Plan Analysis
Population Projections and Capacity Analysis
Introduction
In a comprehensive land use plan, it is important to determine the future pressure that growth may exert on a community. Growth pressure will affect numerous aspects of Miami Township, including infrastructure, educational systems, economic systems, recreational facilities, and government. To develop a sense of this likely pressure, a capacity analysis is prepared. A capacity analysis is a future scenario, or a model of a possible future development pattern, that projects the future development of the Township if population growth trends and existing zoning remain the same for the next 20 years. The capacity analysis compares the projected population to the current zoning regulations, and identifies the amount and type of development that the Township could anticipate accommodating 20 years into the future.
A population projection provides one of the basic elements of the capacity analysis. A population projection is an estimate of the future increase in population of a community. This figure is forecasted into the future, most often shown in five or ten year intervals. A population projection is created by examining a community’s past and current population, recent population growth and the potential impacts of various aspects of the community’s growth patterns and trends on this growth rate.
Readers should note that a population projection is not a guarantee of a future population number, and a capacity analysis is not a predictor of a specific pattern of development. Both analyses are conducted in order to identify the range of likely outcomes if population trends do not change and if zoning, subdivision and other land use regulations do not change. Neither analysis should be read as a definitive statement of the future, but they may be understood as representing a possible outcome if current growth trends and regulations continue.
Population Projection
Population projections indicate the potential future needs of a community. These needs may include land development, infrastructure, economic systems, school capacity, recreational resources, governmental services, etc. The purpose of population projections for land use planning is to provide an understanding of the general trend of population growth that may be expected over the planning period, rather than to specify the exact number of residents the Township will have in the future. Projecting population is not an exact science. Population projections are almost never identical to actual population growth, since the analyst cannot foresee all of the factors that will influence population growth in the future. However, population projections give the Township the opportunity to plan for this growth by having the proper tools to meet the needs of the future population.
The data used for the Miami Township population projection is derived
from the following sources:
•
The Ohio State University Extension Data Center (OSU – EDC)
•
The U. S. Census Bureau (Census)
•
The Ohio Department of Development (ODOD)
Tables 4 to 8 present the projected populations of both Miami Township
and Clermont County as a whole. Each
table includes the following data (from left to right):
• The year of the data source or projection
•
The known population in previous years and the projected population in
years after 2004
•
The percent change of population from one projection year to the next
•
The annual growth rate, which is the percent change between projection
years divided by the number of years
from one projection to the next
Township Population Trends
Table 4 contains the Miami Township population as recorded by the U.S. Census for the years 1960 to 2000. From 1960 through 1970, the Township experienced a growth rate of 5.4% annually. The average annual growth rate for the Township’s population from 1960 through 2000 is 3.4%. Due to the gradual decrease in annual growth rate, it is important to look at the most recent decade for which we have data between 1990 and 2000 for population projections. The population growth trend has slowed somewhat between 1990 and 2000 to an annual growth rate of 3.0%. Some of this deceleration in growth can be attributed to areas of Miami Township that have been annexed by surrounding communities, where public water and sewer were readily available, as well as to a decreasing number of parcels available for new development.
Table 4: Miami Township Population 1960 – 2000
Clermont County Population Trends
Since Miami Township lies in Clermont County, and since the Township constitutes a significant portion of Clermont County’s historic population growth, an examination of the Township’s population growth trends should include the County’s trends as well. Table 5 presents the Clermont County population count for the censuses of 1960 through 2000. The highest growth rate for the County is from 1970 through 1980, at 3.4% annually. The trend for the County, as well as the Township, has also slowed in the recent decade from the 3.4% to 1.9%. The average annual growth rate for the County’s population from 1960 through 2000 is 2.2%. This is comparable to Miami Township because it contains the second highest population and people per square acre in the County, second to Union Township.
Table 5: Clermont County Population 1960 – 2000
Clermont County Population Projections
When formulating population projections, it is important to compare
the local rates to a broader geographic area to provide a frame of
reference in which to evaluate the local growth rates. In Miami
Township, Clermont County provides the most relevant local comparison.
Although Clermont County is relatively rural, Miami Township
contributes to a large portion of the County’s growth.
Two sources have provided population projections for Clermont
County: The Ohio State University Extension Data Center and The Ohio
Department of Development. Both population projections indicate an
annual growth rate of 1.1%. By comparison the County’s most recent
annual growth rate between 1990 and 2000 is 1.9% (See Tables 6, 7 and
8).
Table 6: Clermont County Projection 2000 - 2030
Table 7: Clermont County Projection 2000 - 2030
Table 8: Clermont County Population 1990 and 2000
Township Population Projections
The average annual growth rate for Miami Township’s future population projection used by EK is 2.1%. This percentage was determined by taking the average of all annual growth rates shown in Figures 4 to 8 and adjusting to reflect the likelihood of a slowing growth rate over the next twenty years of Miami Township, comparable to the growth rate between 1990 and 2000. The projected population shown in Figure 6 was calculated by multiplying the 2000 Census population (36,632) by 2.1% each year. The projected population is shown in Figure 6 below in five year intervals to demonstrate more progression than a ten-year interval projection would.
Since population growth cannot be predicted this accurately, the Township should assume that its 2025 population is likely to be between 55,430 and 67,748 (a range of variation of 10% from the 61,589 projection above).
As calculated using the number of new residential construction permits from 2000 though August 31, 2004 (1,395)[1] and the U. S. Census average household size (2.83), Miami Township’s existing population is estimated at 40,580 and is projected to reach between 55,430 and 67,748 in the year 2025. The difference between the estimated current population and the projected 2025 population is 14,850 to 27,168 persons.
Capacity Analysis
A capacity analysis is conducted in conjunction with a population
projection when it is necessary for a community to determine the
future development pressure that is likely to exist due to increased
population. The purpose of the capacity analysis is to provide an
understanding of the potential amount of available vacant land that
may be consumed by new development over the course of the planning
period, and to provide advance warning of any potential implications
that may result from expected growth. This future pressure is
predicted by comparing the projected population to the amount of
developable land available.
For the purposes of this capacity analysis, a few basic assumptions
are necessary. First, the capacity analysis assumes that the existing
zoning pattern will remain in place. This assumption is necessary to
provide a basis for determining the amount of population that specific
areas will absorb. Second, this capacity analysis assumes that all of
the undeveloped land in the Township will be potentially available for
development, except for that land necessary for roadways, floodplain,
wetlands, and slopes 20% and greater.
A capacity analysis is also not an exact science. Growth almost
never occurs exactly as the planner anticipated for a variety of
reasons, and as a result a capacity analysis should not be interpreted
as an absolute prediction of future growth.
Developable Land
The estimates of land capacity presented in this memorandum are based on data provided by Miami Township and Clermont County. The data was analyzed using a Geographic Information System (GIS) application to determine the net amount of vacant or undeveloped land available for future development after removing the environmental constraints: wetlands, floodways and floodplains, and slopes 20% and greater. The process begins with a calculation of the total number of acres within Miami Township (approximately 21,000). Then the total acres of existing developed land, wetlands, floodplain, and slopes 20% and greater is subtracted. From this subtotal, 15% is subtracted to allow for existing road right-of-way. The end result is the amount of potential developable land, which equals approximately 2,250 acres.
Capacity Analysis
Figure 7 presents the following data:
· Existing Zoning Designation and Zoning Type,
· Number of Developable Acres within all parcels that have this
Zoning Designation.
· Number of Developable Acres minus 15% for Right of Way (ROW),
· Average Parcel Size in Acres ,
· Existing Minimum Lot Area specified in the Zoning Code,
· The number of New Units
The Minimum Lot Area is determined via one of three methods,
depending on the structure of the underlying zoning:
· If the existing zoning specifies a certain minimum lot size,
this number is give directly and the cell is colored yellow for
ease
of reference.
· If the existing zoning permits a variety of lot sizes and
setbacks depending on site-specific characteristics, the average
size
of all existing parcels in this zoning category was identified as the
minimum lot area for the purposes of this
analysis. These cells are
presented in pink.
· If the existing zoning permits a variety of lots sizes but
specifies setbacks and zoning lot standards minimum lot area
was
estimated based on these criteria. These cells are shown in green.
In a few instances, minimum lot areas could not be estimated
because the amount of developable land in that category is too small
to accommodate significant development or because the property with
this designation has already been zoned as “planned” district,
which will permit highly flexible development criteria. (PBD, PUD, R-PUD).
The Number of New Units possible per zoning designation was
calculated by comparing the identified minimum lot size to the amount
of developable land available.
Conclusions
According to this analysis, the Township has enough land currently
zoned residential to accommodate approximately 13,200 residents. The
amount of developable land capacity is lower than the low range figure
give for projected population in 2025 of 14,850. Therefore, Miami
Township’s developable land for residential units under the existing
zoning designations is likely to be built out by the year 2025.
Figure 7 also lists the number of new units possible within
non-residential zoning designations. These are summarized below.
B-1 Neighborhood Business 40 New Units
B-2 General Businesses 89 New Units
I Planned Industrial 44 New Units
O-1 Professional Office 10 New Units
T Mobile Home Park 160 New Units
Concept Areas
The development of Concept Areas in a comprehensive plan is
commonly pursued to help the participants understand the full range of
the community’s environments, particularly those that they may not
encounter on a regular basis. The Steering Committee formulated and
revised the Concept Areas between October 2004 and January 2005.
The Concept Areas are presented on Figure 13. The following
sections provide a summary of the key factors that differentiate these
concept areas from others, as well as an explanation of the additional
symbols.
Oasis/Miami Trails Concept Area (Yellow)
· Almost exclusively residential development and includes
primarily R-1 and R-2 zoning districts
· Predominance of recently-constructed, higher-value housing.
· Predominately located in Loveland School District
· Development pressure predominately coming from Loveland
· Some remaining rural pockets.
· Minimal traffic circulation network; predominately two-lane
rural roads experiencing high peak traffic volumes
· Small amount of commercially-zoned land at Loveland-Miamiville
and Branch Hill Guinea roads; commercial
development currently under
construction; mixed-use development undergoing approval process; other
vacant land at
intersection.
· Adjacent to Grailville, which is not included in the Concept
Area.
Wards Corner Interchange (Brown)
· Interchange of I-275 and Wards Corner Road
· Contains a combination of industrial, commercial, and office uses
including:
o International Paper
o United Dairy Farmers
o Frisch’s Restaurant
o Wards Corner Business Center
· Zoned “I” Planned Industrial and “R-1” Single Family
Residence
· Remaining vacant properties total approximately 110 acres (Ranging
from .5 to 17.25 acres in size)
· This area has minimal roadway connections. Wards Corner is the only
road that actually crosses I-275.
o Pine Lane and Lewis Road are both residential streets that originate
from Branch Hill-Miamiville and Wards
Corner Roads respectively. Both
of these streets end abruptly within the Wards Corner Interchange
Concept
Area.
o Contains six residential cul-de-sac’s
o Contains two industrial cul-de-sac’s
· Nearby communities include: City of Montgomery, Village of Indian Hill, and Loveland
Wood Creek/Paxton Area (Pink)
· Predominately residential
· Houses predominately date from 1970s – 1980s
· Largely built out
· Includes Cincinnati Zoo CREW facility
· Some street network connectivity west of Branch Hill – Guinea
Road; little connectivity east of Branch Hill – Guinea
Road.
· See notes in Oasis/Miami Trails Area regarding development at
Loveland-Miamiville and Branch Hill Guinea roads.
Route 50 Concept Area (Purple)
· Predominately commercial/industrial development
· Includes Park 50 Tech Center
· Relatively high vacancy rates, particularly in Park 50 Tech
Center. Relatively convenient highway access
· Significant presence of commercial/industrial buildings over 30
years old – some concerns regarding obsolescence.
· Non-Class A office space
· Some available developable land at top of hill in Park 50 Tech
Center
· Multiple private owners.
· Primary access is U.S. Route 50
· Southern portion of concept area adjoins the East Fork of the
Little Miami River.
Sugar Camp/ Dry Run Area (Dark Green)
· Rural character
· Most rugged terrain in Township
· Generally low-density residential
· Minimal road network
· Non-standard road surfaces and structures
· Lack of sewer and water infrastructure except on Sugarcamp Road
· Includes historic community of Perintown
East Miami Area (Orange)
· Less developed at present that other portions of Township
· Development occurring quickly; subdivision projects under
development and under construction.
· Includes Miami Meadows Township Park
· Remaining agriculture-related businesses, including Shaw’s
Farm
· Current lack of sewer network
· Generally frontage development; some subdivisions
· Relatively level topography; some hydric soils.
· Proximity to Goshen and Stonelick townships
· Increasing traffic on State Route 131
Day Heights Area (Light Blue)
· Predominately residential, except for Route 131 frontage areas.
· Spans both sides of Route 131.
· Significant concerns regarding traffic congestion on Route 131
· Older residential development, generally larger houses, some
newer residential development
· A small number of large undeveloped parcels.
· Generally good street connectivity within neighborhoods.
· Improvements currently underway to the intersection of Route 131
and both Naomi Drive and Day Creek Road.
River Communities Area (Dark Blue)
· Includes several historic river communities interspersed with
subdivision development:
- Miamiville
- Branch Hill
- Epworth Heights
· Predominately residential; small amount of commercial at center
of Miamiville and Branch Hill; some industrial
development along River
Road.
· Subdivisions tend to be 20 years old and older.
· Little Miami State Park (Bike Trail) extends through most of
Concept Area
· Dan Beard Boy Scout Reservation at south end of Concept Area
· Miamiville:
o Historically oriented to Milford
o Stable property values; reinvestment and historic preservation
occurring
o Largest and highest visibility of River Communities
o Some tourist-oriented commercial activity (antiques, etc.)
o Miami Boat Club
o Odor issues resulting from existing sewage treatment facility;
concerns over expansion of sewage treatment
facility.
o Headquarters of Little Miami, Inc.
o Has own post office
o Nearby residential subdivisions (off Branch Hill – Miamiville
Road): stable, little undeveloped land, concerns
regarding rough
terrain and stormwater management
· Branch Hill:
o Similar historic character to Miamiville; smaller and less
visible. Separated from remainder of township by
Branch Hill –
Loveland Road.
o Historically oriented to Loveland
o Stable property values; not significant reinvestment
o 100 year floodplain follows western border
o Predominately older population
o Water service constructed in 2004 via CDBG grant
o Sanitary sewer service not generally available; apartment
buildings using package plants.
· Epworth Heights
o Unique historical development (Methodist summer camp)
o Physical isolation from rest of Township.
o Lack of sewer system
o Extremely small lots
o Varying quality of existing building maintenance
o Concerns regarding illegal dumping
o Nonstandard roadway system
Lower Price Road (Light Green)
· Isolated from rest of Township due to surface road network,
I-275 and Boy Scout facility
· Oriented to Milford
· Predominately residential development
· Most development more than 30 years old.
· Lack of sewer infrastructure
Route 28 Corridor Area (Red)
· Most visible and most heavily-traveled area of Township
· Area most closely identified with Township
· Includes historic communities of Mt. Repose and Mulberry
· Includes I-275 Interchange area and Route 28 Bypass
· Includes area addressed in the S.R. 28
Redevelopment/Transformation Plan
· Predominately commercial development; largest concentration of
commercial development in Township
· Significant redevelopment needs.
· Concentration of residential development along road frontage in
Mt. Repose area.
· Increasing traffic volumes and congestion outside bypassed area
· Current Township/County plans relating to ownership transfer and
roadway improvements
· Complete existing infrastructure
Key Entry Points
· Locations at which significant volumes of traffic enter the
Township on a regular basis (includes Township residents
and residents
of other communities)
· Include interchanges and surface roads
· Gateway signs located at some locations; generally small sign on
signpost
Key Intersections
· Locations that have high traffic volumes and high visibility
· Most, although not all, have existing commercial development
· Concerns in most locations regarding traffic volumes and traffic
congestion, including access management and
roadway capacity.
· Often the defining intersection or center of identity for the
surrounding area.
Future Expectations
In order to determine feasible alternatives for future development
in Miami Township, it is necessary to develop a shared understanding
of likely future trends in Miami Township. These trends will establish
the likely context in which our Plan may be implemented.
The following statements summarize general trends and conditions
that may be reasonably expected to develop in Miami Township over the
next 20 years. These statements were reviewed and revised by the
Steering Committee in May 2005.
· Most of Miami Township’s existing undeveloped property will be
developed by the end of the 20-year period, unless it
has been
restricted from development.
· Undeveloped property in Miami Township will generally increase in
value as it becomes more scarce. Increasing land
values will create
pressure for more intensive development and redevelopment.
· Demand for higher-quality commercial development will be met. As
existing commercial areas in eastern Hamilton
County and southern
Warren County become saturated, commercial developers will find
themselves in search of new
development opportunities. Miami Township
is likely to provide such an opportunity, especially as the existing
market
potential becomes more established and well known and as
populations and income levels in both Miami Township
and townships to
the east continue to rise.
· The Township will experience pressure over time for expanded
services: Fire, Police, EMS and Public Works.
The relatively small amount of undeveloped land in Miami Township will
build interest in redevelopment of existing
properties with marginal
uses. Redeveloped properties, regardless of their land use type, will
be more intensive than
their previous uses.
· Road capacity and road connectivity will continue to be strained by
both existing and new development. The existing
roadway network will
be required to carry more vehicles, both as a result of Miami Township
traffic and through and
destination traffic from surrounding areas.
· Adequate sewer and water infrastructure will be available to almost
the entire Township.
· Most of Miami Township’s existing residential neighborhoods will
remain viable for the duration of the 20-year Plan
period. Most
existing subdivisions will not experience substantial changes in land
use or density during this period.
· Ohio Townships, particularly home-rule townships, will become able
to exercise powers that are not clearly available to
them at this
time. The nature and extent of these powers is not yet known.
· Demand for parks and community or recreational facilities will
continue to grow as the Township’s population and
income levels
increase.
· Miami Township will continue to find itself in intense competition
within the region for office and light industrial activity.
· Miami Township and other local governments will continue to face
intense pressures to expend public funds as
efficiently and
effectively as possible.
[2] Existing
Conditions
| [4] Comprehensive Vision & Goals