HomeMy WebLinkAbout04.09.96 Council and Planning Commission Joint Workshop CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION
JOINT WORKSHOP
APRIL 9, 1996
7:30 P.M.
MUSA EXPANSION/COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE
:. TO: Mayor, Councilmembers
,', City Administrator`)_
-, tom '
FROM: Charles Tooker, City Planner
SUBJECT: MUSA Expansion/Comprehensive Plan
Amendment
DATE: April 9, 1996
INTRODUCTIO!'
City Staff met with the Metropolitan Council staff to get some direction on an
appropriate approach for the City to take in securing additional MUSA and to explore
how this will relate to the preparation of a Major Comprehensive Plan Amendment.
DISCUSSION
The meeting with staff members Carl Shenk, Jim Larson and Tom. Caswell took place on
March 28, 1996 at the office of the Metropolitan Council. The discussion was
directed toward the City's existing three year supply of MUSA which is based upon
current development demand. The land area map prepared—as part of a 1990 updateof
the City Comprehensive Plan was used to illustrate preliminary development priorities
of the Planning Commission for MUSA expansion through the year 2010.
The response from Met Council staff outlined an approach to MUSA expansion that will
serve as the basis for the Comprehensive Plan update, scheduled for completion during
the next six to nine months, as follows:
• The Met Council engineering staff will need to review sewer flows projected for
the Empire Treatment Plant as generated by Apple Valley, Empire Township,
Farmington, Lakeville and Rosemount. Met Council staff needs to analyze regional
flows and compare them with the projected expansion of the Empire Treatment Plant,
expected to be "on line" in the winter of 1999. The basic question is whether
there will be enough capacity for all five communities through the year 2010? Jim
Larson pointed out that Farmington has had a 164 gallon per day per person flow
compared with a metropolitan average of 100 gallons per day per person.
Farmington will need to press for an update of its assigned figures based upon the
reduction in its previous I/I problem and removal of sump pump discharge into the .
system. City staff will work with Met Council staff to expedite this process.
• The Met Council demographer will need to review the household forecasts through
the year 2010 which were based upon permits issued between 1990 and 1993. By
adding 1994 and 1995 to the analysis, the City has been able to illustrate that
Farmington has already approached the number of households forecast for the year
2000. Enclosed is a copy of Dakota County household estimates through the year
2020, together with the background used in producing them. The City staff will
meet with the demographer to reach an agreement on totals before starting the
Comprehensive Plan update.
Cihj t3� Fauteiugtru 325 Oak Stud • Famxixgtex, Wit 55024 • (612) 463-7111 �,
• City staff and Planning Commission will develop land demand estimates (MUSA
expansion priorities) approximating five year increments through the year 2010.
This information will be applied to the City's traffic assignment zones to
estimate the need for any revision to the overall transportation system. Both
issues will be discussed with Met Council staff before proceeding to housing and
other issues that will have a potential impact on metropolitan systems.
• Met Council staff believes that the Metropolitan Council will not grant MUSA
expansion to any area that is not within City boundaries. This places some
urgency upon the work of the Empire/Farmington Joint Planning Board which has
agreed to recommend future land use for the land area south of County Road 66 to
the City Council and Township Board by July 1, 1996.
ACTION REQUIRED
Explore with the Planning Commission, during the April 9, 1996 workshop, the
information that was discussed with Met Council staff. This will bring into focus
issues involved in the Comprehensive Plan update and provide City Council input into
land demand estimates. Upon receiving Metropolitan Council response to the City's
MUSA expansion request, the Planning Commission will formalize land use
recommendations to the City Council.
Respectfully submitted,
(4'44 i;iet,„
Charles Tooker
City Planner
DRAFT
COUNCIL FORECAST PROCEDURES
Background for Discussion of Forecasts with Communities
Friday, March 1, 1996 •
Michael Munson, 291-6331
Regan Carlson, 291-6407
DRAFT
COUNCIL FORECAST PROCEDURES
FORECAST PHILOSOPHY AND PURPOSE
The Metropolitan Council makes forecasts not predictions. Forecasting makes statements about
what could happen. Prediction makes statements about will happen. Rather than striving for an
unattainable and costly level of precision,the Council forecast process focuses on understanding
the forces at work and the range of possibilities they present.
Despite uncertainty planning decisions must be made. These decisions are based on future
expectations of growth and have long-term consequences. These expectations have not always
proven to be correct, nor will they be in the future. It is this uncertainty that requires us to think
of forecasts as a range. We need to consider the impacts of using the higher side of the range
versus the lower end. The possible impacts will vary with the service or facility being planned.
Roads,transit, sewer lines, waste treatment facilities, landfills, schools, social programs, etc., are
each different in how much flexibility(over-building) can be economically provided to deal with
uncertainty.
Forecasting also implies that we have some ability to influence the course of events in the future.
Instead of designing for maximum flexibility,which can be very expensive,we may want to
establish policies that use the forecasts more directly as a guide in shaping development. One of
the crucial issues facing the Council in selecting a future growth option for the region is deciding
how much influence they want to exert in determining future development patterns—which are
reflected in the forecasts.
BASIC ASSUMPTIONS UNDERLYING COUNCIL FORECASTS
I. No wars or disasters. Although these events have profoundly influenced the
demographics throughout the past—the post-war baby-boom being a particularly profound
recent example—these events are simply not predictable.
II. No major human behavioral changes assumed regarding:
A. Family size
B. Marriage and divorce rates
C. Housing preferences
' D. Labor force participation rates by age and sex
E. Age at retirement
III. No major changes in the U. S. economy.
IV. The Twin Cities Metropolitan Area will not experience social and economic change that is
significantly different than the rest of the nation.
1
OUTLINE OF COUNCIL FORECAST METHODOLOGY
I. REGIONAL FORECASTS
A. Regional population forecasts(cohort-survival model). The model is based on
assumptions regarding:
1. Birth rates by age of mother.
2. Death rates by age and sex.
3. Migration rates by age and sex.
B. Step-down from U. S. Census Bureau's national population forecasts as check on
demographic model results.
C. Regional household forecasts generated from regional age forecasts.
D. Forecast of housing demand by type(single-family, apartment and other).
E. Regional employment forecasts stepped-down from national forecasts of U. S.
Bureau of Economic Analysis(BEA).
G. Labor force forecasts. Demographic-based employment forecasts to assure
consistency between the population forecasts and the job forecasts.
II. SUBREGIONAL ALLOCATION
A. Household allocations to major subareas. Households rather than population are
allocated because they relate most closely to development and land consumption.
1. Allocation of households to central cities and four major quadrants.
2. Allocation of households to planning areas within quadrants.
B. Employment allocations to major subareas. A process similar to the household
allocation process is applied.
C. Allocation of subarea(quadrant/planning area)household forecasts to city and
townships.
D. Allocation of subarea employment forecasts to cities and townships.
E. Conversion of household forecasts to population for cities and townships.
F. Local Review.
G. Allocation of city and township forecasts to traffic analysis zones (TAZs).
2
,+ r
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF COUNCIL FORECAST METHODOLOGY AND ASSUMPTIONS
I. REGIONAL FORECASTS
A. Regional population forecasts. The Council employs a basic demographic forecast model built
on cohort-survival methodology. Such a method simply replicates the way a population changes,by
making assumptions(by age and sex)about future birth rates,death rates and migration rates. The
model produces future regional population forecasts for individual 5=year age and sex-groupings.
The individual age data is a far more useful product than simply having a total future population
forecast for the region.
1. Birth assumptions. To forecast births,the total fertility rate(the total number of children
a female will have in her life time)was determined from actual birth records in the Metro
Area for the past 15 years. For 1980-1984 the rate was 1.66,for 1985-1989 it was 1.80 and
for 1990-1994 it was 1.86. It was assumed that the rate would not change much from the
current level,consistent with national forecasts. It was increased from 1.85 for 1995-1999
to 1.88 by 2015-2019. If the fertility rate was increased to 2.1 (the rate needed to maintain
population stability for a population with a balanced age-structure)for the entire forecast
period,it would increase the region's 2020 population by about 125,000 people. Reducing
the fertility rate to the 1.66 level of the early 1980s would lower the region's population in
2020 by a little over 100,000.
2. Death assumptions. The 1980 survival rates were constant through 1990,but needed to
be raised slightly to reflect death rate trends of the early 1990s. These adjusted rates were
then held constant throughout the forecast period. Death rates have not played a significant
role in determining the size of the Twin Cities Metro Area population formany-decades.
Although major changes are possible,the minor variations of our recent trends make little
difference in the overall population. Great increases in life expectancy could greatly increase
the elderly population,and that would have significant regional impacts. However,it would
still not make much of a difference in the overall population by 2020.
3. Migration assumptions. Migration is the major wild card in the region's future growth.
Although migration typically has accounted for about a third of the region's growth,it has
the potential for large and rapid shifts. The model used age-specific rates based on 1980 to
1990 trends. Data for the 1985 to 1990 period was taken directly from the 1990 U. S.
Census. For the 1980-1985 period age-specific rates had to be inferred from 1980 to 1990
age changes and the direct measures of migration from 1985 to 1990. The 1985 to 1990
period was given double the weight of the 1980 to 1985 period in projecting future
migration rates by age.
The late 1980s was a period of very high in-migration,so our migration assumption is fairly
optimistic. However,the aging of the population into less mobile groups should result in a
general decline of overall migration throughout the country. There is no force that dictates
any overall migration level. Rather,it is the collective result of individual decisions. Several
migration alternatives were tested in the forecast model,but it is more instructive to look at
historic variation in migration to get an idea of the possibility for forecast variation. The
Twin Cities Metro Area has gained about 100,000 people from migration in three of the last
four decades. The 1970s was a major departure from that trend. The region lost about
40,000 people due to migration in that decade.
3
44
B. Regional population forecasts using national step-down approach This approach relates the
region's historic population growth trends to national trends,and then applies this relationship to
national forecasts to forecast the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area's population. Reliable national
forecasts are needed and these are provided by the U. S. Census Bureau on a regular basis. It is a
generally accepted forecasting principle that the larger the geographic area,the more accurate that it
can be forecasted. That is because smaller areas tend to be subject to the same factors which cause
variation in the larger area,as well as local factors which specifically affect them. The step-down
method provides a"'talky"check on the model results which are generated wholly from local
demographic trends. This approach showed a high degree of consistency with the demographic
model results.
Twin Cities growth trends,although varying considerably over the past several decades,have
remained"relatively"stable in a national context. Specifically,among the largest twenty-five metro
areas the Twin Cities has been near the middle in terms of growth rate for the past 50 years. Since
1950,the Twin Cities has outgrown all of the dozen northern and eastern large metropolitan areas,
but has seldom grown faster than any of the dozen largest Sunbelt or western metro areas. In the
1980s the Twin Cities growth rate was closer to the rates of several sun-belt/western metro areas
(Miami,Houston,San Francisco and Seattle). Although our growth rate has remained stable,
national estimates as of 1994 put the Twin Cities growth rate slightly above several sun belt areas
(Los Angeles,San Diego and San Francisco and Tampa). Such a stable long-term relationship
makes a step-down approach particularly appropriate for the Twin Cities Metro Are&
The Twin Cities Metro Area's historic share of national growth was looked at in several ways. It
was related to the total U. S.population growth,all metro area growth in the country and growth in
the 25 largest metro areas. These trends all yielded about the same results,so the relationship to .
total U: S.population was projected. Forecasts at this level were readily available.
The Twin Cities Metro Areas share of national growth has been:
1940s .97%
1950s 1.21%
1960s 1.46%
1970s .48%
1980-85 1.12%
1985-90 1.62%
•
1990-94,est. 1.18%
Twin Cities shares of national growth using the Council's demographic model were:
1990s 1.19%
2000s 1.04%
2010s .99%
The demographic model's forecast shares are a little below recent trends,but reflect the average of
the region's longer term trends. Raising the Metro Area's share of national growth to 1.2 percent
would add less than 100,000 people over the next 25 years.
C. Region level household forecasts. Households were forecasted by converting the regional age
forecasts to households. This is done because the rate of household formation varies by age,but
within each age group the household formation rate was fairly stable over the 1980 to 1990 period. a
number of different assumptions using 1980 and 1990 formation rates were tested,but none of the
assumptions made much difference. Selecting the higher formation rate for a specific age group from
4
whichever year was highest, 1980 or 1990,yielded 1,306,000 households in 2020. If the lower rate
was selected,the 2020 household forecast was 1,259,000. This provides a range of less than 50,000.
The assumption that was selected used the average of the 1980 and 1990 rates for age groups where
the formation rate had increased. Where there had been decreases between 1980 and 1990,the rates
were averaged with the 1990 rate double-weighted. The declines affected age groups wider age 35.
This assumption was used because it best replicated the 1995 household projections.
.; D. Forecast of housing demandby type. Bye of the-vast-Mt:tem:m in land requirements of -
different housing types,housing demand was projected for three housing types: single-family
detached,apartments in buildings of five or more units and other housing types(duplex,triplex,
townhouse and mobile homes). These demand projections were based on the forecasts of households
by age of head. Housing preferences can be projected more accurately than simply extrapolating
current market trends and conditions by relating them to the age of the household head. That is
because of the very unbalanced and continuously changing age composition created by the baby-
boom and because there are significant differences in housing preferences by age.
There is a high potential for variation in forecasting housing type mix,however. The reason is that
new housing of each type is not simply built to meet the demands of the new households that are
being formed. Different types of housing are added to the existing stock which,in total,meet the
housing type demands for all households at that point in time. Satisfying this aggregate housing
demand potentially involves all housing and population in the region. There are limits that keep
these trends from fluctuating too wildly(the mix of the existing stock,housing market factors and the
amount of effort it takes individuals to move).
Two housing type assumptions based on recent trends were considered. One holds the 1990 housing
type preferences by age constant over the forecast period and the other projents th trends from 1980
to 1990. Holding the 1990 rates constant fairly closely replicates housing construction trends over
the past five years. The 1980 to 1990 trends revealed a slight shift away from single family housing
preferences for all age groups up to age 60. These modest trends were projected at a dampened rate
over the forecast period. The results of these different trends on housing change is significant,
because it involves the entire population. Holding the housing type preferences constant by age over
the forecast period would result in demand for 66 percent of all new housing added by 2020 to be
single family. This is close to the split of the current housing stock If the trends of the 1980s
continued,but at a slower rate,it would result in a demand for only 42 percent of new housing to be
single family. The difference between these two forecasts in terms of number of new single family
units needed in the next 25 years would be sizable—over 85,000. That is out of a forecast of about
350,000 new households to be added between 1995 and 2020.
The allocation to cities reflects the average of these two assumptions. The aging of the baby-boom
population into the age groups with a high single family preference has already occurred. As they
become elderly in the next century,their preference for single-family housing is likely to drop. The
"echo boom"(the children of the baby-boomers)are now starting to reach adulthood,and this should
also provide a boost to multifamily housing demand in the near future.
E.Regional employment forecasts using national step-down approach. As with population,this
approach relates the region's employment growth trends to national trends and then forecasts the
region's employment by applying this relationship to national forecasts. The national forecasts are
from the U. S. Bureau of Economic Analysis(BEA)and are reconciled with Census Bureau
demographic forecasts. They are the most frequently used national source of employment data and
are regularly updated.
5
•
Twin Cities economy has long been dependent on U.S.economic trends,but as the Metro Area •
in aglobal itis subject to more
forces that can affect its overall
increasingly competes economy
growth trends. That is because the more traditional and stable economic factors related to an area's
competitive economic position and growth,such as its natural resource base and locational
advantages,are likely to be less important in the information-dominated economy of the future. The
factors that affect an information economy are not"givens,"but factors an area must constant work
at maintaining. These include the skills of its labor force and wage rates,the area's perceived quality
of life,external demands-for it goods and services and its communications linkages.
The step-down approach has particular validity for the Twin Cities Metro Area for two reasons. We
have a very stable historic relationship with national employment trends. Secondly,our economy has
a balance and diversity that is similar to the U. S.industrial mix. Thus what happens to the U. S.
economy will tend to happen to the Metro Area. If our economy were not so similar to the U. S.
economy,a more elaborate approach would be needed,such as relating our employment trends to U.
S.trends on an industry by industry basis.
A major element underlying not only the employment forecasts,but supporting a continuation of
current migration trends is that the Twin Cities'economy will remain strong. Several national
sources were used to look at the relationship between the region's and the nation's employment
growth. Most of these sources define the Twin Cities as an 11-county area(the Census-defined
MSA),but since the overwhelming majority of this employment is in the seven Metro counties and
most of the growth will occur there,use of this larger area does not affect the analysis significantly.
The Twin Cities'MSA share of national growth in the 1970s was 1.6 percent. It dropped slightly to
1.4 percent in the 1980s. These shares are well above the region's historic share of population
growth. The region's share of national employment growth surged to 2.1 percent in the 1990s. The
• reasonfor this is that the Twin Cities was not as severely affected by the recent national recession,
and also began a strong recovery before the nation on average. Employment trends can be very
volatile in the short run,and that is why the Council forecasts reflect a share of the nation's growth
consistent with our longer term historic share-1.5 percent. This share is consistent with forecasts by
other national forecasting organizations,such as Woods and Poole and the National Planning Assoc.
F. Labor force forecasts(demographic-based employment forecasts). The labor force approach is
needed to make sure there is consistency between the population forecasts and the job forecasts.
This approach relies on converting population forecasts(by age and sex)to labor force,using
projected labor force participation rates by age and sex. These participation rates were fairly stable
in the 1980s and have been held constant for the forecast period. Deviation from the employment
forecasts could occur if the trends toward earlier retirement were reversed. This would allow for
higher employment growth levels without needing to increase in-migration assumptions or the
population forecasts. This would be similar to what happened in the region in the 1970s,when
employment growth far outstripped population and household growth because large numbers of
baby-boomers entered the work force and the female participation rate increased dramatically.
The number in the labor force is then converted to jobs by assuming unemployment rates for specific
age groups. The Twin Cities Metro Area has consistently had unemployment rates well below the
nation. In recent years,the region's rate has dropped to historically-low levels,nearshe three percent
level. These may not be sustainable in the long term,but a difference of a few percentage points in
unemployment would not directly affect the regional employment total much—one percentage point is
only about 15,000 jobs. However,since our low unemployment rate is one of our competitive
advantages,if we experienced a prolonged higher unemployment rate(relative to other metropolitan
areas),it could significantly reduce in-migration.
6
IL SUBREGIONAL HOUSEHOLD,EMPLOYMENT AND POPULATION ALLOCATIONS
A. Major subarea household allocation. Households,rather than population,are allocated because
they relate most closely to development and land consumption. There are two main reasons for using
subregional areas to allocate(as opposed to independently forecast)the regional forecast One
reason is that large subareas of the region have much more stable,and thus predictable trends than
individual municipalities. This the same reason a national forecast is used to"control"region-level
forecasts. .The second reason is that subareas can be r -tc•regional policy.
The first step is to allocate households to the central cities and four major quadrants based on very
stable historic trends. The quadrants break the region into four areas:Northwest,Northeast,
Southeast and Southwest. The north-south break is roughly Highway 12 and the east-west break is
about at the Minneapolis-St.Paul boundary. This configuration was used because it best fits the
geographic grid pattern of Twin Cities Area cities and townships. A four-part breakdown was
chosen because it created areas of uniform size that could evenly reflect the outward spread of
development from the center of the region over time. This is necessary to make long-term
extrapolation of these areas trends valid.
The quadrant trends for household growth have been extremely stable over the past three decades as
a share of regional growth. Most of the"errors"of past Council forecasts are due to major changes
in overall regional growth trends and local variation,not changes in the broad patterns of growth
within the region.
The quadrant trends were expressed as shares of regional household growth and extrapolated,
assuming a tendency toward convergence. Since these quadrants are of roughly uniform size(in
terms of development capacity over the next forty or more any one quadrant
will capture an increasing share of growth for an extended time period. Different assumptions
regarding how these past trends should be projected were tested,but because of their great stability,
the result on the overall household forecast for the quadrants was negligible.
The next step is to allocate households to planning areas within quadrants. The planning areas are:
fully developed area,developing area,freestanding growth centers and rural service area. These
areas were used for two reasons. One was to reflect Metro Council policies and the other was to be
able to relate growth forecasts to the movement of urbanization outward from the core of the region.
The planning area household control forecasts were determined using a similar method as was used
for determining quadrant shares—past trends were extrapolated. The planning areas do not show
quite such stable trends as the quadrants,but these forecasts are not used as rigid controls. The
reason for this is that as cities in the inner area fill up,and can no longer sustain their growth trend,
growth moves further out—into the next planning area or beyond. In rural areas,Council policies
have been used as a basis for lowering trend-based forecasts.
B. Major subarea employment allocation. A process similar to the household allocation process was
applied at the quadrant and planning area level. However,the results were not as rigorously applied
as they were for households. That is because of other factors relating to the strong tendency of
employment to cluster. For this reason,individual city level forecasts(described in the next section)
were more strongly relied on.
C. Allocation of subarea(quadrantlplannine area)household forecasts to cities and townships.
These allocations are based on:
7
1. Past growth trends. Conditions change,particularly at the local level<which can greatly '
alter past trends,but historic trends provide a realistic starting point for forecasting.
2. Historic density and land-use mix. While assumptions based on historic data are
reasonable,they do not necessarily reflect local policies and zoning. However,these
assumptions do reflect the reasonable expectations of housing demand by type that are
determined from regional demographic forecasts.
3. Land supply. Holding capacity for residential development is a critical component of the
forecasts. Although land use has not been measured since 1990,estimates of 1995 land use,
based on building permits(by type)and employment estimates,were made to provide a more
current forecast base. If the land supply is not adequate within a city to accommodate the
trend-based forecasts,fut re residential growth is assumed to move to adjacent areas,
primarily outward in the same direction. This alters the planning area control forecast.
4. Local policies/attitudes relating to growth. Local action can be a decisive factor in
determining a community's growth,particularly in limiting it. There are a number of
difficulties in factoring in local policies,however. Sometimes the local planning process is
simply not in synch with the timing of Council forecasting work There may also be policy
conflicts between local and regional policies. The Council forecasts are also very long range.
As a community develops and matures,local development policies often change.
Another issue is the need to maintain a reasonable regional control forecast. Adding up all
local expectations may not result in realistic regional forecast. Historically,there has been a
tendency for many communities to believe they were going to grow more than the Council
had forecast. These issues arose:in older suburbs that did not believe they would lose
population;in the faster growing and emerging suburbs,who believed that high rates of
growth would be sustained resulting in ever larger amounts of growth;and in rural
communities,who resisted the Council's policy-based forecasts of reduced growth levels.
Sometimes the local forecasts were right—at other times they were not. Local trends are very
volatile.
We have recently seen some major shifts in attitudes about growth. Many communities now
want less growth and at lower densities. Many of the cities that might be considered the next
century's developing ring of suburbs want to continue as areas of low density residential
development—mostly with rural estates and hobby farms. A number of current developing
suburbs see themselves filling up at densities lower than what is now on the ground. This is
unlike what occurred in the first ring of suburbs who filled up at increasing densities. Even
older areas looking for redevelopment want to maintain or even reduce residential densities
in many of their neighborhoods. Although some of the rural areas that in the past have had
the most growth are attempting to manage growth,other rural areas are seeing new growth
pressures and are planning for it to increase.
D. Allocation of subarea(Quadrant/planning area)employment forecasts to cities and townships.
A process similar to the household allocation was employed,looking at past trends,land supplies and
local polices. More judgement was used in the city-level employment allocation process because
densities can vary enormously and thus are not as tied to land supply. Employment also tends to
expand from existing concentrations—typically along freeways,or forms in new concentrations.
Over the long-run these patterns are not necessarily very reflective of past trends at the city level.
8
E. Allocation of population forecasts to cities. Household forecasts are converted to population
using simple extrapolations of household size trends. The results are reconciled to regional
population forecasts. The population conversion process has worked fairly well in the past because
virtually all cities and townships were on the same downward household size trend,some being
further along than others. It may not work as well in the future as some mature communities see
younger,larger households replacing the elderly who have moved or died. But applying age-specific
cohort-survival modeling techniques for each city is not a reasonable option. Each city is unique and
requires its own demographic actions. In most cases it would be more difficult to make
demographic assumptions for a city than making them for the region as a whole. It would be
prohibitively expensive and not necessarily provide great accuracy.
Because population at the local level is generated from the household numbers,and does not provide
any additional information reflecting development trends,we are deferring the conversion of
households to population until the Council selects a single preferred growth option.
•
F. Local Review. Forecasts need local review,particularly to determine whether communities
have capacity to hold forecasted growth. In the fully developed areas,where land supplies are very
limited and little additional growth is likely to occur,city input is very much relied on. In this
particular forecast effort the cities and townships will have ample opportunity for input. The first
step is to help the Council select a preferred growth option. Once that has been selected and a single
set of forecasts has been prepared that reflects it,communities will have an opportunity to review
these numbers before they are adopted as part of a Regional Blueprint revision later in the year.
G. Traffic Analysis Zone(TAM Allocation. In Council's previous forecasting work,we asked
communities to allocate the forecasts for their city or township to TAZs. The Council supplied 1990
census base year TAZ data. We-believe_this provided-a much more accurate andcost effective way
of doing household and employment forecasts at the TAZ level. When a single set of community-
level forecasts is agreed on,communities will be asked to review and update their existing TAZ
forecasts using the new forecast for their city or township.
9
•
BRIEF HISTORY OF COUNCIL FORECASTING
I. The Council's predecessor,the Metropolitan Planning Commission,working with the State Highway
Department and others,prepared forecasts in the mid-1960s. This"Joint Program"produced the
frequently cited and now seemingly outlandish forecast of four million by 2000. This was not so
unreasonable at that time. The baby-boom had not slowed any clear signs of ending,birth rates
turned up in the mid-1960s after some modest declines earlier in the decade. What is most
remarkable is that although the population forecast will be off by nearly one and a half million people
by 2000,not much more household growth was forecast than has actually occurred. The Joint
Program household forecast for 2000 will be high by only about 60,000(four moderate years of
growth). No one anticipated the enormous decline in household size which resulted in so much more
household growth than population growth.
II. Early 1970s—basic cohort-survival and economic base methods were used for region-level forecasts.
III. Following regional forecast work in the early 1970s,federal transportation funding was provided to
support a complex urban activity allocation model(EMPIRIC). It used many variables within a large
set of simultaneously solved regression equations. It represented the pinnacle(last gasp)of modeling
sophistication.It could not predict the future any better than simpler approaches,but was so
complicated that nobody could understand it and it was of little value in helping us understand and
monitor trends.
IV. The federal Environmental Protection Agency's"201"money provided substantial funding for the
next round of forecasting in the mid-1970s. a more simplified and understandable allocation process
was developed,much like the current forecast methods.
V. In the early 1980s,existing forecasts were adjusted to reflect 1980 census results. The intent was to
incorporate this into a revision of the Council's Metropolitan Development and Investment
Framework(MDIF)and then update the forecasts in mid-decade using more detailed regional
demographic analysis. But the MDIF wasn't adopted until 1986,so interim adjustments were made
throughout this period and no full scale revision was made at that time.
VI. A boom in regional growth in the late 1980s resulted in the MDIF forecasts being somewhat low
already in 1990. The current forecasts were done to reflect this growth,again using 1990 census data
for a timely adjustment.
:\useeme1106m
B \f@method.01 10
S t7 o y n I-1 c c A Q 7 so E r w S = ? m g on c" A A = O G S 7
C1 '� n -1 a n n en
O
eb
S C Og Z
K G ,
O
C
C
0
1 1
N O - N - r N O - O J o0 N 00O
O _N N N _J .0 W O. O 00 W J A N a .O i.. co W .0 N v, a W a
ON
w 00 J O O. N V. O W W CO O. W O` u C` O W.10 N A O. A ted N ..0
.0
A W - N N O N J - J N 0. A
0 N N N CO W J O. 0\ 0. 00 A J �D in a _ d
lit _. J 00 ..- W A O
O. 00 J W0 0. N W A 0 N N 0 A A N O. a N N W .0 W
O. N J 0 J N 0 0 CO D% W •O 0 0 .0 N •O 0 0. N .0 .0. V. 0 .0. 0
CD
•
_ V0
•
A - N A - W W 0 N 0 .-- -) •-• W 0% v. m
00 N W N 00 'a 00 .0 00 "i4 .0% 00 A 0 IO 00 1.. IJ 00 O. T .0 00 - 0. 5O
N 00 0 .O 0% O. 0 O. .0 J W A J N W A N 0 00 N 0 A 00 O
.O N CO W N - u, ut 0% Vt - N 41 00 N W J N .0. W CO v. N N - -4 Iy*0
ill
-, O 0 l
N - CD p F•�C
a% 0 N - V. N - A W - W N - 00 - _- 5.A J 1 C CD y� 7
W W W W J M O O. - ... 00 CO A O. O N 1A a O J CO I, - 0 00 �" ^ • 4
O U W J 0 V+ 0 V. U 0 CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 V. W 0 0 u 0 0 M..r
0 0 0 0 0 000000000000000000000 Wry
C. r) ga
< 0 N
_ O 0 O yyyC
O. N N - V. N - A W - W N - - - V. .1 44 B ; O ,•—•
pt O
1d W W W V V. O C. - v. 00 Oe A C. "O N v. a .co `1 00 - it - o oe /`t
0 v. W J 0 v. 0 v. V. 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 u W o O v, o o
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - d 0 tal
�„r
0 n N ba Q
_ _ y c 0
0. o N - ut N r A W - W N - Co .� •..• M J J 1Y�1���..��ryyyy�1 ��..O�-yy1
0 V. W W J O u 0 V. N 0 00 A 0 o 0 0 0 O .J.. W O 0 V. 0 0 .•. �../1 ..
0 0 0 0 0 000000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
a C 0 0
N ....
00.y
g.O _ N .-. 1 N N O. %A � A .d - 00 I.. r b G. 3
VA W W 00 O. a 00 00 b AIJ _ 0lis v i0 V•. N M J -
0 .O V. O. V. 0 0 0 O 0 N _ 0 0 0 0 0 O N V0 0 00 0 0 O l
O0O O O O O OOOO O O OOO O O O O O O O O O O
_
z )
_ _ _ o C
0 A N - O. N - O. W - N a - Co N - •-• •. -1 00 S
i0 A W W %.3 J O. a .4 b A i0 V. u N U W C - lJ - 00 04 CO
0 0 O. N O. 0 0 0 ... O 0 N V. 0 V. 0 0 0 0 v V 0 00 00 0 R
0000 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o O O O O O O O Cy
g n
....
0 o
O V. N r O. N - O. A - N .Nd - 00 - - - :4' :4 5O y
0. A W W _O �I W .0 a J 1n .0 A W V. A u. 10 W N - J u, H S
0 0 0 IV 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO 0 0
C
N N - Q
W N — O W N D J - A A N 00 N - - W 00 V.
W O. A W O% 00 00 0 IA J N •D A O IJ .O 'C - a i0 1.. N is .s
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00
0
.0.
n
p n ON fD
.- D
cr
0 CI%Q 000 w - VV. 0 0 0 0 0 V. - 0 0 0 0 tO.o. 0 0 .'A 0 0 0 0 0 �' O w
0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 S,
0% .O N - 00 N - OD V. - W A - 00 N - - W CO N % Q` '
-1.4---n -W W �1 00 to pa 00 10 Vp. +O A N 5O Op T D. d 0 N w O ..TT
O O 00 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 O I 0 0 O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 O O O 0
•
v ! ii1iiii: U ! iU- UIiU
f iUfT1UI
> 0
-' M
Pr ti
a n 3. ;i 0 5 ;i :-3
O 2 Y ri p�
c a
z ri
a n
K O
G
C
k.
o
Ot N as N W oo
0
in W W o0 — W b w O N A A 0% A b A .0. '-' - V. W - W N O
u 0 CO N b A W .0. N 0 J W 0 u O
J •" W 0 .0. 0% N u 0 ON '- d .0. N CO CO CO J .0. N 0 N - A 00 W - N b a
N J :O .. 0% . t0
_ _ 4
N O A A A .0. .� .ON N A A CO A if -4 N V. Ot W .- - W N iJ 0
N 0% A N N t0 0% Ch N A 0 00 u W .0. 0 0 u A .- W CT 0 N 00 t0 o.. ON
00 .0. J- 0% J N ON 0 J V. .' to -4 t0 OD J .� 0% A u 00 ON r- -4 0 A .0. 0% 0 N .
O
In
NN 3•
N0 0 N 00 - Y.
m A b
N 14 .0. .0. 14 N .0 ...t. NO W N u A t0 .. .4 NO N u .. ... 0% W .0. N ..
CO NaO NO .0.
CD
N- 0 u N 00 N 0% N 0 N -4 •-• J A v W N NO J W t0 0 .0. 0% N
ru
hal
qC
N N
W A W td /J -- ur9
N N V. AW N V. 0 O 0 W Os u 0 u W W u N 0% W N A W t0 d'
u 0 u CO 0 W -4 0 0 .4 0 0 0 O u A J Ot 0 t0 J N CO 0 J 0
O O O O O O O O O O 0 0OOOOOOOOOOOOO0O
O O O '>
0) � o<
0 = o rk
0
W d N to W - N .-. u F. 0
N N u A W N to O O O W 0% u O M W W u N O% W N A W %O 7 fm^9
lot
0 u CO 0 W J 0 0 -4 _
0 0 0 0 V. .0. J ON 0 t0 J N 00 0 -4 0
0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0- CA
4 til
O 0 0
W a N u 1.4 .. N .' V. y Z
l
N N V. A w N u 0 O O W 0% u O V. V. W V. Al ON W NA W %0 r
•u O u0O W J _ O O J O _ O O O V. A J ON 0 .0 J N _
Co p J O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
)T1
.....
f9 g
.0. to
00 •14 00 O -. N N J 0. = e)
N 00 J V. N N u u w .0 W -4 V. IJ O .0.CO00ON .' A N to W• N 00 0%
J 0 0 0, 0 NO J NO 0 0 u A V. t0 0 0 0 0 V. 0% 00 A W A W t0 ON NO 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000000000000000000 CA
O• O CA
0 N
V. "O• O C
Aso BONN ao O N N DD m
N O a to u N V. U t0 W J V. N V. W O W art .' N J W •'- N to W d
to u O W O O\ J Ot O O J N u W O J O O 00 O. OO A u tO W W W ON J 0 ^ �p
0 0 0 0 O. 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O.
O 00t
.:g'` v V. 1 .W.• ....r N N O ..
N N CA V. -4 N V. u CO to W J u 14 .4 V. O W ON ••-• N J W N u W - y 0.
V. 0 0 W 0 0% J 0% 0 0 to N to W 0 u 0 0 00 ON 00 A V. 10 W W W Ot J 0
O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O 0 O O O O O 0 O O 0 O 0 O O O
ri C
CO
ON 0 CO 0 t0 -- .. N W 10'
N W 00 Ot Cr, V. Ot O 'u - 0% W t0 Ot d I. d C u -4 N N t0 A N .4 A �- J
t0 O ON V. O V. J J O O - A J 00 u O O O J u O 00 .0• ..o v. O 0 O O O
0 co O O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O co co O O O O 0 O
n
A N 1.11
N - - 0 N W .. .. O Cr
V.
N O O. V. N N 0% 0 to -Co W t0 V. A 0% .0 C
AJ N N 00 .0 N u A V.
O VJ 0 J -4 0 0 0 .0. N u V. 0 0 0 _ to 0 0o O8 8
y00
O C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
'
-•'y
`o:
ON
V. 0 coN0 14 N - ... N w 0 N Q\
N a O. u IT N as C V. u W 40 u if W Y J N N 0o A N u A J
V. 0 V. 4 0 J -4 0 0 0 .0. N V. V. Q 0 S A to O 00 O O W 0% J W J 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000000000000000000
i ' u ' z > — c I. rn 3 B °t. .0 —1 S. o o' 0 O
n .;
2 1 (7
K o
C
Os
,.r. .O So J J�I — N A v. A 00
..1 N I 0. O u N a A •••• •-, N A ts) La IA
w O. to 00 0 0% 00 N 0 A -4 to w -. O w A 00 w N w to .0 N 0 •
14 w 00 — 0 O .l — A — w J 00 u O. w 00 O w — — •D O O — N -I — -.I w —
to 0 •-• d P 00 :I N w I V v. •
A w N A N P. — w — NO 4 N — — N W w N 00 00 A N — 0
N CO N 00 .0 A 00 N V. w 00 V A u — U. A N A 0 O. J .0 u 0 0 0%
0 w O\ O. 00 w — N .0. �I 00 A O\ b 0% 00 — A — .0 J N .0 w J — w — 0 00
n
N
O. - — u 0 00 00 w w O 00 U. 1..�
IJ H - IJ 0% to w — — 0 u O. — — N 00 w N is 00 00 N �• ? 'y
w N w N O. N b CO M u — V U. w .4 .O u w A CO -I .0 Co 0 0 - N (9
O .0 00 w 0 0 00 — 0 CO v to to — A to J 0 O. 0 00 .O 0 A 00 — A -.I to 00
f9
O
J w — I." -v 00 00 to .0. A 0 0% '= o Z
w u W u 00 v N A' — — N — N 1J .o. A 0 N to W C2' .'7
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
a
l
EL
� - x
�I w = a SO a0 Qup A :0p o o% 2 q -
0
w o w o 0 0 0 N 00 00 0 - 0 U. 0 .a u 000 w U. 0 .I U. 0 0 00 0 w a o ...
o 0 o 0 o O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0. Cf
til
G) • w
= o O
J W .... Os_Ow. J 00 00 N. A A O O. N 1 r
W to 1e u 00 �i N A N — O J N — — N W A A C to. M w
o 0 o 0 0 0 0 N 00 00 0 to 0 N u 00 w u 0 J w 0 0 0 0 0 a
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,0 0 0 0 0 0 0It
0
= 7
.D v ... )0.•wo .P▪e 0o so co - u
iv se 0.
W 0 00 000 N u N N .0. u 0 N — N w 14 u A 0 �I d w — —
0 0 0 0 W 0 w7 0 0 0 a 0 M 0. w 0 to w u 0 00 0 0 0 0 -4 u
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0CA
CD c CC9)
CD n N
o a O_
CO SONO — %%0 U. .O 00 O. u o w oo 2 m
d to '.0 0 O N A N N 00. 0 00 N — N w .I A A N 0 d w — •07
0. 0 0 0 -4 0 N ..I 0 0 0. N 0 v. w w O w v. 0 00 v 0 0 0 w u ^ Op
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q
•
CD
O
00 SON% U.
d b 00 O. to 0 A 00 y
4O u 00 O 00 N A N N d .o 00 A) — N w 1J A A w O. A w — "'SSS
0 0 0 0 N 0 N J 0 0 0 N 0 u w w 0 w U. 0 00 .4 0 0 0 w to
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O �..0 — O _ •'D 00 00 w — O. .NO 00 O O�.
00 tpo 00 O - O %O N O. N_ N A a d w — N A 0 0% A -D O% '•t/. A
0 0 O 0 0 0 0 ‘••' 0 0 1.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 tr.
0
0. r,
O
N O A 0
W N •-• C
✓ ANO .O .:13 J ....1 OO V. O 2 20% 0 "O 0 00 IJ N to N N p .0 N — N w W N A 0 00 u w m
OOO O C �oO : ' : : :
_..�oo o w Q `�
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U. — — 0 0 U. 0 0 U. 0 U. 0 U. 0 0 CO 0 0 0 IP 0 0 0 0
�i 5�c 5�c — �+ °' n n o. a �' 7. 7 O
5 (IZi es 0 S K . r.
P.:
=y
z D
n
O
C
O
n
u u- O - N J W N T ! J - 1 u - .4. pp - O
J 1J . O IJ 0% W V O% .00 .4 A N u .4 0 A N A to V 14 N 0 N
O u V V N 00 .4 00 0% u 0\ OA 0% W 0 Co 00 0` V. 0% W O V A 0% 00 N 0% J A
V. 00 - V. - J A A J J CO u N u V V O, V - N A A N J -4 V - W W - J W
01 yn- 00 N 00 W00 O - N J VO A. ...• - V -
O V. W '0 C% V. _J - N 0% .0% O ON V. J V 10 u N A _co4 00 . .0.3W N V.
O u 0 %V •-• O V 0 00 00 O 0% b W O. A N J 00 CO u u J 0% as A N V. .4 A
00 - - V. W -4 0 u A J N J V 0% - J J u W V. N 0 J W J 0 O J A V N u
C
_ G7 r
N . N up
0% u 0 N 00 W - V 0 - A J 00 - 0 0' - - V VD
m• � 1..1
C d 00 V C u J W N .,O A ... J W N J 0 -V IA _J N u 1.1 C1 W to i.i O% wy y
NA ON CO 0
a - 0` A N 00 V. A 000 N W 00 V. 0 u - N V.
V, O O 0 - W u J u N u V.
0 0 ON /V
N N N
h��
0, u W - N 00 W - - - O, _— 00 0 - O 00 . . r VO r ,'S.
C. 0% u C 00 C\ .0 0% N 0% C d 00 to N CO b N u d N J in W 00 A '0 d' ft,
►~7�
O 0 0 u O 0 u O 0 0 V J W 0 A 0 O 0 O N J 00 O 0 0 0 u 000 Lr
O C C 0 0 C C C C C 0 0 O O 0 O_O O C 0 000000000000 >
0.c. n K
a v, w — N 00 La - - 0, - 00 00 - 0 00 - - 10 - .1i o
0% 0% V. C C C' 0 C% N 0% O d CO w N CO V N V. . iJ J u W 00 2. b CD m C
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 0 0 C C ^ �°, co)
' M
0 0 x
boy
O\ - W - N eo W - •N+ .....—�.. - 0% _- o0 0e - 0 00 - - 'O - :q l
0% 0 u O 00 en 10 0%Al _N 0% 0 I. co L. N CO V N u A N J u W 00 A 00 1D
0 O 0 V.O O O O O O 0.0 O O 0 O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O C O O 0 0 y
_ J
▪ N N 0\ N N N
dO% VCO - W 00 d N W N N - N .- 00 - 00 - O V. NON .
^
0o C O J NO, O 01 .. O 0 N V W N W N J V. N J C 0 C\ �u CO
OOO O O O 0O _ 00O00u000OVOO0. 00WO _ 0000OOO r)
O O O O O O O 0 O 0 O 0 O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 O O Cn
0CD 0 CA
o
0% OA -3 - W ,O A N V. :4 84. - N - Oo 00 .- - W .- •-• 'O N ^..s
'O C to N N u N .O O N. - C 0 N V N W b N 01 vN d C 2. 10 Q` C A to
0 O 0 0 O O u0 N 0 0 u 00 u 0 00 J ...•
0 0 00 O% 00 W O O O O 0 0 0 u '
C O O O O O O 0 O O 0 0 O O O 0 0 O O O 'O O O O O O C O O O O O O
CD
.7 °
O% Y▪. J - W 00 d N W 14 N - - W - 00 00 -14 N N - N �O N -
CO 00 O J N N W O '.0 - C C N V -"o
u - N O• N _ -"o
C O A -"0
u W 07
O O O O O O O C N O O O 0o u O 00 O C O u 0% 00 W O O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
cf9
-. WWu ¢ co
rl u .+ - W 00 A .N A A - 00 .-- CO00 N 00 .4. - V. 'O W
=
O so C a v t4 4 N 0 in .0 — La in W V 0% N C N N V in N .0 in a v u :i
Q 00 000001A 0 _ 00OOOO 0 0 0 0000 O O —
n
CI 0
O O N 0
i at o - A O A W u V - - ,ONO — — oo — 00 - = v - tJ V N �•,.l
2
O N O W 0% A �l N O u Os W u W N .. O N N O. 10 _ N in O A O �l t...) iy
O O O 00000 N O 0 V. 00 0 0 0 V. V. O u Oo 0% O O 0: : ; : : : : : 0 : : : 0 : ; 00 : .: : C00 : 0 : ; : : : : a.
O '.0 in C% J N C N Cu A - W V. V 1J .4 A NN OT V. 1J 00 V. i. C. u -.1co
0 0000 001A Op0 p0 _
0 OO0O0O0 O O O S O O S p00 O 0 0 0 0 O O
. .
. . .
... . ....— .'' •..,_— —.2 -.... .......,EV.7...sg Nisl
.. ..--...am. _
•
N. !
---o---
, 1 ,.,•-..g-J..=—
:',.....,..
:•••••• •
. 1
N6Pia_
•
• •
. ' 1
•
..
--, - c.. t...:=1:-.1q___:%), vt .
ii. a4 meat--It:;.\
• -::!;;" Ei ....--,„
•
... _ ..
•. ,
i N, ...„.... ,,,...,....„.„.„..... ,,-,
,..,
,.
_ .
,------t ,
.......•--- "rz,IIM 1 flA..'',1qi; 3;rk ,
.. .
r
! _
— 1
-•
.: - . 6 •, ; i t
; t I V.....;-, E t i m a=%--•Vr.—7-.1
-.. ',......1
‘ t
.......me•..m.ow,ip......,/,0 ,.. . !: H.r.. ..,=..„s___--7---- '
I . II
i ......_._.....,L.
•
;; _
:: .==c:r.4..,. ,K1*----• .
-I -- - .
„'--7-1 •.:...:
• :
I ...
:::* (iii. : 1
.. - ..... ....i : . ..”':...c..... "'..."i .
1 I I I
I
1
• .•. •
1 '... .6..i..... .
i....... .....,=,..n7.7
r• •••••• 1........../ 1
•• 1 1 /
............., q . ........ 1
1 1 ••_:
'"X's"--.2.2E;
....
r" S.
i-- H
.....S4-111-j 1
• _i1...,.. -
f --•-•.• _....---
..4. rry + 11
1 iv' 1
t•---r I !! . ,
:i"--
r.-.--.. .,-11 •,_4. f! . . '.... Vr-r -14"'r= i
. . ' 1 ',...m ,.
---\.„-:-----,---- • ..,-,-,...7=,. .. ,,, 1.
LI-; i , .
I • I , ,;:=4 .7iirp.z..ii=m 2 b-
i • . tii, g" -- fX:74:ittr cLrt•-:_ t.,1,,. :=Plarr....St=g•
•
--• 3• i - - -.6=....,:= F.":::I.E,•.01J 7.11ar:""": - I
."1--.==---r,m.r.74,•,r--- ,7! r-72=111 -1301-r-Z
i I I 1
ii
1• .• . .-:.
I ....r.Li -e":7:::..,_
.7.i
• • i
-t.
•
.1.____: L----- . 1 ---•••::'_ I
• , :zsiCAt •• ••=...-
. .. Cl....L..-i • • ris9:2
, I ..1E-E=••• --.: -..":r
— 1 ,
, — -
• PI!.... IT e, '' ''' %,•••Ci . = gi i .—. F._....Fri 1 I r
.-
L ,iiL I
I-
,
I 1 :a..--1..c..• 1 1
•
.f--I 1 ,
.
-
- ._...
I ' , .4.7
I - - —
1
. .
•
1 1
I .
•II er.. .-...' --..."
. •
- • ......_
•
1--d—j
: '-'1 ..-••••
. . . .
- -
• I
• 7.-----------.........!
. I i ...:::::" •
- •• i. i
•
—
. :
I ....:,:.:::•• i - ,' .
M U SA
1.
1 CITY OF FARMINGTON SOO
. . .
I • _ . 0 coo noo 3000
SCALE
FARMINGTON HOUSEHOLD FORECAST
CONTRASTING ACTUAL 1990 - 1993 WITH 1990 - 1995
Year Permits City Metropolitan Council
1990 67 2064 2064
1991 68
1992 88
1993 119
1994 359 2406 2390
1995 345
1996 300* 3110
1997 300*
1998 300*
1999 300*
2000 4310 3200
* Optimum number suggested by City Council
----
141+1;d1 -- 'y; .ill min
����
1 .■'�. 1, I `,.� , • , a : "` E:
•
■YI j! �: •I ti
• .. 1
: Ali • :I :.■ Y. �. !! �£ •
■ 4!
■■ Dili• " .� ■'■.i '
•■■ I • •i• 1� r,'I
A 1J 1 •
•
F , , c • _r.,_,..
i.p---.----
•
•
1 u • irgainr••illi
yk Y
tFfll • E C 17,1117 1
■■ !.
.li,
d1��g■I
2 i'7..\\(1 ' 114.4.4-EC-
e
_ Ih\ a. A• Sll
r `_j A� ■ I _ __
•
\ •• �• it �� �� �� � N,dr ♦ '1 f
•
.I
•
- I .�i
i I >
A
9 It v D ' 11.111..1..11•
' '%-:,'•4:..,..„...„.,-..---,;•:-%
■ 1
• ✓` ■ rIi!IIIiiiiioiliiiwl.IK- ��.irr':1•_,.....c........”1:•...,......::- _ 1 - •of•I
11 el Ililiiiiiii iii�i!i!r_ ,..I�� . •i.:•••: t ::
1 ( !I InIUllllLRllllllUllliinf. .. ■-' , < - ,I. �"
liimnu� CC
.- . 'L '11lnl.r■•.gi_i..■li ,..ie l•1ll.e.'w.l..■ '.. •y,.. 1 x`:11:14".[141. ��..
•
1`-.11
•' J {I I I I . Iii 3 _._. . - ._.' H� '••�� ' - ' aI13T.1 , t'1��� :_ 32
I ��1 „
111' i j ■ ■.�� ■4` Eij A u„�,E� ilH F:
I �� 1'��Iupl$'�1]I file ' -`i"'''.'( €... tll E - _ _ -1
, li..,...,„:„... ■•t 'p I I.
m11 I — :..'• .■. r Fri I i TLk'. E l 11 ,-y,,..�-
�r�a
wm..,rcexwx ..'�.:..:....' ... .. .-...m.... dal I f — .+a a wc. .vs.s�.
I _._. gi�l�t011 _..-'•,-,1
�' I
.�.e-j o—y
d
/ 1
civ
Vr.t:Ili
f
LAND USE PLAN 2000
IIMI COMMERCIAL
='.2INDUSTRIAL
CITY OF TOWNSHIP COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL
FARMINGTON I 1 LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
1 1 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
I 1 HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
ar
i----7 SCHOOLS
C rresi PARKS
I•••••I TRAILS
0 1000 0000 4000
( STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PONDS
CHARLES TOOKER 11 CONSERVATION AREAS
CITY & TOWN PLANNING CIVIC CENTER
n
0 0 0 L
N .--i 00 •
as — N N N 0 0
G .fir ON
0
N
inON0
O
H
i.
O
O
Z H •CC)
'� c3 .1.=
A O o E.
ry J " u
Fel va
Q �1 Q H R ~ s" E. a
v A e. U
Q cts �+
tO i ' ....i• Icn y = VI 'O
WZ A wvav 0 0 z •
8, 0
014
ii Q CO U 0
N
G W t3.
au gO
a
O'
et
N E
01 ON 00
0
♦` .r ,-. 000ON VI
0
C
1
aw
a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w
n7 = O O O O O O O O O 00000 N O
k en en en en N N N N N N N N N N en 000 W
O
N
O'
44
E
V S 00 ON 0 —. N en - N 00 O' 0
CI ON ON 0N ON 0 0 0 CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 --+
G ON ON ON ON 0 0 00 CO 0 0 0 0 0
>4 N N N N N NNNNN N