CHAPTER 4 PLANNING PROCESS
PLANNING PROCESS StanCOG developed the 2014 RTP/SCS through extensive public outreach and involvement from the region’s local jurisdictions. The Plan is a result of a comprehensive and integrated planning effort called Valley Vision Stanislaus (VVS). This effort established an approach to guide the region to near-term success and help establish a framework for future success by developing a planning process that incorporates local visions and input into a regional process. This effort utilized the same demographic data, land use inputs, and decision-making processes to address various issues facing the region, including the 2014 RTP/SCS, the RHNA, and other related efforts not directly associated with this Plan. In so doing, the VVS process set a path for success and truly embraced the intent of SB 375 and performance-based planning.
INTRODUCTION In coordination with the VVS Steering Committee, StanCOG established specific goals and objectives that address the needs and planning aspirations of the region. The goals and objectives were formed based on an understanding of the region’s existing conditions, and reasonable assumptions regarding future population and housing stock. These goals and objectives are intended to guide the region’s future growth. They helped to guide the development of scenarios consisting of both transportation and land use planning strategies. Four unique scenarios were developed through a transparent and deliberative process, during which public input was sought at every major decision point. Ultimately, the StanCOG Policy Board identified a preferred scenario, which became the basis for the 2014 RTP/SCS. This chapter outlines the key elements of the entire three-year VVS planning process, which resulted in the development of the Plan.
2014 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
57
The Steering Committee was designed to ensure a collaborative approach that involved local input and reflected a wide range of transportation and land use interests and expertise STEERING COMMITTEE In November 2010, the StanCOG Policy Board approved the formation of the Valley Vision Stanislaus Steering Committee to help guide StanCOG staff in the development of the Plan. For the first time, StanCOG was responsible for the development of a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) as part of the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) update per Senate Bill 375 (SB 375). The RTP/SCS must also consider the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). With this in mind, StanCOG developed the Valley Vision Stanislaus planning effort, linking these three documents together and creating a longrange, comprehensive planning approach. Since StanCOG does not hold land use authority, the Steering Committee consisted of representatives from each local agency within the region, as well as a representative from the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO), a representative from the StanCOG Policy Board, and a representative from each of StanCOG’s standing committees that represent different interests pertaining to StanCOG’s various functions. The Committee, totaling 15 members, began to take shape in the early part of 2011. The intent of the committee, which met monthly, was to provide input on technical matters, establish the scenarios that were used to create the Plan, and set the overall direction for the VVS planning effort. The Committee was further designed to ensure that the 2014 RTP/ SCS embodied local visions through a collaborative approach that involved local input and reflected a wide range of transportation and land use interests and expertise. This approach not only ensured a better planning effort during the Plan’s formation, it will also help with subse58
quent implementation of the Plan by the region’s local agencies. StanCOG also included a group of secondary outreach partners, who were not formally on the Committee, but received all committee information and whose input has been gathered during the development of the Plan. The secondary outreach partners include a representative from the Building Industry Association (BIA), the Stanislaus County Farm Bureau, the Stanislaus County Health Services Agency (HSA), and the Stanislaus County Agency on Aging. Input from the broad range of committee members and secondary partners helped to create a 2014 RTP/SCS that truly linked land use and transportation planning, and further identified how the needs of the region could best be addressed utilizing all transportation modes.
FORECASTS Regional forecasts of future demographics, travel demand, and transportation funding represent a key step in the planning process. These forecasts provide data on which land use and transportation investment decisions can be based for the region’s plan.
Demographic The developed growth forecasts represent what the region may look like in 2040, and help determine the travel and housing needs. StanCOG retained a renowned consultant to prepare a regional forecast using the latest demographic data, as well as results from the recent recession. StanCOG then worked closely with the
Chapter 4: Valley Vision Stanislaus Planning Process
local jurisdictions and VVS Steering Committee to distribute forecasted countywide growth to each jurisdiction. In some cases, growth was determined at the traffic analysis zone (TAZ) level – the basic geographic unit of analysis in travel demand modeling, using general plan information from the local jurisdictions. This approach, not only provided for extensive local input, but also provided the best and latest planning assumptions to ensure that the RTP/SCS is truly meeting the future needs of the region.
Transportation Demand In 2013, the San Joaquin Valley MPOs, completed travel demand model improvements funded through Proposition 84. StanCOG, in cooperation with the Merced County Association of Governments (MCAG) and the San Joaquin Council of Governments (SJCOG), expanded its model to cover these three regions. The updated tri-county travel demand model gives StanCOG in-house capability to generate new technical information to understand the region’s future travel behavior, modal choices, transportation and transit network performance, and interregional travel demand.
house gas (GHG) analysis for the StanCOG 2014 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. This post processing analysis is provided in Appendix W.
Financial StanCOG used a deliberative and thorough approach to develop detailed revenue projections. These projections were developed in coordination with the local agencies and verified at the local and regional levels. StanCOG calculated a historical average of revenues received over the last 4 to 8 years. This information was then supplemented with the actual figures received during the last fiscal year to project revenues from each funding source over the life of the Plan. Finally, local agencies were asked to produce their own projections based on typical funding levels. These projections were then used to verify the regional transportation-related funding projection.
Despite significant improvements to the policy sensitivity and multi-modal utility of travel demand models, the effects of implementing transportation demand management (TDM) programs must still be handled by post-processing transportation model results. Given that Stanislaus County is subject to San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District’s (SJVAPCD) e-TRIP Rule (Rule 9410), a post processing step was performed to ensure that the future implementation of this rule is accurately reflected in the modeling results for input into the green2014 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
59
Stanislaus
Public Outreach Summary Scenario Development Presentations 6 Planning Commission Presentations 8 City Council Presentations 7 Community Organization Presentations Over 600 people participated in these presentations. Scenario Selection Presentations/Workshops 2 Planning Commission Presentations 5 City Council Presentations Modesto High School Workshop (350+ Students) 3 Community Organization Presentations Over 500 people participated in these presentations. Vision Setting Surveys 291 Mail Surveys 323 Online Surveys 614 Total Participants Workshops City of Patterson City of Modesto City of Oakdale City of Ceres Online Workshop 62 attended in person Over 160 participated online Social Media / Media 1,000 average monthly website visits 29 e-mail blasts to 25,838 addresses 62 eNews subscribers
PUBLIC OUTREACH Effective planning requires input from those affected by a plan. In order to establish a vision for the region and to set policies designed to achieve this vision, StanCOG developed and implemented a comprehensive public engagement plan. This effort was has been improved and expanded considerably compared to previous efforts, in order to reach more members of the public. The effort was designed to engage a broad spectrum of stakeholders throughout the region, including residents, business owners, farmers, elected officials, environmental groups, socio-economically d isadvantaged populations, advocacy groups, news media, and others that expressed an interest and/or had concerns about the Plan and its implications. The public engagement plan was developed to reach all demographics of the region’s population including Hispanic, senior, youth, and other hard-to-reach populations through partnerships with community organizations, electronic communications, and in-person meetings. StanCOG established the following three goals for the outreach process: • Actively engage the diverse populations and communities of the Stanislaus region, • Inform area residents about the purpose of regional transportation and land use planning, and ways to improve our communities by offering a greater variety of transportation and housing choices, and
More than 12 articles in local papers
60
Chapter 4: Valley Vision Stanislaus Planning Process
• Ensure that all populations, including those typically hard-to-reach, are provided an opportunity to be actively involved in the process. Several strategies were developed to ensure these goals were met, including: a project specific website, large email databases, electronic and paper surveys, presentations, workshops, and public meetings. Learning from past experiences, StanCOG sought to provide quicker, more convenient ways to provide input, understanding that it is difficult for residents to spend a couple of hours at a public workshop after work. Therefore, staff utilized electronic outreach methods to reach people remotely, providing them with the opportunity to respond quickly and at their convenience. However, to reach those that do not have access to the internet, an email address, or a computer, StanCOG provided over 40 Public workshops, presentations, and informational talks throughout the planning effort. In addition, StanCOG partnered with key stakeholders representing various community interests to solicit further input from their constituents. This allowed us to reach more people by tapping into networks previously unavailable to StanCOG. Several other outreach strategies were developed to incorporate public input into the 2014 RTP/SCS’s development process. A Valley Vision
Stanislaus website was developed to continually update interested parties during the planning process and provide access to materials developed. A high propensity voter e-mail address list of approximately 25,000 residents (who have “opted in” to receive information about their local community and government) was created and added to StanCOG’s existing stakeholder lists to promote outreach activities, provide updates on the planning process, encourage participation, and conduct surveys. Additionally, two rounds of surveys were conducted during the first phase of outreach resulting in over 600 mail-in and online surveys. This input helped establish the vision for the 2014 RTP/SCS and sought input on the scenarios. To supplement and provide an alternative option to the electronic based outreach, StanCOG conducted three series of workshops and presentations throughout the County to receive public input on key elements of the Plan as described below. In late 2010/early 2011, StanCOG provided an informational presentation on Senate Bill 375 and the SCS to each City Council in the region and the county Board of Supervisors as well as to various other community groups. The intent was to inform the elected officials of the new legislation and describe StanCOG’s approach to developing a coordinated land use and transportation plan.
2014 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
61
What We Heard: • More compact development • Preserve agricultural land • Develop in cities • More transportation choices
In the second outreach series, held between February and May of 2013, StanCOG conducted 17 presentations and/or workshops to City Councils, Planning Commissions, community groups, chambers of commerce, Hispanic groups, and the Farm Bureau. These outreach efforts helped establish the vision for the Plan and began the development of the scenarios for the 2014 RTP/SCS. Over 600 people participated in these presentations and workshops. The third outreach series, conducted in August 2013, sought public input on the scenarios in order to help identify the preferred scenario. StanCOG provided 10 presentations during this series to City Councils, Planning Commissions, rotary clubs, and six high school classes at Modesto High School. In total, over 500 people participated in these presentations. Additionally, three public workshops were held in Oakdale, Patterson and Ceres. Although just over 60 people attended these workshops, an additional 160 people participated in the online version of the workshop found on the VVS website.
Valley Visions – The Valleywide Public Outreach Effort In 2010, StanCOG joined the other seven San Joaquin Valley Metropolitan Planning Organizations (San Joaquin, Merced, Madera, Fresno, Kings, Tulare and Kern,) in a joint grant proposal to the California Strategic Growth Council for Proposition 84 funding. One of the tasks identified in the successful grant proposal was enhancement of the eight MPOs’ individual public outreach efforts with a valleywide campaign. This task included several components: the creation of templates/written materials for customization; and a media campaign with ad banners 62
and audio placement on Pandora, ad titles on Facebook, Google ad words, banner/ad placement on a Google Display network, and online newspaper ad placement in the Modesto Bee and the Turlock Journal. The media campaign was intended to engage residents and publicize outreach efforts using various media. Further, the grant effort sought to assist with the development of SB 375’s required workshops and hearings. StanCOG utilized some grant funding to acquire audience polling devices which allowed us to collect direct numerical data counts from polling at various presentations and public meetings. In addition, an informational video on the Plan’s intent and process was prepared and provided in three languages—English, Spanish and Hmong. Of particular note is the branding developed from the grant effort. To capture the full extent of the 2014 RTP/SCS, the San Joaquin Valley MPOs agreed on Valley Visions, with a tagline of “People. Choice. Community.” StanCOG has since customized the brand, referring to the entire planning process under SB 375, including the RTP, SCS and RHNA as “Valley Vision Stanislaus.” For more detailed information on the public outreach process, see Appendix P and Q.
Chapter 4: Valley Vision Stanislaus Planning Process
PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT
SCENARIO DEVELOPMENT
Performance measurement has increased in importance in regional planning specifically because of state and federal guidance. In a region such as Stanislaus County, which receives limited federal and state transportation funding, performance measurement is critical to ensure that scarce transportation funding is utilized with the maximum benefit. Performance measures help decision-makers and the public evaluate and make informed decisions on the expected results of a plan before it is implemented. Further, performance measures can provide useful information as projects are developed to ensure that they continue to meet the needs of the region.
StanCOG developed four different scenarios to evaluate and analyze various land use development and transportation investment strategies for the 2014 RTP/SCS. Each scenario consists of a unique land use pattern and transportation investment strategy (i.e. project list). Each scenario is constrained by the demographic and financial forecasts developed for the Plan. This means that each scenario is based on the same parameters, which allowed for the public and elected officials to select the scenario that best met the vision, goals, and objectives of the region. Details of each of the four scenarios are presented below.
The 2014 RTP/SCS evaluated the long range outlook of several measures for each of the four planning scenarios to determine which scenario would provide the best mix of future conditions to meet the goals of the Plan and address the needs of the region. These measures closely link transportation system performance and land use strategies. Once the Plan scenario was chosen, its performance was compared against the Historic Trend scenario which captured “business-as-usual” land use planning and transportation investments. Detailed information on the performance measures and their results can be found in Chapters 6, Transportation Plan and Performance and Chapter 7, A Plan for the Future.
For more information on the transportation investments selection process used to select transportation projects the scenarios, see Chapter 5.
2014 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
63
Figure 4.1 Scenario 1 Development Pattern and Investment Plan
Scenario 1. Historical Trend
OAKDALE
RIVERBANK
MODESTO
WATERFORD CERES
HUGHSON
TURLOCK
PATTERSON
Legend New Housing New Job Centers NEWMAN
New Mixed-Use Areas Existing Development 1% Aviation 4% Bike/Ped 18% Transit
Transportation Investment 77% Roadway
Roadway Funding Breakdown
84% New Capacity
64
9% Maintenance & Rehab 6% Operational Improvements 1% Complete Streets
Chapter 4: Valley Vision Stanislaus Planning Process
Scenario 1, Historical Trend, represents the development patterns and transportation investments that have occurred in this region over the last several decades, including a dispersed growth pattern typically located adjacent to existing communities with limited infill development. This pattern of development results in the expansion of existing communities and a suburban, auto-oriented environment with services and employment separated from housing. Housing types are limited with an emphasis on new, lower density, large-lot, single-family homes and limited multi-family housing. Transportation investments reflect a historical pattern of development, with limited alternative transportation choices, and a focus on the expansion of roadways. Under Scenario 1, most transportation investment is dedicated to roadways (77% of all transportation funding) with minimal funding for transit and bicycle/pedestrian improvements.
Figure 4.2 Scenario 2 Development Pattern and Investment Plan
Scenario 2. New Trend Scenario 2, New Trend, reflects a pattern of development that is in line with the currently adopted general plans of the region’s jurisdictions, including a slightly more compact development pattern and more infill development. This pattern of development embraces a mix of suburban and compact neighborhoods with more housing type options and neighborhoods closer to services and employment compared to Scenario 1. Development densities are mixed, with new, lower density, largelot, single-family housing and smaller lot, single-family housing. Multi-family housing development is still limited, although development densities are higher than in Scenario 1. With the higher densities and more compact development, transportation investments include small increases in alternative transportation modes. The majority of transportation investment is still dedicated to roadways at 66% of all transportation funding, compared to 84% in the 2011 RTP. However, there is less focus on roadway widening and more funding is allocated to maintenance, rehabilitation, and operational improvements, as well as “complete streets” (see Chapter 6). Additionally, funding for transit, bicycle, and pedestrian improvements is increased to match potential changes in transportation choice which could occur with a more compact development pattern.
OAKDALE
RIVERBANK
MODESTO
WATERFORD CERES
HUGHSON
TURLOCK
PATTERSON
Legend New Housing New Job Centers NEWMAN
New Mixed-Use Areas Existing Development
Transportation Investment 28% Transit
66% Roadway
1% Aviation 5% Bike/Ped
Roadway Funding Breakdown
81% New Capacity
10% Maintenance & Rehab 8% Operational Improvements 2% Complete Streets
2014 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
65
Figure 4.3 Scenario 3 Development Pattern and Investment Plan
Scenario 3. Moderate Change
OAKDALE
RIVERBANK
MODESTO
WATERFORD CERES
HUGHSON
TURLOCK
PATTERSON
Legend New Housing New Job Centers New Mixed-Use Areas
NEWMAN
Existing Development
Transportation Investment 61% Roadway
33% Transit
1% Aviation 5% Bike/Ped
Roadway Funding Breakdown
74% New Capacity
66
Scenario 3, Moderate Change, emphasizes a pattern of development comprised of compact, mixed-use neighborhoods and infill development, especially in downtowns. Development is denser, and more compact, compared to Scenarios 1 or 2, with development concentrated around mixed-use centers and in new traditional neighborhoods. This scenario contains a greater mix of housing types, with a higher percentage of new multi-family, mixed-use housing, and duplex/townhome housing within and adjacent to downtowns and urban centers. Additionally, there is limited lower density, large-lot, single-family development with a greater mix of smaller lot, single-family housing to provide more housing choices for the changing population of the region.
11% Maintenance & Rehab 9% Operational Improvements 7% Complete Streets
Chapter 4: Valley Vision Stanislaus Planning Process
Transportation funding is allocated to maximize the benefit of the land use pattern, providing better and more accessible alternative transportation choices. Less funding is dedicated for roadways (61%), which is offset by increases in transit funding (33%). Roadway investments are further shifted, compared to Scenario 2, from new capacity, to complete streets projects, maintenance, rehabilitation, and operational improvements.
Figure 4.4 Scenario 4 Development Pattern and Investment Plan
Scenario 4. More Change Scenario 4, More Change, is the only scenario which adjusts the jurisdictional distribution of the demographic forecast. The scenario is still constrained by the total forecasts; but, it shifts population from the outlying cities to the SR-99 corridor. This scenario expands the mixed-use and infill development emphasis in Scenario 3, locating more growth in the incorporated areas of cities.
OAKDALE
RIVERBANK
MODESTO
WATERFORD CERES
The More Change scenario limits the expansion of existing community boundaries, with the pattern of development made up primarily of infill within downtowns and mixeduse neighborhoods. The scenario provides a greater mix of new housing options with an even greater percentage of multi-family, mixed-use housing, duplexes, and townhomes and more limited lower density, large-lot, single family development. To match the envisioned land use pattern of the More Change scenario, greater investments are allocated to alternative transportation improvements, and roadway funding is reduced to 55% of total transportation expenditures.
HUGHSON
TURLOCK
PATTERSON
Legend New Housing New Job Centers New Mixed-Use Areas
NEWMAN
Existing Development
Transportation Investment 56% Roadway
38% Transit
1% Aviation 5% Bike/Ped
Roadway Funding Breakdown
73% New Capacity
12% Maintenance & Rehab 8% Operational Improvements 7% Complete Streets
2014 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
67
The preferred scenario provides more transportation options and a compact urban form to preserve agricultural land and the smalltown feel of the region PREFERRED SCENARIO Input from the region’s local agencies, public, and elected officials was sought throughout the scenario development and selection process. The public desired a more compact urban form, the preservation of agricultural lands and natural resources, the maintenance of the region’s smalltown feel and rural atmosphere, and the provision of more transportation choices. Ultimately, after further modeling, analysis, and public input, the StanCOG Policy Board identified Scenario 3, Moderate Change, as the preferred scenario. This scenario represents the 2014 RTP/ SCS. It provides a flexible blueprint for accommodating growth over the life of the Plan, while integrating land use with transportation planning strategy considerations to address the region’s anticipated growth.
68
Chapter 4: Valley Vision Stanislaus Planning Process
Table 4.1 Summary Description of the RTP/SCS Scenarios Scenario
1 - Historical Trend
Land Use
Transportation
Growth occurs adjacent to existing communities
Focus on roadway expansion
Limited infill development
Driving remains the dominant transportation option
New development expands existing community boundaries
2 - New Trend
3 - Moderate Change
4 - More Change
Some growth occurs adjacent to existing communities
Less focus on roadway expansion
Some growth occurs as infill
More focus on transit service
A mixture of densities are developed
More focus on bicycle / pedestrian infrastructure
Limited expansion of community boundaries
Further reduced focus on roadway expansion
Focus on infill development
More advanced transit modes provided
Greater mixture of housing types
Increase focus on complete streets
Very limited expansion of community boundaries
Most focus on transit system development
Downtown and neighborhood infill development focused
Least focus on roadway expansion
Services, employment, and housing in close proximity
Reduced need for long commutes
2014 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
69
This page is intentionally left blank
70
Chapter 4: Valley Vision Stanislaus Planning Process
