metro vision 2035 regional growth scenarios. scenario workshop

Metro Vision 2035

Regional Growth Scenarios

Scenario Workshop

Scenario Purpose

• Educational process– “what if” analysis

• What happens to some of Metro Vision’s key assumptions

– Food for thought• To guide the Board and its committees

as they craft the 2035 plan

2030 Urban Growth Boundary/Area and 2004 Urban Area

2030 UGB/A

2004 Urbanized Area

Urban Centers

Activity Centers

Mixed Use Centers

Regional Corridors

Themes Discussed

• Land use variations

• Transportation variations

• Pricing variations

Measures

• Long list

• Measures selected

• Measures not selected

12 Measures

• Transportation– Vehicle miles traveled– Transit Trips– Vehicle hours of delay– Access to Transit (EJ)

12 Measures

• Land Use– Additional land used for

development– Households and jobs near transit– Public infrastructure costs– Population and jobs in urban centers– Population and jobs in the Denver

CBD

12 Measures

• Environmental– Air pollutant emissions– Water demand– Wastewater treatment impact

Scenario Descriptions

Policy dimensionsUrban Footprint

Transportation Investment

Priorities

Compact Expanded

Highways

Transit

The Scenarios

• Six scenarios covering key parts of this “policy space”

Policy dimensionsUrban Footprint

Transportation Investment

Priorities

Compact Expanded

Highways

Transit

D

A B C

E

F

Scenario B: Metro Vision Trend

Small increase in urban growth boundary (UGB)

Arterials/collectors added to new urban areas

Roads

Transit

Urban footprint (2030)

Urban footprint (2035)

Scenario A: Compact Urban Footprint

No increase in urban growth boundary (UGB)

Urban footprint (2030 and 2035)

No change to roads and transit in 2030 plan

Roads

Transit

Scenario C: Expanded Urban Footprint

Larger increase in urban growth boundary (UGB)

Roads

Transit

Urban footprint (2030)

Urban footprint (2035)

Arterials/collectors added to new urban areas

Scenario D: Metro Vision Trend Plus Highways

Small increase in urban growth boundary (UGB)

Urban footprint (2030)

Add highway improvements to 2030 transportation plan

Highway improvements

Roads

Urban footprint (2035)

Scenario E: Compact Urban Footprint Plus Transit

No increase in urban growth boundary (UGB)

Urban Footprint (2030 and 2035)

Add transit improvements to 2030 transportation plan

Roads

Transit

Transit Improvements

Scenario F: Compact Urban Footprint Plus Transit Plus Pricing

Double driving costs and make transit free

No increase in urban growth boundary (UGB)

Urban Footprint (2030 and 2035)

Add transit improvements to 2030 transportation plan

Roads

Transit

Transit Improvements

Emerging Themes

Themes/messages

• Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and congestion will increase substantially compared to today– Adding 1.56 M more people!

• Some scenario outcomes can only be achieved with additional transportation investment

Themes/Messages

• Transportation performance improves in scenarios with more compact development– More development in urban centers– More transit use– More bike/pedestrian trips– Shorter trip lengths for autos

Themes/Messages

• Expanding the region’s “footprint” without new transportation funding is problematic– Development extends to the

fringes– Have only 2030 RTP to

accommodate this growth• The growth overloads key facilities

– C-470, I-70 East, I-25 North, etc.

Themes/Messages

• We can reduce delay if we invest additional funding in highway infrastructure

• This will also increase total Vehicle Miles Traveled

Themes/Messages

• If the growth area is constrained, investing in more transit capacity does not make a significant difference (A vs. E) – The 2030 RTP transit network already

serves the 2030 UGB/A well– Lines and services added in E serve

smaller markets– The return on this additional investment is

marginal

Themes/Messages

• Pricing (Scenario F) results in the most significant decrease in hours of delay

• Pricing increases transit ridership substantially by changing behavior– But at what price?

Policy dimensionsUrban Footprint

Transportation Investment

Priorities

Compact Expanded

Highways

Transit

D

A B C

E

F

Data Descriptions

Transportation

• Vehicle miles traveled

• Transit Trips

• Vehicle hours of delay

• Access to Transit (EJ)

Environmental

• Air pollutant emissions

• Water demand

• Wastewater treatment impact

Land Use

• Additional land used for development

• Households and jobs near transit• Public infrastructure costs• Population and jobs in urban

centers• Population and jobs in the Denver

CBD

Better access to transit

More transit use

Less driving

Less congestion

Cleaner air

More efficient water use

Less need for new water treatment facilities

Less spending on infrastructure

Less land consumption

More development

in urban centers

More development

downtown

More development around transit

Land Use

Transportation

Environment

Worse

Better

Better access to transit

More transit use

Less driving

Less congestion

Cleaner air

More efficient water use

Less need for new water treatment facilities

Less spending on infrastructure

Less land consumption

More development

in urban centers

More development

downtown

More development around transit

Scenario B:Metro Vision Trend

Land Use

Transportation

Environment

B

Metro Vision TrendB

Better access to transit

More transit use

Less driving

Less congestion

Cleaner air

More efficient water use

Less need for new water treatment facilities

Less spending on infrastructure

Less land consumption

More development

in urban centers

More development

downtown

More development around transit

Scenario A:Compact Urban Footprint

Land Use

Transportation

EnvironmentCompact Urban Footprint

Metro Vision Trend

A

B

A

B

Better access to transit

More transit use

Less driving

Less congestion

Cleaner air

More efficient water use

Less need for new water treatment facilities

Less spending on infrastructure

Less land consumption

More development

in urban centers

More development

downtown

More development around transit

Scenario C:Expanded Urban Footprint

Land Use

Transportation

EnvironmentExpanded Urban Footprint

Metro Vision Trend

C

B

B

C

Better access to transit

More transit use

Less driving

Less congestion

Cleaner air

More efficient water use

Less need for new water treatment facilities

Less spending on infrastructure

Less land consumption

More development

in urban centers

More development

downtown

More development around transit

Scenario D:Metro Vision Trend+ Highways

Land Use

Transportation

Environment

Metro Vision Trend + Highways

Metro Vision Trend

D

B

B

D

Better access to transit

More transit use

Less driving

Less congestion

Cleaner air

More efficient water use

Less need for new water treatment facilities

Less spending on infrastructure

Less land consumption

More development

in urban centers

More development

downtown

More development around transit

Scenario E:Compact Urban Footprint + Transit

Land Use

Transportation

EnvironmentCompact Urban Footprint

Metro Vision Trend

A

B

Compact Urban Footprint +Transit

E

A

B

E

Better access to transit

More transit use

Less driving

Less congestion

Cleaner air

More efficient water use

Less need for new water treatment facilities

Less spending on infrastructure

Less land consumption

More development

in urban centers

More development

downtown

More development around transit

Scenario F:Compact Urban Footprint +Transit +Pricing

Land Use

Transportation

EnvironmentCompact Urban Footprint

Metro Vision Trend

A

B

Compact Urban Footprint + Transit

E

Compact Urban Footprint + Transit + Pricing

F

A

B

EF

Questions?

Next Steps

Plan Process

• 2035 Update Committee– UGB target– Criteria for UGB consideration

• TAC– Transportation facility criteria

• Draft plan in June

• Board action in December