opening access to scenario planning tools

7/31/2019 Opening Access to Scenario Planning Tools

1/60


2/60

Opening Access to Scenario Planning ToolsJim Holwa, C.J. Gabbe, Frank Hebbert, Jason Lall,

Robert Matthews, and Ra Qua

Poli Fous Rport Sris

The polic ocus report series is published b the Lincoln Institute o Land Polic to address

timel public polic issues relating to land use, land markets, and propert taxation. Each report

is designed to bridge the gap between theor and practice b combining research ndings, case

studies, and contributions rom scholars in a variet o academic disciplines, and rom proes-

sional practitioners, local ocials, and citizens in diverse communities.

About Tis Rport

This report examines the current state o scenario planning, the promise o scenario planning

tools to help us prepare or the uture, the challenges to expanding their use, and their potential

to open access to the planning process. It makes specic recommendations to advance the use

o scenarios and scenario planning tools, including development o an online platorm to acilitate

collaboration, capacit building, and open source activities among scenario tool developers,

urban planners, and other tools users.

The authors review existing research and experience with scenario planning and document the

results o a series o workshops and conversations convened b the Lincoln Institute o Land

Polic and the Sonoran Institute in 2010 and 2011. Participants included proessional and citizen

planners who practice scenario planning, academics researching scenario planning, and experts

who develop tools to support scenario planning. The goals o this ongoing project are to snthesize

what is known about how scenarios are being used or communit and regional planning,

collect data on the tools being used to assist this planning, and identi the most important

means to advance scenario planning to benet uture communit needs. A new website,

www.ScenarioPlanningTools.org, will be the online host or this initiative.

Copright 2012 b Lincoln Institute o Land Polic

All rights reserved.

113 Brattle Street

Cambridge, MA 02138-3400 USA

Phone: 617-661-3016 or 800-526-3873

Fax: 617-661-7235 or 800-526-3944

Email: [email protected]

Web: www.lincolninst.edu

ISBN 978-1-55844-231-3

Polic Focus Report/Code PF031

On The cOveR:

Visualizations or Superstition Vistas

in Arizona. See pages 5 and 15.


3/60

o p e n i n g a c c e s s t o s c e n a r i o p l a n n i n g t o o l s 1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

cotts

2 exuti Summar

4 captr 1. Sario Plaigs Pottial

5 The Goal o Scenario Planning

5 Ke Concepts

9 captr 2. Sario Plaig Prati: Stat o t Art

10 The Uses and Users o Scenarios

14 Emerging Practice

17 Summar

18 captr 3. Sario Plaig Tools: Stat o t Art

20 Leading Scenario Planning Tools

26 The Future o Scenario Planning Tools

29 Summar

30 captr 4. callgs to Usig Sario Plaig Tools

31 Skepticism and Lack o Awareness

33 Complexit and High Cost

34 Diculties in Obtaining and Using Data

35 Lack o Interoperabilit across Tools

36 Need or Foresight and Anticipation

37 Summar

38 captr 5. Opportuitis to expad t Us o Sario Plaig Tools

38 Encouraging Acceptance o Scenario Planning and Tools

39 Reducing Complexit and Cost

40 Opening Access to Data

41 Enhancing Interoperabilit across Tools

42 Advancing Foresight and Anticipation

43 Creating an Open Environment or Collaborative Action

45 captr 6. Rommdatios or Atio

49 Glossar

50 Rrs

51 Rsours

52 Appdix: Sario Plaig Tools Sur

54 Akowldgmts ad Worksop Partiipats

56 About t Autors

57 About t Liol Istitut o Lad Poli, t Soora Istitut,

ad Wstr Lads ad commuitis


4/60

2 p o l i c y f o c u s r e p o r t L i n c o L n i n s t i t u t e o f L a n d P o L i c y

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Executive Summary

views about property rights and the role

o government. Broader and more eective

civic engagement is needed to ensure com-

munity support or decisions about develop-

ment and other land-related policies and

public investments. The traditional predict-

and-plan paradigm is inadequate to address

all o these challenges. We need to move

toward developing and implementing

planning tools and processes that oster

anticipation and adaptation.

Scenario planning is a promising method

to help communities respond to these chal-

lenges. It deals with a range o potential

utures, whether or regional visioning, com-

prehensive planning, or project site planning,

In the ace o increasing complexity and

uncertainty, planners, public ocials,

and community residents need new tools

to anticipate and shape the uture. This

report examines the current state o scenar-

io planning and scenario planning tools that

can help communities and regions prepare

or that uture through a variety o visioning,

land use, transportation, and other planning

eorts. It approaches this topic as an oppor-

tunity or using open source sotware and

processes to oster the development, better

understanding, and use o these tools.

Decisions about the uture are oten con-

troversial due to competing economic inter-

ests, dierent cultural values, and divergent

Partiipats i a Urba

Lad Istitut Ralit

ck sario plaig

xris i Arizoa

us LeGObriks to

idiat loatios or

w dlopmt.

RAyQUAy


5/60


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

and provides decision makers, experts, and

the public better and more comprehensible in-

ormation on what these utures might mean

or their communities. However, despite theirpotential, scenario planning tools have not

been employed widely or a number o reasons.

Three concepts are considered to be critical

to the scenario planning and tool-building

process: collaboration, capacity building, and

creation o an open environment or engage-

ment. Collaborative problem solving acilitates

resolution o interrelated issues that cannot be

resolved by one organization alone. Capacity

building is needed to enable individuals and or-

ganizations to apply scenario planning methods

and tools eectively to their specic planning

concerns. An open environment or inormation

sharing and education will help accelerate the

use and improvement o scenario planning

tools in multiple settings.

The Lincoln Institute o Land Policy and

Sonoran Institute, with other partners, have

convened a community o sotware developers,

planners, and other tool users concerned with

the advancement o scenario planning. Partici-

pants in our recent workshops concluded that

uture eorts should ocus on ve key opportu-

nities: increasing understanding and acceptance

o scenario planning; overcoming the complexity

and cost o tools; improving access to existing

data; enhancing interoperability among dier-

ent tools; and creating mechanisms to integrate

oresight and anticipation into planning pro-

cesses and implementation.

The emergence o new and improved sce-

nario planning tools over the last 10 years oers

promise that the use o scenario planning can

increase and that the goal o providing open

access to the ull potential o scenario planning

tools is within reach. This report recommendsseven immediate actions that are either in

process or could be implemented quickly to

acilitate this goal. The community o tool

developers and users is already working on

various related eorts, and a new website,

www.ScenarioPlanningTools.org, will be the

online host or this initiative.

Create an online platform to oster

collaboration in the development and

application o scenario planning tools. Develop a curriculum on scenario

planning or the next generation o

proessional and citizen planners.

Establish a model process or conducting

scenario planning and show how it can be used

with existing community planning processes.

Illustrate different uses of scenario

planning tools in various stages o the

planning process to acilitate increased use

o scenario planning.

Establish data standards to improve

inormation sharing, starting with develop-

ment and place types or land use patterns.

Initiate a model collaborative project

to demonstrate the potential or integrated

tools, models, and modules.

Advance new concepts o anticipatory gov-

ernance by using oresight and anticipation

to address uncertainty and uture challenges.


6/60


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C h a p t e r 1

Scenario Plannings Potential

Rsidts

partiipat i a

dsig arrtt

i nort

vaour.

DESIGN

CENTREFOR

SUSTAINABILITy,UNIVERSITyOFBRITISH

COLUMBIA

,VANCOUVER.

Planning or the uture o the places

we inhabit has become increasingly

challenging. The social, economic,

environmental, and inrastructure

systems that sustain us have become more

complex and interdependent, and uncer-

tainty about uture changes remains high.

A deeper understanding o sustainability has

extended the planning horizon to 50 years

and beyond, ar longer than the terms o

most politicians and the careers o todays

planners and administrators.

Communities, cities, and regions across

the country ace a wide range o concerns

in making their places more sustainable,

and responding to these challenges oten

requires anticipating uture conditions and

making decisions about a communitys

policy options, community services, and

inrastructure investments. Such decisions

may be controversial because o competing

economic interests, diering cultural values,

and divergent political views on issues such

as property rights and the role o government.

In recent years these conficts have become

even more acute. Consequently, broader

and more eective civic engagement is

needed to ensure community support or

decisions about development policies and

investments in a communitys uture.

Decision makers generally seek simplicity

in the process o public policy development,


7/60


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

but this is dicult to achieve in an environ-

ment o complexity, uncertainty, long-term

planning horizons, and broad civic engage-

ment. Over the last ew decades scenarioplanning has emerged as a promising method

to help decisions makers and the public re-

spond to these challenges. Tools that acilitate

the use and analysis o scenarios have not

been widely employed, although they have

the potential to inorm a large number o

planning activities. This report explores ways

to expand the development and eective use

o scenario planning by opening up access

to the tools or both users and tool developers.

Th e G O AL O F

S c en AR IO PL An n In G

Complexity and uncertainty need not be

barriers to planning the long-term uture.

While it is impossible to optimize or every

possible benecial outcome or easible

uture, scenario planning is designed to

put better inormation about alternative

utures in the hands o decision makers,

experts, and the public. Emerging methods

and tools can enable new approaches to

planning that were not even envisioned

by the proession a decade ago (gure 1).

The goal o scenario planning is toprovide a comprehensive view o the inter-

related pros and cons o potential utures by

breaking out o traditional decision-making

silos. As uncertainty increases and available

resources decrease, it becomes more impor-

tant to consider the ull range o emerging

conditions and the communitys ability to

adopt policies and pursue investments that

will be resilient across a variety o potential

utures. Scenario planning is an eective way

to speciy and assess these utures, whether

or regional visioning, comprehensive plan-

ning, or project site planning (Kwartler

and Longo 2008).

Key c O n c ePTS

Three concepts are recognized as being

critical to the scenario planning and tool-

building process: collaboration, capacity

building, and creation o an open envi-

ronment or engagement.

F i g u r e 1

A Possibl Sario or a Dowtow Trasit Stop i Suprstitio vistas i Arizoa

Source: Fregonese Associates, Inc.


8/60


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Collaboration

Collaborative problem solving acilitates res-

olution o interrelated issues that previouslyseemed too complex or one organization to

resolve alone. An important aspect o collab-

oration is inclusive and authentic dialogue

that augments individual and organizational

capacity to engage in collective problem

solving (Innes and Booher 2010).

Knowledge o the problem at hand and

the shared values and ideas o other stake-

holders increases the collective ability to

innovate and achieve solutions. Another

element o eective collaboration is the

provision o open access to inormation or

all stakeholders and a orum where engage-

ment and dialogue is open to all.

The types o organizations and indivi-

duals that need to participate in this process

can be grouped into several categories, with

the recognition that some individuals may

identiy with more than one group.

Sario plaig ad tool adoats:

Organizations and individuals interested

in urthering the use o scenario planning

and scenario planning tools through

outreach, unding, and other activities;

Tool dloprs: Planning rms, univer-

sities, nonprot organizations, or sotware

developers who are writing, selling,

and supporting sotware or scenario

planning;

Prossioal ad itiz plars:

Government agencies, organizations,

and individuals using scenario planning

and scenario planning tools within

public planning processes; and

Aadmi duators ad rsarrs:

Faculty and researchers working, study-

ing, and conducting research to advance

scenario planning tools within a univer-

sity, private consulting rm, or nonprot

organization.

Capacity Building

Scenario planning is a not an end in itsel,

but rather a general method used within alarger planning context to address commu-

nity or regional issues. The current capacity

o planning proessionals to apply scenario

planning is oten limited by their lack o

knowledge o the method and limited

access to the available tools. Scenario plan-

ning continues to evolve as new techniques

are developed in public policy practice that

draw on research in elds beyond regional

and community planning, such as climate

change adaptation and water resource

management. A transer o knowledge and

expertise rom these and related elds is

needed to incorporate these new techniques

into community and regional planning and

to adapt the current generation o scenario

planning tools or uture situations.

Signicant resources, including time,

data, expertise, and unds, are also required

to use the scenario planning processes and

tools discussed in this report. The capacity

o organizations and individuals to use

scenario planning processes and tools is a

unction o the knowledge o those involved

and the ability o the organization to com-

mit resources to the eort. Enhancing the

capacity o users, organizations, and tool

developers through an open environment

o inormation sharing and education

will accelerate and improve their use

over time.

Open Source Environment

The ull potential or collaboration and

capacity building is not likely to be realized

in the same environment that gave rise to

existing scenario planning tools. Their de-

velopment over the last decade has been

in a closed environment, with each tool

carving out its own, oten proprietary,

market. Interaction among users occurred


9/60


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

F i g u r e 2

Sussul commuitis Oli Toolkit Iormatioexag (ScOTi)

primarily among those using a particular

scenario planning tool or underlying geo-

graphic inormation system (GIS) platorm.

This approach is inadquate to address thechallenges involved in expanding the use

o scenario planning and scenario planning

tools. Collaboration is now being acilitated

by Internet-enabled tools that create open

environments or authentic dialogue, chang-

ing the model or advancing science and

policy (Nielsen 2012).

One concept that has been demonstrated

to create environments o open collaboration

and capacity building is known as open

source. In sotware development, where it

originated, this concept means that a group

openly collaborates to create a product or

service, which is then made reely available

to all. In the case o sotware, this also in-

volves open access to the underlying source

code o the program, hence the terms

open and source.

Many people who use ree sotware

such as Wikipedia and Mozilla Fireox are

amiliar with open source products. Yet,

open source embodies more than specic

products. It is a way o thinking and ap-

proaching complex problems, predicated

on the idea that a better result can be orged

through collaboration and exchange rather

than through traditional production methods

(box 1, p. 8). In simple terms, open source

is about a share-and-share-alike philosophy

that can be applied to both the development

o scenario planning tools and the approach

taken to solve community and regional

problems.

Many in the planning eld are amiliar

with case studies and best practices, and

the concept o compiling them is, at its root,

similar to open source collaboration and

Source: Sonoran Institute.

standards. Communities, institutions, and

rms disseminate successes and ailures so

that others can learn, modiy, and adapt.

The Successul Communities Online Toolkit

(Sonoran Institute 2012) is such an example

(gure 2). Ideally, these lessons would be

shared through both physical and virtual

networks. In addition, a tool that allows

others to comment and improve on planning

problem statements, methods, data, and

best practices, and then makes these rene-

ments available to all users, is one o many

potential outcomes in applying open source

thinking to planning problems.


10/60


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

B o x 1

Op Sour Tikig

The core concept o open source is the reedom to obtain and modi the source code

o existing sotware and carr out the creation o new sotware and tools through an

open, collaborative process. Technolog provides the unctionalit to acilitate collaboration

over distance and time, while online bug tracking and automated testing and code confict

resolution make it easier to build open source tools. An open source approach, however,

does not mean the sotware is ree. The costs o sotware maintenance and installation,

data management, training, and stang continue to all primaril on the user. Related to

GIS applications, examples o such development environments are MapWindows, OsGeo,

and Open Geospatial Consortium.

People are the most important aspect o open source eorts because the intellectual capital

o programmers, coders, tinkerers, designers, and users provides the resources required to

build sotware collaborativel. In addition, legal rameworks in the orm o special open source

licenses allow participants to clearl understand the use o intellectual contributions and

provide rules that guard against unair use or misuse. A technical background is not neces-

sar to be an open source contributor. In act, eedback and requests rom nontechnical

users provide important guidance to improve tools and enhance the user experience.

Open source thinking does not eliminate the need or proprietar sstems, nor does it dis-

courage innovation or devalue proprietar tools; rather it helps to improve them. Proprietar

sstems can participate in and benet rom an environment o collaboration, particularl

through the adoption o consistent data input and output standards and improved interoper-

abilit among dierent sotware tools. Additionall, open source eorts can signicantl in-

crease the points o interaction with tools or new users and developers, thus beneting both

open source and proprietar sstems.

Sotware provided at no cost under an open source license need not eliminate nancial

benets rom supporting, enhancing, and distributing such sotware. Open source approaches

can actuall generate economic value through service models that allow tool developers and

consultants to charge or value added around open source sotware, as well as increase

returns to proprietar products through the secondar eects o increasing the number

and diversit o users (Krishnamurth 2005; Riehle 2007).

More broadl, open source approaches and thinking help participants succeed in an environ-

ment that promotes urther adoption o scenario planning practice and enlarges the role or

open source and proprietar tools. Experience indicates that an open source approach to tool

interoperabilit and access to data can increase the relevance, adoption, and usabilit o all

scenario planning tools, as well as knowledge about the strengths and appropriate market

niches o the dierent tools.


11/60


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C h a p t e r 2

Scenario Planning Practice:State o the Art

Scenario planning methods have

been used in the business commu-

nity since the 1960s, but their

application or urban and regional

planning has been inconsistent (Hopkins andZapata 2007). Over the last decade, how-

ever, scenario planning has begun to fourish,

ueled by widely recognized successes, such

as Envision Utah and other regional initia-

tives; by increasing uncertainty in social,

economic, and environmental systems; and

by aster computing, advances in visualiza-

tion sotware, and increased availability o

GIS and other data necessary to model

these systems (gure 3).

Scenario planning today is being used

to address a variety o planning issues

across a wide range o scales, rom large-scale natural resource management to the

evaluation o project site designs. In act,

scenario planning is now a required part

o some public planning processes, includ-

ing legislatively mandated greenhouse gas

(GHG) reduction planning in Caliornia

and Oregon and U.S. Department o Hous-

ing and Urban Development (HUD) grants

F i g u r e 3

estimats o Grous Gas Rdutios Basd o Altrati Lad Us Optios i Sattl, Wasigto

n estmtd gHg dctns

n empymnt

n Hsn

Source: Urban Land Institute/Seattle.


12/60


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

or community sustainability. Scenario plan-

ning processes can vary substantially based

on the issue being addressed, the institutions

conducting the planning, and the inorma-tion and resources available.

This report ocuses on scenario plan-

ning used with community and regional

visioning, land use, transportation, and other

planning eorts. Scenario planning in this

context is requently acilitated with GIS

sketch planning tools that allow the devel-

opment and analysis o land use and

transportation scenarios.

Th e U S eS An D U S eR S

O F S c en AR IO S

Urban and regional scenario planning today

alls on a continuum between two types o

scenario planning: normative and explor-

atory. Normative scenario planning is used

to articulate the values o a community or

region by eliciting peoples opinions about

dierent possible visions o the uture

(Hopkins and Zapata 2007).

Comparing the pros and cons o several

scenarios allows a variety o values to be iden-

tied, in order to derive a common set o

values or goals or the uture o the commu-

nity or region. In this type o planning the

scenarios are requently applied to major

policy decisions that could have a substantial

impact on the uture orm o the commu-

nity, such as unding and locating transpor-

tation inrastructure or changing land use

regulations. Each scenario is based on how

the uture may play out under a dierent

policy approach.

Groups o scenarios are oten bookended

by scenarios that represent a range between

least and most aggressive actions relative to

a baseline business-as-usual or no action

alternative. Assessment o the impacts o

each scenario on indicators such as trac

congestion, inrastructure costs, air quality,

open space, or aordable housing can help

people articulate the pros and cons o each

impact, and thus begin to articulate values

and goals or the uture. This is the type o

scenario planning that has been used mostcommonly by local and regional planners

and was notably successul in the Envision

Utah planning process.

The second type, exploratory scenario

planning, is used to anticipate the impact

that dierent uture conditions may have

on values, policies, or goals that have been

established or are being considered (Weber

2006). The desired end result o such a pro-

cess is a set o robust or contingent strategies

that policy makers can use to achieve agreed-

upon goals under a wide variety o possible

but uncertain utures. These scenarios are

typically based on changes in environmen-

tal, social, or economic actors that could

aect the uture o the community, yet

are beyond local control, such as aging o

the population, the state o the economy,

population growth rates, and climate

change.

Each scenario is based on a dierent

possible end state o one or more o these

actors, which are oten selected to represent

the ull range o possible uture conditions.

Assessment o how each scenario aects

the communitys ability to achieve its goals

can be used to identiy how potential change

can create opportunities or threats and

determine what strategies can be used to

avoid undesired changes or promote

desired outcomes.

The scenario planning tools described

in this report are ound within the ull range

o the continuum between normative and

exploratory. They are used to develop land

use and transportation scenarios at a range

o scales, engage the public in participatory

planning processes, and create visualizations

or values and goal setting. The scenarios

may be related to a desired community

orm, such as maximizing growth around


13/60


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

transit, identiying development and rede-

velopment opportunities, testing and rening

regional transportation plans, or developing

strategies or climate change mitigation and

adaptation (gure 4). Exploratory scenario

planning is expected to become more

important or developing sustainable ap-

proaches to address increasing uncertainty.The ollowing sections describe three

types o scenario planning users. The asso-

ciated case examples introduce our specic

tools that are described in more detail in

chapter 3: CommunityViz, Envision To-

morrow, INDEX, and I-PLACE3S.

City and County Users

Scenario planning uses within city and

county planning activities include:

comprehensiveandareaplanning;

transitcorridorandstationplanning;

neighborhoodplanning;

infrastructure(water,sewer,street,

and storm) planning;

projectimpactassessment;

climatechangemitigationand

adaptation strategies development; and

regulatoryanalysis.

For comprehensive and regional plans,

a variety o existing tools are available to

engage the public in a workshop setting

or to develop scenarios o dierent develop-

ment alternatives. The scenarios help test

policies and prioritize strategies. Scenarios

can also be utilized to demonstrate to stake-

holders how key uture conditions couldimpact their community and to consider

which approaches may be most robust

across a variety o potential uture conditions.

Ater a plan is completed, scenario plan-

ning tools can be used to monitor the

plans status during implementation.

At a smaller scale, scenario planning

tools can be used to develop and analyze

design alternatives at a site plan or building

scale or neighborhoods or transit stations

and corridors. They can also be used to

understand the inrastructure capacity and

demand timing implications o dierent

land uses in the uture. In addition, these

tools can be used to explore the implications

o various zoning assumptions or proposals

when rezoning or optimizing a communitys

zoning code is being considered.

F i g u r e 4

2030 GhG emissios Goals or Baltimor, Marlad

Source: Criterion Planners or Urban Land Institute/Baltimore.

Sequestration Areas

Sequestration & Renewable Power Generation Areas3 tons/capita/r Environmental Buers/Agriculture

15 tons/capita/r Managed Growth Areas

12 tons/capita/r Priorit Growth Areas

8 tons/capita/r Inll & Redevelopment Areas

2030 GhG emissio Goals


14/60


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

F i g u r e 5

Lad Us Paltt or Sario Sktigi elbur, Illiois

Sigl Famil

10 DU/acre

neT AcReS

Sigl Famil

16 DU/acre

hig Dsit

Rsidtial

30 DU/acre

Rtail

45 jobs/acre

Of

80 jobs/acre

Mixd-Us

45 jobs/acre

20 DU/acre

Park

Wid Farm

0.05 MW/acre

Istitutioal

12 jobs/acre

DU=Dwelling Units MW= Megawatts

Trasit Statio Ara, elbur, Illiois

Elburn, Illinois, with a population o approximately

4,000, is located about 50 miles west o downtown

Chicago. The Metra commuter rail system extendeda rail line to the community in 2005, with a station

about our or ve blocks rom Elburns downtown.

In 2004, in anticipation o the rail station, the

Urban Land Institute and the Campaign or Sen-

sible Growth organized a technical assistance panel

that worked with the community to identiy strategies

to accommodate inevitable growth while protecting

the communitys sense o place and liestyle.

One recommendation was to encourage transit-

oriented development (TOD) on a 300-acre site

southeast o the station. This site is now one o thecommunitys ocus areas or uture growth. Elburn

used INDEX in a ull-day digital charrette in

which 60 residents and ocials sketched alternative

plans or a TOD site. Each alternative was analyzed

or its impact on the community. Important design

goals in using the tool in this context were to

maintain the small block street grid o the adjacent

historic downtown and to protect wetlands on the

site as part o the communitys emerald necklace

o parks and streams that ring the downtown

(gure 5).

comprsi Pla,

Grad Jutio, colorado

In 2007, the City o Grand Junction initiated

a process to update its comprehensive plan, using

CommunityViz as part o the public engagement

process. The city hosted 27 citizen planner chip

games during which residents used chips to

indicate on a map where and at what density they

would like to see growth occur. The need or compact

development was a theme echoed in each game. The

results were collected, digitized, and analyzed with

CommunityViz, and then shared with the public in

subsequent workshops. As alternative land use plans

were developed during the process, CommunityViz

could dynamically update inormation into the

regional database to allow the testing o impacts

on the transportation system. This iterative processSource: Criterion Planners; Condon, Cavens,

and Miller (2008, 22).


15/60


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

eventually revealed a preerred alternative scenario,

and Grand Junctions comprehensive plan was

adopted in 2010.

Metropolitan Planning

Organization Users

Many scenario planning tools have been

developed to respond to regional growth

challenges, and thus are particularly well-

suited to planning on a large scale. Metro-

politan planning organizations (MPOs)

tend to use these tools to encompass a

geography beyond individual cities and

counties. Examples include regional trans-

portation plans (RTPs), integrated regional

land use and transportation plans, regional

visioning, and plans to reach GHG reduc-

tion targets. The tools are requently linked

with other models operated by MPOs,

such as economic models, transportation

models, and inrastructure models.

Bluprit, Saramto Ara

couil o Gormts

In 2003, the Sacramento Area Council o Govern-

ments (SACOG) launched an award-winning regional

growth analysis called Blueprint. The analysis o

six counties is based on a broad partnership o re-

gional stakeholders including employers, developers,

investors, the press, special interest groups, and citizens.

I-PLACE3S, an Internet-based planning tool, was

used to help SACOG work with elected ocials and

the public in dozens o interactive planning work-

shops. I-PLACE3S was used during the workshops

to provide real-time inormation about how dierent

growth alternatives would aect the regions trans-

portation system, air quality, housing, and natural

resource protection, among other issues. Output rom

I-PLACE3S was also used as input to the SACOG

regional travel model to estimate the impact o land

use alternatives on travel and the transportation net-

work. The result was a preerred Blueprint Scenario

that is used by SACOG with I-PLACE3S as a

comparative scenario to review development proposals

or its member agencies(gure 6).

F i g u r e 6

Prrrd Sario Map or t Bluprit Lad Us adTrasportatio Pla or t Saramto Rgio

Source: Sacramento Area Council o Governments.

Note: El Dorado Count was not able to directl participate in the Blueprint

project that led to the SACOG Boards adoption o the 2050 Blueprint con-

cept map and growth principles. The land use pattern shown on this maprepresents SACOGs expected growth in El Dorado Count through 2035,

the planning horizon ear o the next Metropolitan Transportation Plan. For

the other ve counties in the SACOG region this map represents Blueprint

growth through 2050.


16/60


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

coptual Lad Us Sario, Soutr

calioria Assoiatio o Gormts

The Conceptual Land Use Scenario (CLUS) was

developed or Southern Caliornia Association oGovernments (SCAG) in response to the passage o

Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32), which requires Calior-

nia to reduce statewide carbon emissions to 1990

levels by the year 2020, and Senate Bill 375

(SB 375), which calls or coordinated, regional

land use and transportation planning to help reduce

the states total carbon emissions. Because the region

had to go beyond existing policy to meet the anticipat-

ed carbon emissions reduction target, SCAG decided

to explore how ar land use planning could go toward

reducing regional vehicle miles traveled. SCAG usedEnvision Tomorrow to isolate specic land use

planning principles known to reduce tripssuch

as increased density, mixed land uses, and ocused

growth around transit areasto evaluate how such

changes might impact transportation patterns and

reduce regional emissions.

Nonproft, Business, and

Community Users

Nonprot, business, and community organi-

zations at local and regional levels are taking

a larger role in planning as they represent

interests as diverse as environmental protec-

tion, community health, and social equity.

These organizations oten use scenarios to

advocate or their interests and ensure that

their values are represented in decisions that

will guide local and regional growth. Many

o them also use scenario planning tools to

test alternatives and assert their positions

within community planning processes.

Some nonprot organizations, such as the

Sonoran Institute, work directly with local

jurisdictions to build technical capacity to

encourage the use o these tools.

Supportig yout i Dsigig Sustaiabl

nigboroods, Bosto, Massaustts

A group o university and educational partners used

CommunityViz or a program in which 200 Boston-

area high school students worked on projects related to

urban planning and sustainability. Students engaged

in eld studies beore they began building and com-

paring neighborhood-scale scenarios in their weeklycourses and intensive one-to-two-week-long workshops.

Suprstitio vistas, Arizoa

Superstition Vistas, a 275-square-mile tract o

undeveloped state trust land in Arizona, is one o

the largest pieces o land under single ownership in

any metropolitan area. Its sensitive location is in the

path o the ast-developing Sun Corridor that en-

compasses the region between Phoenix and Tucson.

Envision Tomorrow was used to create six large-

scale scenarios, ranging rom a trend scenario to

a compact, transit-oriented orm (gure 7). The

scenarios are being used to help guide uture decision

making about sustainable development or the

Superstition Vistas site (Holway 2011).

eM eR G In G PR Ac T Ic e

The scenario planning practices and cases

described above attempt to orecast what

may happen to regions and communities

under dierent policies that infuence urban

orm and transportation. The goals o these

planning eorts are to help communities

decide what they want or their uture

(normative) and how they will achieve these

aspirations under dierent possible uture

conditions (exploratory). Tool developers

acknowledge that the models included in

their tools are not intended to create a static

prediction o the uture; rather they create

a reasonable estimation o what might

occur given a dened set o assumptions.

Even with advances in the science o

systems modeling, the ability to predict the

uture is tenuous at best (Flyvbjerg, Holm,

and Buhl 2005; Lempert and Schlesinger

2000). It is impossible to model all o the unc-

tions and details o complex and dynamic

social and environmental systems (Cox

and Stephenson 2007), and their uture

is plagued with uncertainty (Brewer 1983;


17/60


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Pielke, Sarewitz, and Byerly 2000; Stewart

2000; Waddell 2011). This unpredictability

is exacerbated by unanticipated black

swan events in politics, economics, nature,

and technology, such as war and natural

disasters, that can radically change the

course o human events (Taleb 2007).

Although ew urban modelers would claim

that their work rises to a level o prediction,

when citizens are asked to choose a uture

and a decision path to get there, they are

eectively relying on a prediction that

ollowing that path will lead to the uture

o their choice.

Most physical planning today orecasts a

uture trend or chooses a desired uture and

then identies the decisions needed to serve

or create that uture (Hopkins and Zapata

2007). We are more likely to be able to

predict the impacts o policy interventions

i social and environmental systems are

stationary or change very slowly and the

planning horizon is relatively short (20 or

ewer years). In addition, the implications

o being wrong are less i unding or ser-

vices and inrastructure is abundant and

stable and the consequences o ailure are

not disastrous. Unortunately, today we ace

a number o issues, such as an interdepen-

dent global economy, cultural and demo-

graphic shits, climate change, and political

schism, which challenge such comortable

assumptions.

It is evident that the traditional planning

paradigm o predict-and-plan will not prove

adequate to address these and other planning

0 0.9 1.8 2.7 Miles

Rail Stop

Regional Rail

Freeway

Arizona Parkway

Major Road

Study Area

Existing Road

Creeks and Washes

Central Arizona Project

100 Year Floodplain

Proposed NetworkLow

Medium

High

Density

0 5,000 10,000 15,000 Feet

Tr o t six sarios produd b t Suprstitio

vistas osultats illustrat t rag o dlopmt itsit

ad dlopd ara. Sario X is t bas as wit o

omprsi plaig. Sario A as a mior dsit

iras or urrt trds i otr parts o t rgio.

Sario D ouss o ig-dsit urba trs.

Source: Superstition Vistas Consulting Team (2011).

enario X Scenario A Scenario D

G U R e 7

r Possibl Sarios or t Dlopmt o Suprstitio vistas i Arizoa


18/60


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

issues that society will ace over the next 50

years (Milly et al. 2008; National Research

Council 2010). In response, a new model

o anticipatory governance in planningpractice considers a range o possible utures,

prepares strategies to respond to one or

more o these utures, and then adapts to

those changes as the uture unolds over

time (Quay 2010).

The concept o anticipatory governance

entails three basic steps:

1. Use oresight and utures analysis:

Foresight is the act o looking orward to

what is possible. Though we cannot pre-

dict the uture, we can anticipate a wide

range o potential uture conditions. Di-

erent scenarios can be based on expert

opinion or developed using models that

estimate uture conditions across a range

o values or one or more actors. These

are not normative scenarios to be com-

pared or valued individually; rather they

are used in aggregate to explore the

sensitivity or risk o various actors (e. g.,

population, economy, climate) and their

range o impacts. Such analysis claries

uncertainty by helping planners identiy

and ocus on the most important aspects

o uture possibilities.

2. Anticipate adaptation: Using the

utures analysis, potential actions to

adapt to particular utures are identied.

These actions may be important to pre-

serve uture options or respond to specic

potential changes. Such actions may be

fexible, allowing incremental implemen-

tation, or they may be robust, working

well across a large number o possible

utures.

3. Monitor and adapt: On a regular

basis the actors related to the anticipated

utures are monitored to identiy changes

and the need to respond. As dierent sce-

narios become more or less likely, actions

anticipated or them can be implemented

or abandoned as appropriate. Given the

long time rame or issues such as regional

growth and climate change, planning and

monitoring time rames can span manydecades. Thus educating uture decision

makers and institutionalizing these

concepts is critical.

Most applications o anticipatory gover-

nance have occurred in elds tangential to

community and regional planning, such as

water resource planning, open space con-

servation, and climate change adaptation.

An exception is its use in Urban Land Insti-

tute (ULI) Reality Check regional visioning

projects in Maryland, Arizona, North Texas,

and the Puget Sound area. These tactile

exercises use LEGO bricks to allocate uture

growth on a game board map. Increasingly,

these activities are tied to GIS analysis

capabilities to generate multiple stakeholder

scenarios (oresight) and scenario analysis

methods to create robust regional planning

strategies (anticipation).

visio nort Txas,

DallasFort Wort, Txas

Vision North Texas (VNT) is a grassroots regional

visioning eort organized in 2005 as a public-

private-academic partnership among North Central

Texas Council o Governments, the North Texas

District Council o ULI, and the University o

Texas at Arlington. The intent o this eort is to

move the region away rom a business-as-usual

model and toward a more sustainable uture. VNT

conducted dozens o development principle exercises

using LEGObricksin dierent parts o the

region, resulting in an ensemble o uture urban

orm scenarios. Analysis revealed a range o per-

spectives toward the regions uture urban orm,yet

there was consensus about the need or alternatives

to inecient and unsustainable suburban sprawl.

Rather than selecting a single regional vision,

VNT crated our mutually inclusive visions (con-

nected centers, return on investment, diverse distinct


19/60


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

F I G U R e 8

visio nort Txas: Prrrd Psial Dlopmt Pattr or t yar 2050

Source: Vision Nor th Texas (2010, 20).

communities, and green region) that described the

range o opinions and options on uture urban orm.

An illustrative diagram o a preerred physical

development pattern that embraced these options

(gure 8), a set o 12 Guiding Principles, and

policy recommendations addressing eight topical

investment areas provide fexible guidance or the

regions communities to crat sustainable utures

that are unique to their location and politics.

SUMMARy

Scenario planning has proven to be an

eective method to address complex issues,

such as community and regional growth

planning, and new approaches are now

emerging to help address highly uncertain

challenges such as climate change adapta-

tion. A number o specic scenario planning

tools have proven eective or acilitating

a broad range o planning processes.

Key

Mixed Use Centers

Regional Center

Metropolitan Center

Policy Areas

Natural

Separate Communities

Inner Tier

Outer Tier

Rural

DALLASFORT WORTh


20/60


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C h a p t e r 3

Scenario Planning Tools:State o the Art

FREGONESEASSOCIATES,INC.

A xampl o a

mai strt pla tp

i t Wst villag

igborood o

Dallas, Txas. The specic types o scenario plan-ning tools examined here are oten

reerred to as sketch planning tools.

These computer-based land use

evaluation tools are usable at multiple scales,

including the site, district, city, and region.

They can be applied quickly to illustrate

and analyze land use and transportation

alternatives based on indicators related

to a communitys goals and issues.

Users o these tools typically create

scenarios o uture conditions in their com-

munity or region, requently based on the

expected impacts o public policies that will

dene a uture urban orm and transportation

network. They then use the tool to assess

how well each scenario aligns with the com-

munitys goals or the uture. These tools are

a subset o the more general category called

planning support systems (PSS) that includes

other methodologies such as econometricand agent-based behavioral modeling

(Brail 2008).

The scenario planning tools described

below are based on a GIS or database sys-

tem that can use dierent units o analysis.

Traditional tools started at the development

or place-type scale, but many o them are

now able to support modeling o individual

buildings. A development or place-type tool

might include a town center or residential

neighborhood, while a building-type tool

could include a retail store or a single-amily

home. One potential benet o starting at

the building scale as a unit o analysis is that

it can more closely refect the realities o

local urban development patterns. One o

the disadvantages in that type o analysis is

an increase in the data and setup require-

ments or the model.


21/60


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Like all modeling tools, scenario planning

tools have limitations. Since they are inher-

ently design-based, users must speciy a set

o assumptions or parameters. As a result,the scenario outputs are only as sound as

the data and assumptions that go into them.

Some o the tools are described as black

boxes, with internal calculations that may

not be transparent to all users, while others

expose these calculations, including both data

and assumptions. Nevertheless, the complex-

ity o the combined assumptions, design

decisions, and black box calculations means

that these tools have the potential to be

misunderstood or used incorrectly.

There is no substitute or a thorough

and transparent review and understanding

o all o the scenario assumptions. Greater

transparency o underlying methods can

be provided within the sotware itsel (e.g.,

CommunityViz) or through external docu-

mentation (e.g., INDEX). Being able to

show the work is important or catching

errors and increasing the level o trust in

the outputs that ultimately will inorm deci-

sion making. In act, most o the deault

assumptions are based on industry expertise

or best practices, and the ability to explore

changes to the underlying assumptions is an

explicit part o the scenario design process.

Scenario planning tools and the uses to

which they are being applied have improvedconsiderably since the 1990s (Brail 2008;

Condon, Cavens, and Miller 2009). These

planning tools have evolved to help proes-

sional and citizen planners analyze develop-

ment options and scenarios, and they may

include scal impact models; simple local

area population allocation models; water

and sewer capacity and design models; local

storm water and watershed food models;

trip generation models; and general and

detailed environmental impact models

(gure 9). Some o these tools have been

available commercially, while others have

been available as ree public domain or open

source sotware. Some are based on simple

spreadsheets, while others are highly

complex dynamic models.

Specialized tools, including UrbanSIM,

SLUETH, and What I ?, attempt to orecast

uture patterns o urban growth. They utilize

methods such as cellular automata, econo-

metric, and agent-based models to simulate

the complex dynamics o land use alloca-

tion and development. They share some

F I G U R e 9

cotig 2D ad 3D Iormatio to Aalz Urba coditios i Sattl, Wasigto


Source: Decision Commons, Universit o Washington.


22/60


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

similarities with the tools discussed in this

report, though they are much more complex.

One distinct dierence is that these special-

ized tools orecast uture land use as an out-

put o the model, while most sketch planning

tools use a uture land use alternative as input.

The high-end computational and data needs

o some tools can limit their useulness or

sketch planning, but they are requently used

as either a precursor to create alternatives

or input into sketch planning tools or to

examine sketch tool outputs in more detail.

L eAD In G S c en AR IO

PL An n In G TO O L S

Four scenario planning tools are used widely

today: CommunityViz, Envision Tomorrow,

I-PLACE3S, and INDEX. Each o them

provides a variety o eatures and unique

capabilities, yet there is substantial overlap

among them (table 1).

CommunityViz

CommunityViz is a 3D analysis and planning

extension or ArcGIS that provides scenario

planning, analysis, and 3D visualization

(Walker and Daniels 2011). It was created

by the Orton Family Foundation and released

in 2001. In 20042005, development and

operations were spun o into a new com-

pany called Placeways, which now markets

and develops CommunityViz in partner-

ship with the oundation.

The sotware helps communities and

TaBle 1

Summar o Sario Plaig Tools

Tool commuitviz eisio Tomorrow InDeX I-PLAce3S

Dlopr Orton Famil Foundation,

Middlebur, VT; Placewas,

Boulder, CO

Fregonese Associates, Portland,

OR (Envision Tomorrow+ to be

developed with Universit o

Utah)

Criterion Planners,

Portland, OR

Sacramento (CA) Area

Council o Governments

yar Dlopd 2001; 20042005 2004 1994 2002

Summar o Approa Spatial, GIS-based Spatial, GIS- and Excel-based Spatial, GIS-based Spatial, web-based

Sal Building to regional Building to regional Place tpe to regional Place tpe to regional

Op Sour Status Proprietar with open

access models

Open source, housed at

Universit o Utah

Proprietar, in transition

to open source

Open source

2D Map visualizatios yes yes yes yes

3D visualizatios yes No No No

cost $500 (Sel service

support) and $850 per

user (one ear supportand upgrades)

There is no cost associated

with downloading Envision

Tomorrow+.

A standard version o

Index PlanBuilder costs

$1900.

Contact SACOG

Rquirmts Version 4.12, is

compatible with ArcGIS

9.2 and up, including 10.

Windows XP, Windows

Vista, or Windows 7

(with MS .Net Framework

2.0 and DirectX 9.0)

is required.

A Windows operating

sstem and at least the

basic version o ArcGISDesktop are required.

Requires Windows XP or Vista,

MS Oce 2000 Pro or greater,

and Esris ArcGIS desktop

sotware 9.3 or greater.

The tool supports all ArcGIS

license tpes (ArcView,

ArcEditor, and ArcIno).

Desktop tool requires

Windows, MS Oce 2000

Pro with Access, and

ArcGIS 9.3.

Web tool operates on

Windows or Linux servers

using a PostgreSQL/

PostGIS database and a

Pthon-centric application

eaturing Django, Mapnik,

GEO/OGR, ExtJS,

OpenLaers, and GeoExt.

Requires an Internet

browser, centralized

server, a JAVA virtual

engine, and access to an

Esri ArcGIS application

and license, which

EcoInteractive maintains.

I-PLACE3S works with

both the integrated

4-step travel model

that requires a current

Citilabs license, as wellas an external travel

model.


23/60


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

regions understand the implications o

planning decisions and scenarios. It oers

a range o tools or community design and

planning, including development o realistic3D models, build-out analysis, suitability

analysis, impact assessment, and growth

modeling. Public participation is a key ocus,

and the sotware includes numerous eatures

to support public workshops and interactive

sessions with diverse audiences. It has been

used in conjunction with chip games and

electronic meeting tools, and as a acilitation

tool to help groups understand and make

better planning decisions (gure 10).

Scenario 360, the scenario analysis com-

ponent, has easy-to-use exploration tools,

setup wizards or particular planning appli-

cations, standard impact calculations, and a

sophisticated geospatial ormula engine or

creating custom models and analyses. The

Common Impacts Wizard can produce

up to 16 custom indicators based on user-

entered ormulas. The Land Use Designer

allows land use scenarios to be sketched on

a map using predened or user-customized

land use types. Users create their own scena-

rios or a region or community starting with

existing GIS data and then sketch on the

map or speciy land use policies. Using built-in standard ormulas or their own custom

models, users measure how scenarios per-

orm relative to user-dened objectives.

A typical Scenario 360 analysis compares

the implications o three or our scenarios

using dozens or hundreds o indicators

displayed in charts, maps, and tables.

Weighted actors can be changed to show

how dierent values and priorities impact

the nal analysis. A real-time update capa-

bility allows users to change input settings,

assumptions, and weightings, or to edit

eatures on the map and get immediate

updates that result rom these changes.

Specialized map editing capabilities pro-

vide a wide range o sketch modes including

place types, chip games, land use painting

to create dierent options on a map, and

tight integration with ArcGIS templates and

sketch tools. Assumptions and values can be

changed on the fy to update the analysis.

F I G U R e 1 0

commuitviz Faturs ad Aalsis Tools

Source: Placewas.


24/60


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The Build-Out Wizard calculates the devel-

opment capacity o a scenario. Additional

tools are available or growth allocation,

suitability and risk analysis, ragmentationand optimization, and other planning unc-

tions. CommunityViz models and ormulas

are open, transparent, editable, and shar-

able. The tool also has the ability to connect

to other tools such as Microsot Excel or

specialized impact models or real-time

data sharing and updates.

The Scenario 3D component allows

users to build complex, interactive, photo-

realistic 3D scenes rom two dimensional

data, which can be explored with ArcGIS

fythrough technology or GoogleEarth, or

exported as 3D models in common CAD

and SketchUp ormats. A ModelBuilder3D

component also allows users to generate

realistic 3D models o objects such as

buildings and trees, or other tools such

as SketchUp can be used.

CommunityViz currently provides three

dierent methods o creating realistic 3D

models o proposed plans. The GoogleEarth

exporter makes .kml les compatible with

GoogleEarth, ArcGIS Explorer, and other

viewers. Scenario 3D, which comes with

CommunityViz, creates very realistic, small-

er-scale scenes that use SketchUp building

models and can be viewed with a ree viewer.

An ArcScene extension allows users to work

in the ArcGIS 3D environment. Community

Viz can be used with, but does not include,

an external travel model.

Envision Tomorrow

Envision Tomorrow began as a proprietary

toolkit used in the national planning prac-

tice o Fregonese Associates, Inc. Over time

demand increased or an open source version

usable by clients at dierent scales. At its core,

Envision Tomorrow is a Microsot Excel

and ArcGIS-based modeling and evaluation

tool that analyses growth and development

scenarios at a range o scales rom neigh-

borhood to regional.

It utilizes several components to develop

and evaluate land use scenarios. The Proto-type Builder is able to design buildings and

site plans and test their physical and nancial

easibility at a local level. It can be used to

estimate the physical and nancial easibility

o development regulations based on a

range o actors including parking, height

and use requirements, costs associated with

construction, ees, rents, and subsidies.

Although building prototype analysis alone

can be used or small-scale site scenarios,

the prototypes can also be combined, along

with open spaces, streets, and civic uses to

create a series o development types, such as

main street, mixed-use neighborhood, and

strip commercial. The development types

then orm the basis or land use scenarios at

the district, city, county, and regional scale.

With the Scenario Builder component,

users can paint the landscape to allocate

these development types across a study area.

This component concurrently allows the

creation and comparison o up to ve land

use scenarios. An Excel-based scenario spread-

sheet is dynamically linked to the tool and

maintains the scenario outputs such as

housing mix in a series o tabs or quick

comparison. Changes made to a scenario

are automatically reported in the spread-

sheet or instant monitoring. Users can ocus

on small areas or detailed design control or

zoom to a larger scenario with the small area

changes intact. Detailed scenario results are

exportable and reportable at any geography.

Envision Tomorrow has been used to

design small single-parcel alternatives or

cities such as Tulsa (gure 11), as well as

regional scenarios or the Chicago and South-

ern Caliornia areas. It does not include

an internal travel model, but is requently

used in conjunction with an external

travel model.


25/60


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Utahs Wasatch Front Regional Council

received a Sustainable Communities grant

rom HUD to und Envision Tomorrows

move to open source and establish a perma-nent home at the University o Utah. This

grant is also unding the expansion o a set

o tools, known as Envision Tomorrow+,

which includes 18 modules covering trans-

portation, housing, economics, environment,

and other planning elements. The modules

are being released as they are completed,

with anticipated release dates during 2012

and 2013.

INDEX

INDEX is an integrated suite o desktop

and web-based scenario planning tools or

neighborhoods, communities, and regions.

The tools operate on the desktop as an

ArcGIS extension and on the web as an

open source application. INDEX was intro-duced in 1994 by Criterion Planners or

land use, transportation, and environmen-

tal planners in public agencies and design

rms, and or university instructors.

INDEX applications usually begin with

benchmark measurements o existing con-

ditions to produce a strengths, weaknesses,

opportunities, and threats (SWOT) analysis

and create a rame o reerence or evaluat-

ing alternative utures. The tools are then

used to design and visualize scenarios, score

their perormance, and compare and rank

them in terms o goal achievement. Once

F I G U R e 1 1

PLAniTULSA comprsi Pla, Tulsa, Oklaoma (prepared with Envision Tomorrow)

Source: Fregonese Associates, Inc.


26/60


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

a preerred alternative is selected, its imple-

mentation can be evaluated incrementally

or goal consistency, and cumulative changes

can be measured with periodic progress

reports (gure 12).

INDEX uses a database o nested

geographies that start at the building level

and work up through parcels, census block

groups, trac analysis zones, local govern-

ment jurisdictions, subregions, and regions.

For integrated land use and transportation

analyses, it also includes distinct travel net-

works or walking, biking, transit, and motor

vehicles. INDEX scenario planning unc-

tions are organized in a series o modules

that culminate in a library o 150 indicators

that measure scenario perormance. This

library is organized into measurements o

demographics, land use, housing, employ-

ment, transportation, environment, energy,

and climate protection.

Scenarios can be visualized through use

o multimedia presentations and 3D

modeling. The modules include:

CaseDesignerforcreatingscenariosin

real time with stakeholders participating

in digital charrettes;

anROItoolforevaluatingrealestate

development easibility;

ascalimpacttoolforassessinglocal

government costs and benets;

SGWaterforwateruseandstormwater

modeling;

7Dsforestimatingchangesinwalk,bike,

transit, and auto use as a result o land

use and urban design actions;

LEED-NDConnections(Leadershipin

Energy and Environmental Design or

Neighborhood Development) or connec-

tivity analysis using LEED criteria;

CoolSpotsformodelingbuildingand

transportation energy use and GHG

emissions; and

aratingandweightingtoolforranking

scenarios by goal achievement.

The INDEX open source web tool is de-

signed or practitioners and members o the

public who have no special GIS or technical

modeling skills. To acilitate rapid set-up

and ease o use, it is preloaded with nation-

al data sets or the categories listed above.

These provide contextual and benchmark

inormation at the census block level. The

database can be expanded locally with addi-

tional data sets that can reach down to the

F I G U R e 1 2

InDeX Sario ealuatio Pross

Source:Criterion

Planners.


27/60


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

parcel and building levels. Users are able

to assemble scenarios by combining and

editing eatures online or by importing them

rom the desktop tool. Multiple scenarioscan be displayed or public evaluation and

preerence ranking.

I-PLACE3S

I-PLACE3S (Planning or Community Energy,

Economic, and Environmental Sustainability)

is a sotware tool that acilitates integrated

land use and transportation scenario plan-

ning. This web-based platorm creates land

use and transportation scenarios, conducts

detailed scenario analysis, and engages the

public in workshops using place types and

other variables (gure 13).

The original PLACE3S sotware appli-

cation was a desktop application developed

in the late 1990s in the public domain by

Parsons Brinckerho, Fregonese Associates,

Calthorpe Associates, and Space Imaging

and in collaboration with Esri. It was und-ed by the Caliornia Energy Commission,

the U.S. Department o Energy, the Sacra-

mento Area Council o Governments, the

Association o Bay Area Governments,

the City o San Diego, the San Diego

Association o Governments, the City o

Sacramento, the Georgia Regional Trans-

portation Authority, and the Caliornia

Department o Transportation.

In 2002, the Caliornia Energy Commis-

sion contracted with EcoInteractive, a sot-

ware development company, to convert the

desktop version o PLACE3S to an Internet

version o the land use model, now reerred

to as I-PLACE3S. The ormer PLACE3S

F I G U R e 1 3

Sampl Buildig ad Pla Tps or Publi Worksops Usig I-PLAce3S

Source: Sacramento Area Council o Governments.

cod ad nam exampls

DU/Ar

Rag

Far

Rag Dsriptio

Mixd Us Buildig Tps

RcORegional/

Commercial Oce 0.30.4

75% Retail

25% Oce

cncOCommunit/Neighborhood

Commercial/Oce 0.20.3

75% Retail

25% Oce

MU1Mixed Use

Emploment Focus1525 0.751+

45% Residential

40% Retail

15% Oce

MU2Mixed Use

Residential Focus6090 1.52.5

70% Residential

25% Retail

5% Oce

Op Spa Pla Tps

AGR Agriculture N/A N/A

F Forest N/A N/A

OS Open Space N/A N/A

P Parks N/A N/A


28/60


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

desktop version is no longer supported by

the various developers, although it is still

in use by some agencies.

Scenarios are developed using place typesbased on user-generated assumptions. The

tool has around 100 evaluation indicators,

including total jobs and dwelling units, den-

sity by land use type, a mix o uses (dened

by land use type), economic easibility, vehicle

miles traveled and vehicle trips per house-

hold, and change in walk/bike and transit

mode shares. This inormation can be exam-

ined or each scenario in a report or exported

to regional travel models. The indicators

or various scenarios or dierent subareas

within a scenario can be compared in a

report ormat.

I-PLACE3S has a built-in ROI unc-

tion and can estimate water and sewer fow

rates. It also has 4D unctionality, an energy

module that estimates gas and electric energy

consumption and emissions, and a health

module that estimates health attributes based

on urban orm. A number o new modules,

eatures, and tool updates have been devel-

oped by users including the Caliornia

Energy Commission and the Sacramento

Area Council o Governments.

Th e FU TU R e O F S c en AR IO

PL An n In G TO O L S

In many ways this report is a harbinger

o the uture o scenario planning tools.

To date, the growth in their use has been

primarily in a closed environment, with

each tool carving out its own, oten prop-

rietary, market silo. These tools generally

dont talk to one another, so they cannot

easily share data or unctionality. But this

incompatibility is changing as scenario tool

developers become more collaborative.

Some o the research in this arena ocuses

on the creation o generalized modules

that can be used by several tools. A module

is a sel-contained set o analytical methods

that addresses a specic set o indicators.

For example, a real estate nance module

might be developed to calculate a return

on investment or residual land value. Inthe current programming environment it

is possible to write such a module so it can

be used easily by dierent sotware programs.

Such a module could be developed once

and then used by all the current scenario

planning tools (gure 14).

The IPLACE3S inrastructure model

and the Envision Tomorrow + 7D trans-

portation modules being developed at the

University o Utah are examples o porta-

ble methods (or modules) that can be used

with other systems or tools. This type o

ramework approach means that advances

to the major scenario planning tools, i they

are amenable to open source approaches,

could include connections to other appli-

cations (both modules and new tools) rom

developers throughout the world. For exam-

ple, multiple tools might be connected to

advanced visualization engines, such as the

Decision Commons at the University o

Washington.

Some tools, such as CommunityViz,

support limited interoperability by providing

ways to import and link data to proprietary

and nonproprietary databases and spread-

sheets. While this process is currently consid-

ered best practice, data and model descrip-

tion standards will help advance a much

more seamless level o interoperability. All

o the platorms described here are linked

with Esris ArcGIS, although the direction

o new entrants in the eld points toward a

reduced reliance on Esri products (box 2).

Emerging Trends

Four broad trends in inormation technology

also have implications or uture applications

o scenario planning tools.

The rst is crowdsourcing, a nontradi-

tional way to collect data by asking people to


29/60


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

contribute an item o data, oten a personal

observation made while going about their

normal daily tasks. Online review sites such

as Zagat and Yelp are amiliar examples o

crowdsourced data. Internet-enabled cell

phones have greatly increased the opportu-

nity or such data collection. As part o their

311 inormation services, many cities now

have cell phone apps that allow individuals

to report grati, broken street lights, pot-

holes, and other local concerns. When people

encounter a problem, they can note it, take

a picture, and, i their cell phone has GPS,

record the location. OpenStreetMap.org is a

website that allows people to contribute spa-

tial inormation to a reely available map.

Crowdsource data can come rom voluntary

contributions or be derived by monitoring

activity patterns in existing city services,

such as 311 reports, 911 or complaint lines.

Second, trends in Internet usage point

to more people accessing online inormation

by using mobile browsers on their cell phones

or other devices rather than on traditional

computers (Horrigan 2009; Wortham 2009).

Mobile applications and websites that

present planning and scenario issues and

analysis will potentially reach many new

and untapped audiences

The third trend is the emergence o

web-based GIS that can provide powerul

mapping and analytical work entirely within

a web browser on a computer. Web mapping

tools also require less up-ront conguration

or the end user, and can be easily replicated

and updated in multiple locations. As online

mapping providers add more unctionality

and tools to their sites, users will become

more amiliar with web GIS, and more

developers will use web maps as the basis

or innovative tools. Applications like Google

Earth and MapQuest have already brought

GIS tools to the public, and many counties

now provide access to county assessor data

through such web applications. Planning

departments in cities are now beginning

to experiment with such systems to deliver

inormation and provide a way or people

to contribute their ideas as part o a

planning process.

F I G U R e 1 4

Iormatio exags amog Plaig Tools, Appliatio Moduls,ad Databas/GIS Platorms

Iormatio

exag Basd

o Data Stadards

Modul

X

Modul

y

Sario Plaig

Tool A

Sario Plaig

Tool B

Sario Plaig

Tool c

Databas/GIS Platorms


30/60


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

In addition to the our major commerciall available

tools, several others have been released recentl

or are in development.

Urba visio

This open source sotware sstem is used or visualiz-

ing alternative land use and transportation scenarios

at scales ranging rom individual neighborhoods to

large metropolitan areas. It is a server-client sstem

that extends the UrbanSim model to provide an inter-

active land use and transportation simulation and

visualization tool. The simulation outputs include the

prediction and analsis o alternative land use and

transportation policies and plans, including real estate

development and redevelopment at a parcel level.

The visualization outputs include interactive views

o 3D urban models created automaticall rom the

simulation outputs. The sstem supports f-through

and walk-through interaces to allow nontechnical

stakeholders to visualize and interpret the nature o

the proposed land use and probable outcomes rom

those simulations.

The project is a collaborative eort between the

Universit o Caliornia, Berkele and Purdue Univer-

sit. It is led b Proessors Paul Waddell o Berkele

and Daniel Aliaga and Bedrich Benes o Purdue, and

unded primaril b the Metropolitan Transportation

Commission o the San Francisco Ba Area, with

support rom research grants sponsored b the

National Science Foundation and Google, Inc.

Disio commos

Decision Commons is a research initiative o the

Universit o Washingtons Runstad Center or Real

Estate Studies. The project was created rom the

desire to design a revolutionar wa or urban govern-

ments to make decisions around dicult inrastructure

and land use issues, with unding rom HUDs Sustain-

able Communities Regional Planning Grant program.

B O X 2

emrgig Tools

Decision Commons provides cutting-edge, seamless

3D visualization o our citiesrom street level to the

regional scaleconnected to powerul analsis and

design tools. The result is the abilit to sketch alter-

native utures quickl and compare them side-b-side.

Stakeholders in the planning process will have eas

access to relevant inormation on environmental,

social, land use, transportation, real estate, and

econ-omic development issues.

This tool can visualize plausible uture conditions in

3D and displa high-level inormation through a graphic

dashboard to acilitate conversation and understand-

ing o complex problems. The sstem also supports

decision making through an interactive user experience

that allows participants to explore scenarios in real

time b adjusting designs or assumptions.

Rapid Fir

Rapid Fire was developed b Calthorpe Associates

or Vision Caliornia, a statewide planning eort und-

ed b the Caliornia High Speed Rail Authorit and the

Caliornia Strategic Growth Council to explore the role

o land use and transportation investments in meeting

the states environmental, scal, and public health

challenges. This comprehensive modeling tool has the

capabilit to inorm state, regional, and local agencies

and polic makers about climate, land use, and inra-

structure investment policies. This nonspatial, spread-

sheet-based sketch planning tool produces and evalu-

ates statewide, regional, count, and/or cit scenarios

across a range o metrics. It is based on empirical

data and the latest research on the role o land useand transportation sstems on automobile travel,

emissions, and land, energ, and water consumption.

The model produces results or a range o critical

metrics, including vehicle miles traveled; GHG emis-

sions rom cars and buildings; air pollution; uel use

and cost; public health impacts; building energ use

and cost; water use and cost; land consumption;


31/60


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Finally, as governments move more

services and inormation to online systems,

the underlying data should become more

available to a variety o potential users.This accessibility to data could also lead

to the development o many third-party

applications and analyses, which will oer

diverse ways to engage with local issues

and services. These new applications o

the data may extend benets in previously

unanticipated ways. For example, many

transit providers publish data about their

services in a structured, machine-readable

ormat. Google and other services retrieve

data rom hundreds o cities to provide

transit planning. The same data can also

be used by entirely dierent developers to

calculate transit-sheds o service coverage

or analytical purposes. As planning-related

data such as land use, tax rolls, and other

basic elements become available, scenario

planning tools will be able to take better

advantage o them.

All o these trends suggest that in the

near uture scenario planning tools will

connect more easily to a wider array o

inormation sources and oer expanded

opportunities or public engagement

in scenario planning processes.

SUMMARy

Over the last 10 years scenario planning

tools have advanced substantially and have

emerged as a key actor in acilitating the

integration o scenario planning within

broader planning processes, ranging rom

site planning to regional visioning. Just as

scenario planning is evolving to respond to

issues o high uncertainty such as climate

change adaptation, scenario planning tools

also will evolve in a direction o more fex-

ibility and utility. Yet, i these tools are to

continue to expand the use o scenario plan-

ning, a number o challenges will need to

be addressed.

and scal impacts (revenue, inrastructure

and operations and maintenance costs).

It provides a single transparent ramework

within which these assumptions and research

can be loaded to test the impacts o varing

land use patterns on environmental and

scal perormance. The Rapid Fire model

can be run as a stand-alone process or with

other models such as Envision Tomorrow.

Urba Footprit

This open source map-based model is also

being developed as part o the Vision Calior-

nia process. Built entirel with open source

sotware, it is a scenario creation and model-

ing tool with co-benets analsis capacit.

It includes a ull set o 30+ detailed and re-

searched place tpes built up rom a set o

50+ building tpes; a scenario translation

engine that converts input scenarios into

opening access to scenario planning tools

Documents