ENVISION REGION, PLAN LOCALThe San Joaquin Valley Blueprint Planning Process

Presented By

BHARAT SINGH

“There are only two things American don’t like, density and sprawl.”

-Rural Planner, Randall Arendt

Planning at a Regional Level in CaliforniaHistorically Regional Planning in the US has been minimal.

Cumulative impacts of poor air quality, congestion, environmental degradation, distribution of water and loss of farmland/open space necessitated the need to envision regional futures.

Recent realization of global warming and climate change has expedited the need to plan with a regional vision.

Transportation

Air Quality

Water

MPOs & COGs

Planning at a Regional Level in CaliforniaRegional Framework for Collaboration

• Federal and State levels provide forums, funding and guidance

• Regions have transportation planning process, corridor and landscape scale vantage point, framework for convening stakeholders

• Local level makes land use decisions

• Community level provides public input on needs and desires

Transportation

Air Quality

Water

MPOs & COGs

Planning at a Regional Level in California• Planning has been

compartmentalized – Land Use, Transportation, Environmental, Land resource management, housing, economic development etc.

• Agencies created to help guide and manage urban agglomerations (ABAG, SANDAG) - Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs)

• Smaller urban clusters are managed by County level agencies call Council of Governments (COG)

Transportation

Air Quality

Water

MPOs & COGs

THE CALIFORNIA REGIONAL BLUEPRINT PROGRAM

California Blueprint ProgramState initiative to promote:

Linking land use, transportation, housing, environment, economic development, equity

Consensus on preferred growth scenario - “Blueprint” - for each region identifies transportation impacts of land use

A more efficient and effective transportation system

Sufficient housing supply to accommodate population growth in each region

California Blueprint Program Desired Outcomes Improve mobility

reduce auto dependency, congestion

increase transit use, walking and bicycling

Land use encourage infill

development accommodate sufficient

housing supply minimize impacts on

farmland and habitat Establish a better process

for public engagement in planning

California Blueprint Program Blueprint Regions

• MPOs

• Rural Counties

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY

San Joaquin Valley Regional Blueprint• 8 Counties• Central Valley• Agricultural Heartland• Seen rapid suburbanization

– loss of Farmland/Open space

• High Poverty• Lack of housing option• Poor Public Transportation• Running out of Water

San Joaquin Valley Regional Blueprint• Each County responsible for

running individual Blueprint Process

• Process to include Consensus Building amongst communities

• Developing data to model land use and integrate better transportation modeling tools

• Develop alternative scenarios

• Achieve ‘Preferred Scenario’ by consensus

FRESNO BLUEPRINT PROCESS

Fresno Blueprint ProcessKey Hurdles - Political• Public Outreach to bring all

communities and jurisdictions to the table.

• Developing Consensus on regional issues, assets, need & goals.

• Convincing communities of regional issues such as limited resources and need for affordability and choice of housing types.

• Assuring local governments about their authority of planning and developing their communities.

• Establishing a Vision for the Region.

From the San Joaquin Valley Blueprint Website

Fresno Blueprint ProcessKey Hurdles - Technical• Poor Land use Database • Lack of professional

capacity to develop data collection land use/transportation modeling standards .

• Establishing a graphic vocabulary and language to explain technical results to decision makers.

• Identifying technical methods to evaluate alternatives.

• Educating decision makers and community leaders about development alternatives.

Fresno Blueprint ProcessResulting Process• Fresno COG conducted outreach to

develop a vision and set of goals.• Got assistance for Data development• Developed four alternative future

scenarios for the County by the year 2050.

• Accepted a 5th Alternative advocated by the City of Fresno

• Comparatively evaluated all alternatives on several parameters:• Loss of Farmland/Open space• Reductions in Vehicle Miles travelled• Reduction of green house gasses• Consumption of electricity and water

• Presented finding to decision makers & community leaders to establish consensus on preferred future for Fresno County

• Established Blueprint Vision to guide future growth, General Plans, Zoning and transportation investments.

Fresno Blueprint ProcessResulting Process• Fresno COG conducted outreach to

develop a vision and set of goals.• Got assistance for Data

development• Developed four alternative future

scenarios for the County by the year 2050.

• Accepted a 5th Alternative advocated by the City of Fresno

• Comparatively Evaluated all alternatives on several parameters:• Loss of Farmland/Open space• Reductions in Vehicle Miles travelled• Reduction of green house gasses• Consumption of elctricity and water

• Presented finding to decision makers & community leaders to establish consensus on preferred future for Fresno County

WEB RESOURCES

Web Resources• San Joaquin Valley BLUEPRINT

http://valleyblueprint.org/

• California Regional BLUEPRINThttp://calblueprint.dot.ca.gov/

• UPLAN Land use modeling Softwarehttp://ice.ucdavis.edu/doc/uplan

• Smartgrowth Transportation Planning http://www.smartgrowthplanning.org/

• California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valleyhttp://www.sjvpartnership.org/

• Community Design + Architecturehttp://community-design.com/

THE END