Metropolitan Centers: Evaluating Local Implementation of Regional Plans and Policies

The Denver and Salt Lake City Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) have embarked upon regional visioning strategies that promote development around higher density, mixed use centers with current or future access to transit. This study examines the programs and policies in the Salt Lake City and Denver regions to examine regional vision influence on local planning and the opportunities and constraints facing centers. The research team analyzed local plans over the past several decades, interviewed planners, and examined demographic, land use and transportation characteristics in select centers across the region. We found that the regional vision had a moderate influence on local planning, due to vague definitions and criteria. However, light rail investment and market forces have had a more substantial influence—resulting in cities developing supportive transit oriented development policies. While over 100 centers have been designated, many face significant challenges to support regional goals, particularly because many light rail lines were located along rail and freeway alignments. A limited number of “tipping point centers” already contain the necessary elements to be successful with city and private investment. Many “greenfield centers” offer significant future opportunity for development, but their suburban location and infrastructure needs present significant costs and challenges. Many other “redevelopment centers” are dominated by industrial, commercial or office development, and the land use and transportation patterns within these centers present substantial hurdles that may limit their potential to achieve regional goals

Regional Transportation and Land Use Decision Making in Metropolitan Regions: Findings from Four Case Studies

Throughout the United States, metropolitan regions face increasingly complex issues related to transportation and land use. The diffuse nature of decision making creates a need to better coordinate land use and transportation to address issues such as: congestion, infrastructure costs, and greenhouse gas emissions. Key players in this decision making are regional metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) with transportation planning authority, regional planning responsibilities, and in some cases regional land use planning authority. The goal of this study was to describe and assess efforts by regional agencies to coordinate land use and transportation. Policies and processes in four key topic areas were examined: 1) Governance: formal and informal decision making approaches; 2) Coordination: strategies used to coordinate land use and transportation; 3) Growth Centers: policies to encourage development in higher density centers; and 4) Transportation Improvement Program (TIP): policies to incorporate smart growth criteria in TIP funding decisions

Oregon\u27s Acts, Cross-jurisdictional Collaboration and Improved Transportation Planning

The Oregon Transportation Commission (OTC) created Area Commissions on Transportation (ACTs) to improve coordination, help prioritize infrastructure investment, and provide input on statewide transportation issues. The structure of the ACTs is designed to provide a cross-section of input from the state, regional, local, private, and community sectors. A research project was initiated to: assess the role and experiences of ACTs, research comparative approaches in the state and nationally, and develop and assess options for improving coordination and increasing effectiveness. This study used interviews, an on-line survey, case studies from Oregon and comparative studies from three other states to assess ACTs and identify options. The findings reveal that ACTs have improved the state prioritization process and increased communication across the parties involved, but they face challenges in relation to cross-regional coordination, strategic investment decisions, and regional problems such as urban travelsheds. The study highlights a range of options for improving ACT functioning under its current structure, and more significant options that would require policy and structural changes. Note: ACT appendices are included here as a supplemental file

Metropolitan Centers Mean Smart Growth

In this study, a multidisciplinary team from the University of Oregon and the University of Utah examined regional metropolitan center programs and policies in the Salt Lake City and Denver regions. The goal of the study was to examine this topic on two levels. First, to learn how and why local governments have adopted the concepts of metropolitan centers over time and the related supporting and constraining factors. Second, to understand how demographics, land use, and transportation choices have changed over time in the designated centers

A Typology of Collaboration Efforts in Environmental Management

Collaboration involves stakeholders and the public in a process of consensus building to address some of the most difficult environmental management problems facing society today. Collaborative groups vary widely, ranging from small watershed councils to regional ecosystem collaboratives to groups addressing large-scale policy issues. While these collaboratives all match the common principles of collaboration, a closer examination reveals many differences. Using institutional theories about levels of decision making provides a way of classifying collaboratives along a spectrum from action level to organizational level to policy level. This typology is applied to thirty-six collaboration case studies in Australia and the United States that were investigated over a series of years through interviews, observation, document analysis, and surveys. The application reveals different tendencies among the case types in terms of population, size, problem significance, institutional setting, and focus of activities. The typology also reveals functional differences in the types of stakeholders involved, the management arrangements for implementation, and the approaches to implementing change. This typology can help practitioners better understand the challenges and appropriate types of collaborations for different settings. It helps highlight differences in the role of government and decentralization of power. It distinguishes the different theoretical foundations for different types of collaboratives. Finally, it elucidates the different evaluation approaches for different types of collaboratives