University of Cincinnati
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI Date:___________________ I, _________________________________________________________, hereby submit this work as part of the requirements for the degree of: in: It is entitled: This work and its defense approved by: Chair: _______________________________ _______________________________ _______________________________ _______________________________ _______________________________ SMART GROWTH IN THE STATE OF OHIO: CONFLICTS AND CONSTRAINTS An analysis and evaluation of the evolution of smart growth in the Cleveland and Cincinnati metropolitan regions A thesis submitted to the Division of Research and Advanced Studies of the University of Cincinnati in partial fulfillment of the Requirements for the degree of MASTER OF COMMUNITY PLANNING in the School of Planning of the College of Design, Architecture, Art and Planning 2004 by Surachita Bose B.Arch., Bangalore University, India, 2001 Committee Members: Chair: Dr. Carla Chifos, PhD Reader: Ms. Elizabeth Blume i ABSTRACT Urban sprawl’ is a term used to define the patterns of uncontrolled and haphazard development that characterizes the American landscape as of today. Economically, socially and environmentally, sprawl is creating some of the costliest problems that the United States now faces. The ‘Smart Growth’ movement has emerged out of the realization that we need to rethink the way we grow. This thesis is an outcome of the need for documented evidence of the current status of smart growth in the state of Ohio. The research attempts to establish the conflicts and constraints in the context of smart growth in Ohio as well as in its two key sub-regions – Cleveland metropolitan area in Northeast and Cincinnati metropolitan area in Southwest Ohio. The methodology uses a case study analysis approach to document and analyze the macro and micro level dynamics of the two regions and the state of Ohio as a whole. The critical components of the study were the establishment of a smart growth prescription with nine overarching principles and their sub elements followed by a chronological evolution of smart growth in the state and in its two sub-regions and finally a matrix composition and analysis framework that was used to establish the relative status of smart growth in the two respective central cities, suburbs and metropolitan regions. ii iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank Prof Carla Chifos for her valuable suggestions and constant guidance without which this thesis would not have been possible. Her ideas and expertise in the field of smart growth contributed greatly to the shaping of this project. I would like to acknowledge the support, guidance and valuable time provided to me by my reader, Liz Blume despite her demanding schedule. Her extensive experience in the field of planning, critical insights and constant words of encouragement were extremely helpful during different stages of the study. I would like to thank all the experts who participated in my research providing me with valuable information and responding to my interviews. Dr. Tom Bier, Dr. Wendy Kellogg, Prof. Robert Manley and Janet Keller of OKI have been especially helpful and I’m indeed very thankful for their time and cooperation. Last but not the least I’d like to express my gratitude to the most important people in my life - my parents, my grandparents, my brother and close friends who always heard me out and stood by me. I really appreciate their patience, understanding and constant encouragement. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction 6 1.1 Background 1.2 Problem Statement 1.3 Methodology 1.4 Thesis Structure 2. Overview of Urban Sprawl 16 2.1 Urban Sprawl in United States 2.1.1 Urban Growth and Transitions in the United States: Post World WarII 2.1.2 Problems Arising Due To Dispersed Development Patterns 2.1.3 Need for Change 3. Smart Growth: A Policy Tool to Combat Sprawl 21 3.1 What is Smart Growth? 3.2 Main principles of smart growth 3.2.1 Mixing Land Uses 3.2.2 Expanding Housing Opportunities and Choices 3.2.3 Providing Transportation Options 3.2.4 Strengthening Existing Communities through Infill Development and redevelopment 3.2.5 Conserving Open Space, Farmland and Critical Environmental Areas 3.2.6 Providing Incentives to Smart Development to make it predictable, fair and cost effective 3.2.7 Fostering attractive communities with a strong sense of place 3.2.8 Using Innovative and Compact Design Techniques 3.2.9 Encouraging multi-stakeholder and community collaboration 4. The State of Ohio and Smart growth Policy 36 4.1 The State of Ohio – An Overview 4.1.1 Location and size 4.1.2 Physical characteristics 4.1.3 Transportation Networks 4.2 Lack of innovative planning in Ohio 4.3 Ohio and Smart Growth: One of the worst cases 4.4 Cincinnati and Cleveland – Two Key Representative Cities Of Ohio 4.4.1 Why choose Cincinnati and Cleveland? 4.4.2 The city of Cleveland and its Landscape Characteristics: A profile 4.4.2.1 Location and Size 4.4.2.2 Physical characteristics 4.4.2.3 Transportation Networks 4.4.2.4 Identification of High Growth area in the vicinity of Cleveland: City of Avon 4.4.2.4.1 Location and Characteristics 4.4.2.4.2 Background 4.4.2.4.3 Selection of the city of Avon as ‘high growth area’ for study 4.4.3 City of Cincinnati and its Landscape Characteristics: A profile 4.4.3.1 Location and size 4.4.3.2 Physical characteristics v 4.4.3.3 Transportation Networks 4.4.3.4 Identification of High Growth area in the vicinity of Cincinnati: West Chester Township 4.4.3.4.1 Location and Characteristics 4.4.3.4.2 Background 4.4.3.4.3 Selection of the West Chester Township as ‘high growth area’ for study 5. Evolution of Smart Growth in Cleveland 59 5.1 Background 5.2 Identification of panel of experts 5.3 Interview Sessions 5.4 Chronological evolution of Smart Growth and key players/organizations 5.4.1 Events preceding the Smart Growth related discussions 5.4.2 Beginning of the Smart Growth Movement 5.4.3 Key Projects/Organizations and Individuals in the Cleveland Metropolitan Region 5.4.4 Debate surrounding Smart Growth in the Cleveland Region 6. Evolution of Smart Growth in Cincinnati 78 6.1 Background 6.2 Identification of panel of experts 6.3 Interview Sessions 6.4 Chronological evolution of Smart Growth and key players/organizations 6.4.1 Events preceding the Smart Growth related discussions 6.4.2 Beginning of the Smart Growth Movement 6.4.3 Key Projects/Organizations and Individuals in the Cincinnati Metropolitan Region 6.4.4 Events that hampered the smart growth movement in eth Cincinnati Region 7. Smart Growth Responses in the state of Ohio 98 7.1 Background 7.2 Before 1980 7.3 During the 1990’s 7.4 Since 2000 8. Matrix Composition and Evaluation 105 8.1 Current status of Smart Growth in Cleveland 8.1.1 Matrix Series for Cleveland and City of Avon 8.1.1.1 Matrix A1: Mixing Land Uses 8.1.1.2 Matrix A2: Expanding Housing Opportunities and Choices 8.1.1.3 Matrix A3: Providing Transportation Options 8.1.1.4 Matrix A4: Strengthening Existing Communities through Infill Development and redevelopment 8.1.1.5 Matrix A5: Conserving Open Space, Farmland and Critical Environmental Areas 8.1.1.6 Matrix A6: Providing Incentives to Smart Development to make it predictable, fair and cost effective 8.1.1.7 Matrix A7: Fostering attractive communities with a strong sense of place 2 8.1.1.8 Matrix A8: Using Innovative and Compact Design Techniques 8.1.1.9 Matrix A9: Encouraging multi-stakeholder and community collaboration 8.2 Current status of Smart Growth in Cincinnati 8.2.1 Matrix Series for Cincinnati and West Chester Township 8.2.1.1 Matrix B1: Mixing Land Uses 8.2.1.2 Matrix B2: Expanding Housing Opportunities and Choices 8.2.1.3 Matrix B3: Providing Transportation Options 8.2.1.4 Matrix B4: Strengthening Existing Communities through Infill Development and redevelopment 8.2.1.5 Matrix B5: Conserving Open Space, Farmland and Critical Environmental Areas 8.2.1.6 Matrix B6: Providing Incentives to Smart Development to make it predictable, fair and cost effective 8.2.1.7 Matrix B7: Fostering attractive communities with a strong sense of place 8.2.1.8 Matrix B8: Using Innovative and Compact Design Techniques 8.2.1.9 Matrix B9: Encouraging multi-stakeholder and community collaboration 8.3 Summary of Matrix Results 8.3.1 Summary of sub-elements ‘present’ in Cleveland, Avon, Cincinnati and West Chester Township 8.3.2 Summary of sub-elements ‘absent’ in Cleveland, Avon, Cincinnati and West Chester Township 8.3.3 Summary of sub-elements ‘under consideration’ in Cleveland, Avon, Cincinnati and West Chester Township 8.3.4 Overall Summary of Matrix Results 9. Findings and Comparative Analyses 151 9.1 Comparison of central cities: Cleveland and Cincinnati 9.2 Comparison of suburbs: City of Avon and West Chester Township 9.2.1 Avon’s perspective on smart growth 9.2.2 West Chester Township’s perspective on smart growth 9.3 Comparison of metropolitan regions: Cleveland metropolitan region and Cincinnati metropolitan region 9.3.1 Regional Constraints in the Cleveland metropolitan region 9.3.2 Regional Constraints in the Cincinnati metropolitan region 10. Conclusions: Conflicts and constraints within the state of Ohio 167 10.1 Conflicts and constraints in Ohio 10.2 Recommendations 10.3 Limitations of the study Bibliography 173 Appendices A. Questionnaire 178 B. List of Experts Interviewed 181 3 List of Figures Figure 1.1 Flowchart showing structure of Thesis 15 Figure 4.1: Location of Ohio in the United States 36 Figure 4.2 The State of Ohio 37 Figure 4.3: Ohio: Major Interstate Routes 39 Figure