HomeMy WebLinkAboutLand Use Committee SummaryDATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
PROJECT:
PROJECT NO:
COPIES:
DAVID EVANS
AND ASSOCIATES INC.
MEMORANDUM
July 22, 2004
Land Use Committee and Billings Bypass Advisory Committee
Laura L. Meyer (Hunter)
Land Use Committee Summary
Billings Bypass EIS
NCPD 56(55) CN 4199
JUL 2 6 2004
C!TY OF L2 UREL
Fred Bente, Bruce Barrett, Alan Woodmansey, Sandra Straehl, Ron Dutton, John Shoff, Bob
Marvin, Debra Perkins-Smith, Jane Boand, Ed Schumm, File
The project team has summarized the findings of the Land Use Committee and provided a summary packet for
your review and comment. The committee met twice to discuss residential and employment growth allocations
based on the no-action and bypass scenarios.
The project team would like to thank the committee members for participating on the Land Use Committee and
contributing their local knowledge and expertise to this process. The committee was of great assistance to the
project team in developing and analyzing future land use scenarios.
Please forward any comments you may have to me at llhu(a)deainc.com or via fax at 720-946-0973 no later than
August 6, 2004.
Attachments/Enclosures: Billings Bypass Advisory Committee Roster; Land Use Committee Roster; Land Use Summary Packet
Initials: Ilhu
File Name: P:2vlDOT0000-0019 - Billings~ADMIN\Correspondence\Letters~BBACXLUC summary memo.doc
i331 17th Street, Suite 900 Denver Colorado 80202 Phone: 720.946.0969 Facsimile: 720.946.0973
BILLINGS BYPASS ElS
SUMMARY OF
GROWTH AND LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS
for the
BILLINGS PLANNING AREA
BILLINGS BYPASS ElS
NCPD 56(55)CN 4199
July 9, 2004
Introduction
The Land Use Committee (LUC) was established to provide local knowledge and insights regarding the
economic ouUook for the Billings region and development trends in the community for the purpose of
informing and guiding the underlying planning framework and traffic modeling for the Billings Bypass
project. The LUC is comprised of representatives of local governments, utility service providers and the
real estate development communities. Specific objectives of the LUC were to:
· Validate the overall residential and employment forecasts for the planning period, which were
developed for the Shiloh Road Corridor EA.
· Assign the incremental growth to neighborhoods under the baseline or No Action scenario,
assuming the existing and committed improvements are completed.
· Adjust the baseline assignments to reflect the affect of the Bypass on future growth and
development.
Process
The consultant team provided the LUC with information regarding past growth and development trends
and a series of growth assumptions and allocations developed as par~ of the Shiloh Corridor study. The
LUC discussed the rationale and implications of the assumptions, as weir as other factors that could
support alternative assumptions, ultimately deciding to maintain growth assumptions consistent with
those used in the prior study. Those growth assumptions are:
· Dwelling Units - Annual net increase of 1.5% of the 2002 inventory
· Employment- Annual net increase of 2.0% of the 2002 employment
Applying those assumptions to the 2002 base yielded the following forecasts.
Table 1
Billings MPO Planning Area
Forecasts of Dwelling Units and Retail and Non-Retail Employment
For The Planning Horizon Years of 2007, 2020 and 2027
Dwelling Units Retail Employment Non-Retsil Employment
% Increase # of % Increase # of % Increase
Year # of Units (above 2002) Employees (above 2o02) Employees (above 2002)
2002 47,780 n/a 21,215 n/a 28,584 n/a
2007 51,365 7.5% 23,335 10.0% 31,439 10.0%
2020 61,310 28.3% 28,847 36.0% 38,862 36.0%
2027 65,719 37.5% 31,818 50.0% 42,864 50%
Total Increment 17,939 DUs 10,603 Retail 14,280 Non-Retail
Annual Growth
Increment 717 DUs 424 Retail 571 Non-Retail
Increment as a %
of 2002 1.50% 2.00% 2.00%
Source: MDT, Transportation Planning, 2004.
As shown in Table 1, the total growth during the planning horizon based on the growth assumptions are:
17,939 additional dwelling units; 10,603 additional retail jobs; and 14,280 additional non-retail jobs.
Billings Bypass ElS
NCPD 56(55)CN 4199
Billings Growth and Land Use Summary
The LUC concluded that completion of the Billings Bypass would not substantially alter the underlying
economic and demographic outlook for the Billings area through 2027. The LUC agreed that the Bypass'
primary influence would be Iocational, affecting where business and residential development occurred,
rather than how much and when such growth and development occurred.
Based on the conclusions regarding the growth forecasts and the influence of the proposed Bypass, the
incremental growth was assigned to geographic regions (neighborhoods) in the planning area under the
baseline or No Action scenario. The LUC developed the assignments considering the following
development constraints and influences:
· Terrain/Topography
· Current and future land use
· Environmental suitability
· Proximity to a new river crossings
· Developable Land
· Land ownership
· Annexation Policies
· Airport Landing Pattern/Noise
· Limited Access Highway Facility
· Water availability
· Water, wastewater and utility service
capacity
The neighborhood structure used in making the assignments is depicted in Figure 1 below.
Figure 1
Land Use Committee Summary July 9, 2004
3
Billings Bypass ElS
NCPD 56(55)CN 4199
Billings Growth and Land Use Summary
Results
Based on consideration of the constraints and influences listed above, the LUC identified a significant
shift in the location of future residential development from the assumptions defined during the Shiloh
Road Corridor EA. The primary reason for the shift is in response to the recent changes in the City of
Billings' policies regarding future development. The changes ara being driven by the realization that
providing water service on the west end would be considerably more costly than previously anticipated.
The LUC also recognized that the proposed Inner Beltway from Wicks Lane through the Rehberg Ranch
development to Zimmerman Trail, could be another major influence of future development trends.
The consensus of the LUC was that these and other factors would result in a major redistribution of future
development from the assignments that were made during the planning process for the Shiloh Road EA.
As shown in Figure 2, the baseline assignments developed by the Billings Bypass LUC effectively shifted
more than 7,500 new dwelling units from the south and west to the north and east.
Figure 2
These future growth and development assignments reflect the influence of the changes in highway
accessibility, acting in concert with the ether factors, resulting from implementation of the proposed
project. Because the LUC determined that the bypass would primarily influence the location of growth
and not the amount or timeframe of growth, increased assignments to one neighborhood were offset by
reductions elsewhere. The resulting assignments of future residential, retail and non-retail job growth are
presented in the following tables and illustrated on the accompanying maps.
Land Use Committee Summary July 9, 2004
4
Billings Bypass ElS
NCPD 56(55)CN 4199
Billings Growth and Land Use Summary
Table 2
Residential Growth Assignments, Billings Bypass Project.
NoActlon 2002- 2027 Bypass 2002. 2027
Baseline Additional Additional
Billings Neighborhood: 2002 Growth Total Units Growth Total Units
Billings Central 6,896 379 7 275
......................... , .................................. ., .............. 3..7.9.. 7275
........ ~ ...................................... :....~ ..................... 1.,.090 ] 10 212
Billinas Northwest ! 9,122 I 090 10,212 ....... ~ .....
Heiohts EastI 2,031 I 3,130 5,161 ,' ........... ~ .....
......... ,~ ....................................... [ ..................... 3..3.3..o. ...... 5 381
.... .8..o.~.t~ .0..eEt£~l ......... 3..-6.7.6. ......... .54..1 ......... .3.¢).7. ........ 5.¢.1 ......... .3,.6.1.7..
West Oentral 6,624 - 6,624 - 6,624
......... ............... I ....... ....... ....... i;8 yl .......
...... §'~f~'e~'~- ......... i;~'~] I ........ ~';6~8'1 ....... ~;~'~'{'1 I ......... 8~'| .......
'"8~,'ti~i&~]i4~-~&i ........ ~8'~ ~ ......... '~88'~ ......... Y~8'I I' ........ ~sb'! ....... ~ ~-~
Shiloh Northwest 1,069 1,281
....... 'V¥ ...............~ ........... ~ ~ .............. 2,350. , 1,281 2,350
est End 6,046 720 ....... [~ ~ .......... ;~' .......
TOTALS 47,780 17,939 65,719 17,939 .....
Distributional
Effects of the
Bypass
200
200
(4oo)
40o
(40(
Figure 3
Land Use Committee Summary July 9, 2004
5
Billings Bypass ElS
NCPD 56(55)CN 4199
Billings Growth and Land Use Summary
Table 3
Retail Job Growth Assignments, Billings Bypass Project,
NoAction 2002- 2027 Bypass 2002- 2027
Distributional
Baseline Additional Total Retail Additional Total Retail Effects of th~
Billings Neighborhoods 2002 Growth Jobs Growth Jobs Bypass
.... .a.i.~!Ln. 9..s..c..e.n.?.a.~ ......... .7:.2.~.4. .......... 7..9.0. ....... .s.,.6j..4 ......... .7.9.0. ........ .~.,.o. t4..
....BjI. Ij .n.g.s..N..o..rt.h..w.e.9.t ....... .1:.6).5. .......... 3..9.6 ....... ,2..0.1.1. ......... .3.9.6.. ...... .2.,.0.t !.
Heights East 52 597 649
............................... 597 649
......H..ej g..h.t.s...W.e..s.t .......... ):.5.5.8. ......... 1.;!.9.2. ........ .2.,.7.5..0. 1,192 2,750
Lockwood 316 595 911 ....... :1]~'~ ...... ~1',~'~ 450
..... §~i~ ~;,h't'r~i .......... ~b'~'~' ......... ~]~ ......... §~'d~ ........ ~]i~'~' ...... ~'d~'
...... .W..e.s.t..c.e....t .rg! .......... .5:.~ ~.7. ........... 3_9§ ....... .5.,.6.S..3 ......... .3.9.6. ...... .5..5.s.3..
North 34 299 333
........................................ 599 633 300,
Shiloh West 212 ....~ "~§~1 .......'1' [~,;~ ........ :1]~'1' ...... ~1'~' (65£
' ' ~[~'ti ~/i~.~ ~ ~'~i~'~';~;~ .......... ~4~ ......... ~(~D ........ '1'~ ......... :~'~ ......... §'~:~' 250
....... .S.o.u..t .h..H.i! I.s. ......62 396 458 396 458
Shiloh Northwest ........ D~ .......... '~' .........~'~ ...........................
............................ 595 685
West End ..... ~'1'1' ..... ;~:;J~' ....... ~,tl~ ....... :1~¥'~ ........ ;~',¥'~' (350)
TOTALS 21,215 10,603 ..... ~'1',~'1'~', 10,603 ...... ~'1',~'1'~'
Figure 4
Land Use Committee Summary July 9, 2004
6
Billings Bypass ElS
NCPD 56(55)CN 4199
Billings Growth and Land Use Summary
Figure 5
Non-Retail Job Growth Assignments, Billings Bypass Pro
No Action 2002-2027
Baseline Additional Total Non-
Billings Neighborhoods 2002 Growth Retail Jobs
ect.
Bypass 2002 - 2027
Additional Total Non-
Growth Retail Jobs
Billings Central 13,720 2,276 15.996
' ' '6il'fi~]:'~r:t[b'~i ' ' I ..... [?,;~ 'I I ......... '~'1 .......
..... .h;e~i~i~'(::~i ..... 1 ....... ~:l'~lI......... -~,i~'l ......... ~'~'
..... ~a¢~'w~ ..... I ..... ~:,~-dl I ........ ~:~Y'I ....... '~,Y'~'
South Central
West Central
North
Shiloh West
...O..u.t.lyj .nj~ .N..o~.h.e..a.s.t..
South Hills
Shiloh Northwest
West End
TOTALS
1,976 15,696
446 659
...... E:~'¢ .......
...... ~7'~§"¢ ........
2,390 1 040 3,430 ....... ~76~ T ...... ~',~'~ '
..... ~:~;'~:1 I ......... '~'! ....... ~,~'~ .......... a'~:l: ...... ~:~'~
....... ~b'~l I .......... 1'~'1 ......... ~'SE ,~ ........ ~'~/ ........
....... .5.6. ........ 2..3..7.7. l ....... .3.,§.3..3 ....... 2..3.7.7..[ ...... .3..6.3.3..
68 100 168 200 268
....... ~Z~.l I .......... i~'! ......... :,'ia'l [ ........ i~'f ........ :~'~'a'
....... i~'f ............. iiYl ......... ~'fi'l [ ........ i~'f[ ........ i'~'i'
..... ~,453 31416 - .............. 4,869 ' -' ........... 3,116- ............. 4,569
28,584 14,280 42,864 14,280
Distributional
Effects of the
Bypass
(300',
2OO
30O
100
(300)
Figure 6
Land Use Committee Summary July 9, 2004
7
BILLINGS BYPASS EIS
BILLINGS BYPASS
LAND USE COMMITTEE
The following people participated on the Land Use Committee:
· Candi Beaudry, City-County Planning Department
· Matt Brosovich, Prudential Floberg Realtors
· Jerry Ellis, Yellowstone Valley Electric
· Wyeth Friday, City-County Planning Department
· Charlie Hamwey, Yellowstone County Planning Board
· Connie Herberg, Shepherd Community Action Committee
· Bill Kennedy, Yellowstone County
· Ramona Mattix, Director- City-County Planning Department
· Lora Mattox, City-County Planning Department
· Bob Moats, Yellowstone County
· Sharon Moore, DNRC
· Dan Munson, Northwestern Energy
· Duke Nieskens, Billings Height Water District
· Glenn OppeI, Billings Board of Realtors
· John Ostlund, Yellowstone County
· Jim Reno, Yellowstone County
· Rick Russell, Lockwood Water & Sewer District
· A1 Towerton, Public Utilities Department
· Scott Walker, City-County Planning Department
BILLINGS BYPass ElS
BILLINGS BYPASS ADVISORY COMMITTEE (BBAC)
The following have accepted invitations to be BBAC members to represent the local community
in this proposed project's development:
Dave Brown, Council Member- Billings City Council Ward 2
· Larry Brewster, Council Member - Billings City Council Ward 2
Ramona Mattix, Director- City-County Planning Department
· Dave Mumford, Director, Billings Public Works
· Bill Kennedy- Yellowstone County Commissioner
· Doug Clark - Yellowstone County Planning Board
· Kevin McGovern - Director, Yellowstone County Public Works
· Rhonda Harms (or appointee) - Billings Area Chamber of Commerce
· Angela Cimmino - Chairperson, Heights Task Force
· Conrad Stroebe, Lockwood Transportation Improvement District Representative
· Connie Herberg, Shepherd Community Action Committee Representative
· H.R. "Spook" Stang, Montana Motor Carriers Association
· Shelly Harris, Yellowstone Valley Cycling Club
· Mike Penfold, Yellowstone Conservation Forum
· Alan Riley, Lockwood Fire Chief
The following team members for this proposed project will attend the BBAC meetings to answer
questions and provide guidance as necessary.
· Alan Woodmansey- Program Development, FHWA
· Fred Bente- Consultant Design, MDT
· Bruce Barrett- District 5 Administrator, MDT
· Debra Perkins-Smith - Project Manager, DE&A
· John Shoff, HKM Engineering