Case Study:

Envision Utah

Application

Table 3 summarizes the various modeling results for the four scenarios. This table has been presented on Envision Utah's web site, in conjunction with maps and a basic description of each scenario, to help the public compare the four scenarios.

The impacts of the Quality Growth Strategy were determined using similar methods, in some cases with refinements. These impacts were then compared to the impacts of the baseline scenario. Some of the highlights of the findings include:

• The land use analysis is based on a market-driven housing demand forecast, extensive use of infill and reuse development, and mixed use/walkable development patterns. Under the Quality Growth Strategy, 171 square miles less land is converted to urban use than would be converted under the Baseline. This allows for the conservation of 116 square miles of agricultural land, compared to the baseline scenario.
• Transportation modeling for the Quality Growth Strategy shows a reduction of 2.4 million vehicle miles of travel per day or 3.0 percent relative to the baseline (note that one-third of this reduction is due to an off-model adjustment to account for increased telecommuting). At the same time, average speeds increased by 12.5 percent and commute times declined by 5.2 percent (Figure 7). Speeds are still lower and commute times longer than under current conditions, however.

Figure 7. Transportation Impacts

Source: Quality Growth Efficiency Tools Technical Committee, Utah Governor's Office of Planning and Budget (2000).

• Transit accessibility improves significantly, as the population within one-half mile of rail transit increases from 1.7 to 22.6 percent of the total regional population. Transit trips also increase, although transit remain a relatively small proportion of all trips; the share of work trips by transit increases from 3.0 to 5.0 percent of all work trips (Figure 8).

Figure 8. Transit Impacts

Source: Quality Growth Efficiency Tools Technical Committee, Utah Governor's Office of Planning and Budget (2000).

• The transportation system improvements come with a reduction in road spending of approximately $3.5 billion and an increase in transit spending of $1.5 billion, for a net savings of $2.0 billion, including both regional and subregional roads (Figure 9).

Figure 9. Infrastructure Cost Impacts

Source: Quality Growth Efficiency Tools Technical Committee, Utah Governor's Office of Planning and Budget (2000).

• An additional $2.5 billion in savings is realized under the Quality Growth Strategy from reduced water, sewer, and utility infrastructure costs. Savings in water use are substantial enough to delay some parts of the baseline regional water projects. Increased densities, clustering, and infill also result in savings at the municipal and site level.
• The Quality Growth Strategy reduces mobile source emissions by 7.3 percent and total emissions by 3.5 percent in 2020, a total of 93 tons per day. Indices of the concentration of emissions and their distribution with respect to population, however, show a small increase (negative performance) compared to the baseline scenario (Table 4). This is because population and therefore emissions are more concentrated in specific areas, even if overall emissions are reduced. The differences are relatively small because the overall distribution of population within each county is relatively similar between the two scenarios.

Table 4. Air Quality Evaluation Metrics

*Lower is better.

• The Quality Growth Strategy results in a per capita water use of 267 gallons per day, 10 percent less than under the baseline scenario. This is due to land use changes, such as reduced lot sizes, as well as additional conservation measures.

A more extensive set of impacts for the Quality Growth Strategy versus the baseline scenario is shown in Table 5.

As a result of this process, Envision Utah identified a number of strategies, classified by goal area, to achieve the Quality Growth Strategy. Examples include promoting mixed-use and walkable development and neighborhood zoning; promoting telework; and encouraging reversible lanes where feasible. For each strategy, the Envision Utah also identified why it is important, who is responsible for it, and the actions required to accomplish the strategy.

[TOP]