Land Use Coordination Imagine 2040 was not intended to be a comprehensive land use plan for the region; however, it does demonstrate the collective outcomes that are possible through a coordinated approach to land use and transportation planning. The future success of the region will be influenced by the degree to which land use plans and transportation strategies are implemented in a coordinated, consistent manner complimentary to local and regional visions for future development. As decision makers are faced with promoting and maintaining livability, quality of life and economic vitality, continued efforts to promote a sustainable growth pattern will be important including the following: A summary of these strategies is listed in Table 3.2. Improve Travel Mode Choices in the Region The MPO should work with local governments, the states, and regional stakeholders to improve travel mode choices for the area. This will require a multi-faceted approach, which includes a variety of transportation modes in addition to the following: Encourage population and employment growth in preferred growth areas identified in Imagine 2040. Direct growth away from rural, agricultural areas identified in this study. Promote development patterns that enable people to live, work, learn, and play in the same community. Allow a mixture of land uses throughout the community, especially in urban neighborhoods, suburban commercial centers, historic town centers, and along the primary growth corridors identified in this study. Regional Land Use Coordination Land use and development patterns occur regionally and often develop without regard to local political boundaries. The impacts generated by land uses and new development, such as traffic, air quality and storm water run-off, span these boundaries as well. The MPO considered the regional impacts of land use and development patterns as part of the Imagine 2040 scenario planning process. The Imagine 2040 process, as described in detail in Chapter 3 Land Use and Scenario Planning, provided the opportunity for citizens, stakeholders, and elected officials to explore regional growth visions. It is important to continue this dialogue in regards to regional land use coordination in the form of regular meetings of local land use planners, traffic engineers, and others engaged in land development review and permitting processes to discuss proposed land use and transportation changes that may have regional impacts. It would also provide a forum for the introduction of large land development proposals at a conceptual stage. This could also serve as a forum to discuss inter-jurisdictional land use plans and best planning practices. To enhance stakeholder engagement in planning processes, this forum might furthermore include representatives of the real estate development industry, advocates for natural and cultural resources, and supporters of quality planning. Establish Redevelopment Districts in Declining Urban Neighborhoods and Local governments within the study area should formally encourage redevelopment and infill development in areas of decline. Many of these locations are eligible for formal state and federal designations that offer incentives for local investments. The creation of redevelopment districts would provide a mechanism for receiving state and federal funding. 3-12
Encourage Only Planned Extensions of Utility Infrastructure into Rural Areas. Development that occurs in rural areas should be encouraged to be clustered and served in a way that does not encourage strip commercial development. Investment in existing infrastructure encourages redevelopment and sustainability. Improvements to existing infrastructure should have priority over extensions of utility infrastructure to support new development. Regional Greenprint An opportunity exists for state agencies and local governments within the MPO Study Area with jurisdiction over rural areas to prepare a Regional Greenprint strategy. The Greenprint may include an inventory of important natural, agricultural, and cultural resources. The inventory is the first step in protecting the region s sensitive and valued areas that play a role in critical ecosystems, environmental features and green infrastructure that can be used to connect people with places, as well as working lands (farms) and cultural resources. A comprehensive inventory will allow for the creation of a Regional Greenprint strategy that promotes the preservation and promotion of these areas through local policy, land management, conservation and financial means. A Regional Greenprint can benefit the MPO and its member jurisdictions as a resource document for transportation and land use planners preparing environmental assessments in advance of transportation improvement projects and other developments. Table 3.2 How to integrate the land use, urban form, and transportation elements of local sustainable initiatives Continue to support local initiatives that result in a more efficient, livable transportation system (street connectivity, complete streets, transit oriented development, etc.). Partner with local, regional, state, and federal agencies that share a common vision for implementing sustainable development. Develop livable street design guidelines for major arterial and collector streets (begin with endorsement of the cross-section design recommendations in this report). Include recommendations for cross-section, lane width, planting specifications, sidewalk, street lighting, etc. Ultimately, this will facilitate standardization of design treatments in the different communities. Prepare best development practices and conduct design summits to educate and encourage developers to incorporate these principles into their land use planning and development process. Respect local government control and their desire to implement sustainable initiatives when programming improvements to the regional transportation system Build grassroots support for amending the local comprehensive plans to encourage through policy more sustainable development patterns. Establish flexible, performance-based zoning and subdivision standards that support emerging sustainable initiatives through regulation. Give consideration to formbased codes or unified development codes that better integrate use standards and development controls. Develop design guidelines that establish development priorities and core design principles for implementing sustainable initiatives. Prioritize projects in the capital improvements programs that influence the timing and location of new development to better utilize existing infrastructure including roads, transit, and utilities. Understand that one size does not fit all for implementing sustainable development. New plans, programs, or policies adopted by elected officials should acknowledge the differences between rural, suburban, and urban settings. Reinvest in existing infrastructure and promote infill development or redevelopment that can be served by transit instead of continued sprawl out from the core of the community. Identify champions of change for continuing the momentum of sustainability from initial vision through project ribbon cutting. Seek state and federal funding supportive of activities to improve the quality of development and protect human health and the environment. 3-13