Case Study:

Envision Utah

Methodology

Scenario Development

Envision Utah and QGET produced a baseline scenario (1997), three alternative scenarios (1998), and an analysis of the Quality Growth Strategy (2000). All of the scenarios utilize the same regional population and employment projections. The baseline (Scenario B) and three alternative scenarios (A, C, and D) include the following basic characteristics:

• Scenario A - More single-family homes (77 percent, versus 68 percent in 1990) with larger lot sizes (0.37 acres in 2020 versus 0.32 acres currently); expansion of highway infrastructure compared to baseline.
• Scenario B - Baseline growth trends (75 percent single-family homes versus 68 percent in 1990), same lot size as current, and baseline transportation improvements.
• Scenario C - Most new housing is still single-family, but there are more apartments, condos, and small-lot homes; expanded transit system; much of new housing is in villages and towns along major roads and rail lines.
• Scenario D - Similar to Scenario C, but with further expansions to transit network, reductions in single-family lot sizes, and increases in multi-family dwellings.

The "quality growth" scenario, resulting from the feedback obtained on the initial four scenarios and additional strategy development, is most similar to Scenario C as described above, but is still a unique combination of land use and infrastructure investment. Scenario C is depicted pictorially in Figure 4, and the regional concept map corresponding to this scenario is shown in Figure 5. One significant difference is that in the Quality Growth scenario, county-level employment did not differ appreciably from the baseline scenario. In contrast, in Scenarios A, C, and D, employment totals were constrained at the regional level but not at the county level. In the Quality Growth scenario, only the distribution within the county and the nature of development varied significantly. The assumption was that the voluntary nature of the growth strategy would not change the population and economic growth of individual counties.

Figure 4. Growth Scenario C

Figure 5. Regional Concept Map for Scenario C

[TOP]