introduction leslie kohli administrator springfield township lucas county, ohio
TRANSCRIPT
Introduction
Leslie KohliAdministratorSpringfield TownshipLucas County, Ohio
Swan Creek Watershed Pilot Project
Lake Erie Commission Provides Opportunity
Balanced Growth: a voluntary, incentive-based strategy to protect and restore Lake Erie, the Ohio River, and Ohio's watersheds to assure long-term economic competitiveness ecological health, and quality of life.
To promote best land use for the protection of water quality
What is Balanced Growth?
Key Aspects of Balanced Growth
• Maximizes incentive based initiatives• Focuses on ecological protection/restoration• Encourage land uses in appropriate locations
Balanced Growth is a strategy to protect and restore Lake Erie and its watersheds to assure long-term economic
competitiveness and quality of life.
About Swan Creek watershed
205 square miles of land in Lucas, Fulton, and Henry counties.
Swan Creek is 40 miles long. 200 miles of ditches & streams. 23 political jurisdictions
3 counties 13 townships 2 cities 5 villages
The Partnership
Swan Creek Committee Representatives from jurisdictions Watershed interest groups Representatives of:
Conservation
Development
Agriculture
Committee members
TMACOG staff Soil & Water Conservation district County Commissioners County Engineers Planning Commissions Consulting Engineers Municipalities Townships Park Districts Nature Conservancy Board of Realtors
Political Jurisdictions
The Partnership
Name county PopulationPercent
Population AcresPercent of Watershed support
Harding Township Lucas 724 0.64% 5,996 4.60% no
Spencer Township Lucas 1,362 1.21% 5,379 4.13% no
Village of Holland Lucas 1,306 1.16% 555 0.43% no
Amboy Township Fulton 335 0.30% 1,747 1.34% yes
Fulton Township Fulton 1,618 1.44% 17,579 13.50% yes
Pike Township Fulton 454 0.40% 3,782 2.90% yes
Swan Creek Township Fulton 5,457 4.85% 19,163 14.71% yes
Village of Delta Fulton 1,145 1.02% 581 0.45% yes
Village of Swanton Fulton 3,307 2.94% 1,525 1.17% yes
York Township Fulton 0.01% yes
Washington Township Henry 609 0.54% 2,437 1.87% yes
City of Maumee Lucas 5,228 4.65% 2,243 1.72% yes
City of Toledo Lucas 54,981 48.86% 8,289 6.36% yes
Monclova Township Lucas 6,472 5.75% 13,261 10.18% yes
Providence Township Lucas 3,005 2.67% 12,400 9.52% yes
Springfield Township Lucas 16,364 14.54% 9,679 7.43% yes
Swanton Township Lucas 3,330 2.96% 14,029 10.77% yes
Village of Waterville Lucas 2,465 2.19% 837 0.64% yes
Village of Whitehouse Lucas 2,733 2.43% 2,211 1.70% yes
Waterville Township Lucas 1,553 1.38% 8,564 6.57% yes
96.90% 90.84%
20
Jurisdictions
Plus
3
Counties
The Breakdown
• Townships• population 36%, land area 88%
• Village,Cities• Population 64% land area 12%
Grant required: 75% population 75% land area 75% jurisdictions
= 225%
We had: 97% population 91% land area 87% jurisdictions
= 275%
Swan Creek watershed – topographically very flat
Lucas County is on a nearly level plain… The Oak Openings extends northeast-southwest from Sylvania to Neapolis…the flat surface is broken by low, rounded hills, or undulations of sand. -Soil Survey of Lucas County, Ohio
GOAL: Priority Areas
Project outcome is to recommend future land use priority areas
PCAs – Priority Conservation Areas Natural areas, parks, forests, wetland or other habitat
PDAs – Priority Development Areas Areas that are attractive for Residential, Commercial,
or Industrial development
PAAs – Priority Agricultural Areas Agricultural preservation areas
Priority Areas: the process
Technical CommitteeMet monthlySelected & prioritized modeling criteriaDetermined what computer data would
identify “good” areas for conservation, development and agriculture; data sources
Prepared maps of PAAs, PCAs, PDAs, & Combined Priorities
Maps for review & comment
Priority Area Process
Brainstorm criteria affecting development, conservation, agriculture
Long list of criteria 57 items totalVoted to rank most important
But Wait……..
Why not just use existing plans?Not all areas are zoned – creates a
patchworkInconsistent from jurisdiction to
jurisdictionMost zoning – status quo, not
addressing the environment or efficient smart development
PCA: Top Conservation Priorities
WetlandsRare plants/animalsForest sizeConservation areasFloodplainRiparian corridor
Using the Criteria
Conservation Priority Index Ranking of Value Ranges
Total PossibleParameter Data Source 4 3 2 1 Weight
Presence of wetlands ODNR, GIMS Yes -- -- -- 6 24
Rare plant/animal occurrences:
density within 1 mile radius
ODNR, Natural Heritage Database
>50 per mile2
30 - 50 per mile2
10 - 30 per mile2
>0 - 10 per mile2 5 20
Forest patch size ODNR >100 acres25 - 100
acres 5 - 25 acres >0 - 5 acres 4 16
Protected conservation
areas[1]
County auditors; USGS
GAP; metroparks Yes -- -- -- 3 12
100 yr. Floodplain FEMAIn
floodplain -- -- -- 2 8
Riparian corridor USGS NHD
<500 ft. from
stream -- -- -- 1 4
Highest Possible Score 84
PDA: Top Residential Priorities
Sanitary SewerWaterRecreation: parks, open spaceCultural attractionsQuality of schoolsExisting commercial
PDA: Top Industrial Priorities
WaterHighwaysSanitary SewerBrownfieldsIncorporated areas: distanceInterchanges / Major intersections
PDA: Top Commercial Priorities
Incorporated areasWater Sanitary SewerCommercial marketPer Capita IncomeHighways
PAA: Top Agricultural Priorities
Farmland preservationPrime/Important farmlandSize of farmCAUVCurrent farmlandDrainage capacity
Combined Priorities
Residential – Industrial – Commercial — combined into multi-use “PDAs”
Areas may score high for multiple priorities
Selected top-scoring – highest 10% by area – for each land use
Resolved almost all multi-priority designations
Local Input = change
Committee/Computer generated maps presented to jurisdiction
Jurisdiction may chose to alter the priority areas
Committee reviews/discusses the proposals and makes changes if in keeping with the intent of the project
Final Priority Areas
2013 Update: Streamside Buffers
Developer Concerns
Will the balanced growth plan restrict development?
Will developers be penalized as a result of the plan?
Can developers take advantage of incentives?
NO
NO
YES
Where do we go from here?
Transitioned from Technical Advisory committee to Balanced Growth committee Representatives of public jurisdictions in watershed Representatives from Technical committee
Currently formulating focus of committee Encourage Airport/Oak Openings initiatives Review projects proposed in watershed and
provide endorsement if they fit the plan