Slide 1

Brian Voigt, Austin Troy, Brian Miles, Alexandra Reiss University of Vermont Spatial Analysis Lab

Slide 2

What will land use patterns in Chittenden County look like in 20-30 years? What effect will future urban development patterns have on environmental quality? How might alternative policies alter these outcomes? How can we develop a model framework that effectively integrates the (inter)actions of households, employers, developers, transportation, and the environment? 2 Do indicators of predicted land use change differ depending on whether accessibilities are updated to reflect changing land use?

Slide 3

Integrated Model Framework

Slide 4

4

Slide 5

5

Slide 6

YEAR 1930 Min = 0.79 per / mi 2 Max = 3712 per / mi 2 YEAR 1940 Min = 0.79 per / mi 2 Max = 4221 per / mi 2 YEAR 1950 Min = 0.59 per / mi 2 Max = 4709 per / mi 2 YEAR 1960 Min = 0.00 per / mi 2 Max = 5189 per / mi 2 YEAR 1970 Min = 1.98 per / mi 2 Max = 5111 per / mi 2 YEAR 1980 Min = 1.78 per / mi 2 Max = 4418 per / mi 2 YEAR 1990 Min = 0.40 per / mi 2 Max = 4650 per / mi 2 YEAR 2000 Min = 2.38 per / mi 2 Max = 4588 per / mi 2 6

Slide 7

Model parameters based on statistical analysis of historical data Integrates market behavior, land policies, infrastructure choices Simulates household, employment and real estate development decisions agent-based for household and employment location decisions grid-based for real estate development decisions from Waddell, et al, 2003 7

Slide 8

Data-intensive Disaggregated Dynamic Disequilibrium Driven by trends and forecasts Model Coordinator Database Scenario Data Control Totals TDM Exogenous Data Output / Indicators 8

Slide 9

Grid_ID: 60211 Employment_ID: 427 Sector: 2 Employees: 135 Grid_ID:23674 HSHLD_ID: 23 AGE_OF_HEAD: 42 INCOME: $65,000 Workers: 1 KIDS: 3 CARS: 4 Grid_ID:23674 Households: 9 Non-residential_sq_ft: 30,000 Land_value: 425,000 Year_built: 1953 Plan_type: 4 %_water: 14 %_wetland: 4 %_road: 3 9

Slide 10

Land Price Real Estate Development Residential Land Share Accessibility Mobility & Transition Location Choice mover vacant units probabilities site selection

Slide 11

New land development events in response to insufficient supply Land Price Residential Land Share Accessibility Mobility & Transition Location Choice Real Estate Development

Slide 12

Coefficient NameDefinitionEstimatet_statistic AVE_INCAverage income in the gridcell1.19E-0517.2403 BUILD_AGEAverage age of improvements-0.001493-3.8204 COST_INC_RAT Average cost of improvement to average income ratio -0.345484-9.32952 DEV_TYPE_M1Is zoned mixed use development0.2236114.69345 IS_NEAR_ART_300Is within 300m of arterial street2.72118.52261 IS_NEAR_HIGHWAYIs within 1500m of the interstate-0.453467-2.49592 LN_COMSF_WWD LN of commercial square feet w/in walking distance 0.03599287.33788 LN_HOME_ACC_POPLN home access to population by auto-3.88147-4.20383 LN_HOUSEHOLDSLN number of households in grid cell-0.386432-20.0571 LN_RVAL_PER_RUNIT LN average value of res land per res unit w/in walking distance -0.348223-11.6168 %_LOW_INC_WWD_ IF_HIGH_INC % low income households w/in walking distance if high income -0.0451663-19.3233 %_LOW_INC_WWD_ IF_LOW_INC % low income households w/in walking distance if low income 0.054372319.3845 VAC_RES_UNITS# of vacant residential units-0.682592-63.5107 12

Slide 13

TransCad 4-step model Developed by RSG, Inc for the CCMPO Run on 5-year interval TDM accounts for changes in land use patterns Calculates accessibility measures and passes results to UrbanSim model 13

Slide 14

14 TDM No TDM

Slide 15

15 TDM No TDM

Slide 16

16 TDM No TDM

Slide 17

17 No TDM with TDM No clear spatial pattern in the differences

Slide 18

18 No TDM with TDM No TDM clusters new residential development in the western portion of the County With TDM clusters new residential development in the eastern portion of the County

Slide 19

19

Slide 20

20

Slide 21

21

Slide 22

Residential Units by TAZ H o : sd(with TDM / without TDM) = 1 H a : sd(with TDM / without TDM) 1 f = 0.6420 Pr(F > f) = 0.0000 Commercial Feet 2 by TAZ H o : sd(with TDM / without TDM) = 1 H a : sd(with TDM / without TDM) 1 f =1.0452 Pr(F > f) = 0.6564 22

Slide 23

No TDM vs RPC housing data H o : sd(no TDM / RPC) = 1 H a : sd(no TDM / RPC) 1 f = 0.9203 Pr(F > f) = 0.2247 With - TDM vs RPC housing data H o : sd(with TDM / RPC) = 1 H a : sd(with TDM / RPC) 1 f = 0.8136 Pr(F > f) = 0.0303 23

Slide 24

Current implementation of model yields mixed results # of development projects Zoning Continue to explore alternative model specifications Integration with disaggregate travel model 24

Slide 25

This work was funded by grants from the US DOT FHWA and the University of Vermont Transportation Research Center UVM UrbanSim team: Brian Miles, Alexandra Reiss Special thanks: Chittenden County MPO & RPC, Dr Adel Sadek and Shan Huang, Resource Systems Group, Inc Stephen Lawe, John Lobb, and John Broussard For more information www.uvm.edu/envnr/countymodel 25

Slide 26

Questions??? brian.voigt@uvm.edu University of Vermont Spatial Analysis Lab 26

Slide 27

Data CategoryData Set NameData Source EconomicLand and improvement valueGrand List from individual town assessors office Year built for all structures in the countyIndividual town clerks office Employment (size, sector, location)VT Secretary of State and Claritas 1 Residential UnitsCCRPC 2 BiophysicalTopography, soils, wetlands, waterVermont Center for Geographic Information Land CoverUniversity of Vermont Spatial Analysis Lab InfrastructureRoadsGDT 1 TransitChittenden County Transit Authority Planning & ZoningZoningIndividual town plans Conserved landUVM Spatial Analysis Lab DemographicsHousehold characteristicsUS Census: SF1, SF3, 5% PUMS ForecastCCRPC 2 / CCMPO 3 1: proprietary data sets 2: Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission (CCRPC) 3: Chittenden Country Metropolitan Planning Organization (CCMPO) 27

Slide 28

Coefficient NameDefinitionEstimatet_statisticSE Constant 11.16889954158.32699580.070543297 DIST_ART Distance to nearest arterial street 0.42414900743.894798280.00966285 ELEVElevation-0.000367311-30.91169931.18826E-05 IND_WIWLK % industrial w/in walking distance 1.04801E-078.7936697011.19177E-08 IN_SEWERIs within sewer district0.81976199257.448101040.0142696 IS_CONSLIs conserved land-0.227327004-16.222900390.0140127 LN_HOUSEHOLDSLN grid cell # of households0.16217799520.764999390.00781016 TT_CBDTravel time to CBD-0.0187907-29.97150040.000626952 YRBLTYear built5.41195E-0510.172400475.32023E-06 28

Slide 29

29

Slide 30

30