Morrow County Ohio Home Sales - PowerPoint by zno11350

VIEWS: 6 PAGES: 50

More Info
									Observations on the ―Outside‖ Game:
Townships, Regions, and Agriculture

              Presentation to
        1000 Friends of Central Ohio
              Columbus, OH
           September 15, 2004
       Contact Information
Jeff Sharp
Associate Professor
Dept. of Human & Community Resource Development
Sharp.123@osu.edu

Jill Clark
Program Manager
Exurban Change Project
Exurban@osu.edu
                   Introduction
► The  Exurban Change Project focuses on
  understanding the rural and exurban side of the
  regional change question.
   Repository of data pertinent to communities at the R-U
    interface
   Custom analysis available on request

► Project   is part of larger effort at OSU
   Other programs at OSU include—Swank Program for
    Rural-Urban Policy; OSU Extension Land-Use Team;
    Center for Urban and Regional Analysis (CURA)
        Outline of Presentation

► Review   ―rural‖ population trends in Ohio
  and Central Ohio
► Examine interconnections among Rural and
  Urban areas of the Central Ohio Region
► Review challenges associated with farming
  at the interface
► Discuss Planning & Zoning needs of
  townships
   Ohio Population:
Return of the Township
Nation, State and Regional Population Growth
            by decade, 1970-2000
      18.0%

      16.0%                                                                               15.4%


      14.0%                                                                       13.2%

      12.0%                 11.4%                               11.1%
                                                         9.8%
      10.0%                         8.8%

       8.0%

       6.0%                                                                4.7%
       4.0%

       2.0%          1.3%
                                                  0.5%
       0.0%
                        1970-1980                   1980-1990                1990-2000

                                           Ohio     U.S.    Central Ohio
 Source: US Census Bureau
    Ohio Township Government
► Townships   are administrative units of the
  State of Ohio
► Townships were created to facilitate the
  distribution of land
► They possess only the powers that are
  provided them through the Constitution of
  Ohio and the Ohio Revised Code
   In contrast to Home Rule of municipalities
Population of Ohio Townships, Villages and Cities, 1960-2000

                            4.50


                            4.00


                            3.50
 Population (in Millions)




                            3.00


                            2.50


                            2.00


                            1.50


                            1.00


                            0.50


                            0.00
                        Year:      1960 1970 1980 1990 2000   1960 1970 1980 1990 2000   1960 1970 1980 1990 2000   1960 1970 1980 1990 2000

                                          Village                 Small Cities*              Large Cities*               Townships

                                     Change 1960-2000:          Change 1960-2000:          Change 1960-2000:         Change 1960-2000:
                                         +11.4%                     +27.9%                      -15.2%                   +33.2%
                                  1960         1980



      Township Population Density
          1960 - 1980 - 2000

               Less than 50 persons/sq. mile

               50 - 100 persons/sq. mile

               100 - 500 persons/sq. mile

               500 or more persons/sq. mile    2000
Source: US Census Bureau
Changes in Central Ohio
     Townships
                           Population of Central Ohio Townships,
                              Villages and Cities, 1960-2000
                800000

                700000

                600000

                500000
   Population




                400000

                300000

                200000

                100000

                    0
                         1970 1980 1990 2000      1970 1980 1990 2000          1970 1980 1990 2000         1970 1980 1990 2000
                             Villages              Small Cities* Large Cities*                              Townships
                            45% growth                100% growth                  51% growth               60% growth

Source: US Census Bureau                       *Small cities have a population less than 50,000. Large cities have a population greater than 50,000.
           Population Density, 1970




Source: US Census Bureau
           Population Density, 2000




Source: US Census Bureau
   Population Change, 1970 - 2000




Source: US Census Bureau
Regionalism: Appreciating
the Columbus MSA shadow
       Connecting the Dots:
     The Importance of Roads
► Historic Settlements at the crossroads
► Urbanization and transportation have always
  been interrelated.
       The first suburbanization occurred in the mid-
        1800‘s as railroads and streetcar lines were built
        from central city to outskirts of city.
►   Persistent ―rural‖ pockets of low density
    settlement
73% of all
urban land
cover in Ohio
is located
within 5
miles of a
highway.
(Reece and
Irwin, 2002)
                                                  Major Urban Center
Persistent Rural Pockets




                           Historic Settlements
                                                  Major Urban Center
Persistent Rural Pockets




                           Historic Settlements
                                                  Major Urban Center
Persistent Rural Pockets




                           Historic Settlements
     But it‘s not just people who
          follow the roads…
► Roadbuilding also spurs firms to move
 outward and leads to the development of
 ―edge cities‖ around the central city.
     allows people to move even further out
► This
 and maintain the same commute time.
Job Growth by County, ‗94 – ‗01

                          -11.9




          19.3     96.6



                                         13.0

         17.4      20.7



                                  21.3
                 4.5
                                                Ohio Average =
                                                    12.01%
    Selected Commuting Facts
► Columbus MSA core counties: Franklin,
 Licking & Delaware
   Between 1990 and 2000, commuters into
    Delaware County increased from 9,068 to
    22,083.
   Morrow County commuters into core counties of
    the Columbus MSA increased from 3,260
    (26.7% of workforce) to 5,173 (34.5% of
    workforce).
   30,386 workers commuted into core counties
    from outside the Columbus MSA
Percent of Workforce Commuting in to
 Core Columbus MSA Counties, 2000


                          34.5%
                              Morrow

         31.5%

           Union    Delaware



                                       Licking

         46.0%     Franklin
        Madison
                                 50.2%
                   44.8%         Fairfield
                   Pickaway
       Soon to Join the Party?
► Countiessurrounding the Columbus metro
 area are poised to join the MSA based
   Current threshold of 25%+ of the county‘s
    employed population commuting to the core
    MSA counties necessary to join.
Percent of Workforce Commuting in to
 Core Columbus MSA Counties, 2000

                    10.4%
                     Marion

                                  Morrow
                                            20.7%
                                             Knox


             Union      Delaware



                                            Licking

                       Franklin
          Madison

                                     Fairfield
                      Pickaway
                                           18.1%
                                           Hocking
                     8.2%
                       Ross
          Issues at the Edges
► Road   development and business location within
  the Columbus MSA impacts a very large region
► Many counties & townships outside (and even
  inside) the Columbus MSA may not understand
  their stake in the Columbus MSA.
► What, if anything, needs to be done to develop a
  regional identity beyond Franklin County and the
  immediately adjacent counties?
   Agriculture:
A possible partner
   Significance of Ohio Metro and
  Columbus MSA Agriculture (2002)

  Attribute       Metro Ohio         Columbus MSA
                (% of total Ohio)   (% of total Ohio)

# of farms           43.1%               9.5%

Land in farms        38.4%               11.2%

Ag. Sales            39.0%               11.1%
     Three Ag. Issues other than
       Farmland Preservation

► Farming  vs. Farmland
► Selected Farming Issues
   Farm Succession
   Landscape Fragmentation
   Enterprise Adaptation Options
               Farm Succession
► Desperately   seeking young farmers
   Total # of Ohio farmers declined 1.2% between
    1997 and 2002
   32.2% decline in metro farmers LT 35
   Farmers LT 45 comprised 30.6% of metro
    farmers in 1997, down to 25.2% in 2002
► Part-time,retired, and hobby farmers of
 special concern
      Farmland Fragmentation
► Who   will farm a fragmented landscape?
   Part-time/hobby farming vs full-time


► Impermanence     Syndrome
   Gradual disinvestment and exit from farming
    due to negative assessment of social and
    physical changes in community or landscape
   County Level Farm Attributes

            Farm Size   Avg. Farm Value Famer Occ.
Pickaway       348      $    997,805.00   58.7%
Madison        337      $ 1,068,829.00    63.8%
Union          251      $    672,903.00   60.4%
Delaware       207      $    714,762.00   55.5%
Morrow         207      $    546,657.00   56.9%
Fairfield      167      $    505,863.00   53.1%
Licking        160      $    583,951.00   51.3%
Franklin       145      $    643,692.00   51.3%
    Farm Enterprise Adaptation
► Urban   opportunities
   Off-farm employment
   Urban-oriented Agriculture-Greater Columbus
    Food Shed Project
   Road frontage development
► Urban   Limitations
   Compatibility of livestock and residential
   Landscape fragmentation
   Loss of critical mass of farm services
Crop and Livestock by sales


                           Morrow




        Union   Delaware




                               Licking

                Franklin

     Madison                                Ohio Average =

                                Fairfield   Crops      54%

                     Pickaway               Livestock 46%
 The Columbus MSA Farming Buffer
► Some   areas may repel nonfarm development
   Madison & Pickaway; parts of Union and Licking
► Possible   Development/Policy needs:
   New farmer recruitment
   Zoning that preserves unfragmented landscapes
   Zoning that limits incompatible land-uses (e.g. livestock
    and people)
   Community Economic Development efforts that include
    agriculture
   Planning and Zoning
Options for Ohio Townships
              Ohio‘s Public Policy
► The  laws governing land use in Ohio were
  established when development was highly
  centralized in major cities.
► Policies designed for metro areas may not serve
  local townships and small communities who are
  facing development decisions.
► In Ohio development is, for the most part, a local
  matter.


        From Sustainable Growth and Development for Ohio ―Education for Public Policy Decisions‖
        Ohio State University Extension
              Handling Growth and Change
                   in Ohio Townships
►   Fundamental approaches for handling growth and change
    are planning and zoning
►   Comprehensive Land-Use Plan**
     77% of metro townships have a plan (township or county)
     61% of nonmetro townships have a plan
►   Zoning
     Almost all townships in the Columbus metro area have zoning
      (fewer than ½ of Morrow County townships are zoned)
     Across Ohio, only about 50% of all townships have zoning


         **From a survey study by Meghan Gough and Jennifer Evans-Cowley
         Results in the upcoming Ohio Township Association magazine
      Zoning by Exurban Stage
                       100%
                       90%
                       80%
Percent of Townships




                       70%
                       60%
                       50%
                       40%
                       30%
                       20%
                       10%
                        0%
                              Rural         1          2          3        4        5           6
                                                           Exurban Stage
                                      County or Township Zoning   Rejected County   No Zoning
            Township Zoning**
► #1problem for administering zoning is
 zoning resolution enforcement
   Part-time inspectors
► #1   land use or zoning issue is sprawl
   #2 economic development




        **From a survey study by Meghan Gough and Jennifer Evans-Cowley
        Results in the upcoming Ohio Township Association magazine
 Cutting Edge 1930‘s Planning &
       Zoning in the 2000s
► Possible   changes in current legislation:
   Planning--questions about ability to adopt a plan
   Changes in Township & Count Zoning Enabling
    Legislation
     ► ―Health, Safety and Morals‖
     ► Addition of ―General Welfare‖

   Subdivision regulations—5 acre exemption
► New   tools for local governments
   Enable impact fees for unincorporated areas
   Enable transfer of development rights

                  See Section 4 Growth and Change at the R-U Interface
                  Exurban Change Project, 2003
 Agricultural Zoning in Ohio Townships

► Three   approaches to agricultural zoning in Ohio:
   Agriculture is a preferred use, but one of many
    permitted uses in a zone (Central & NW)
   Agriculture is an incidental or ignored use (NE & SW)
   A more aggressive strategy: Agriculture is the primary
    (exclusive) use
     ► Exclusive   agricultural zoning (voluntary or mandatory) or
       agricultural zoning where residential development is conditional
    Challenges for Ohio Townships
►   Do Ohio townships at the R-U interface have the capacity
    to manage changes associated with exurbanization?
     Does sufficient ―social capital‖ exist within and between
      communities at the R-U interface to collectively respond to the
      changes?

     Do local governments have the professional and technical capacity
      to manage changes?

     Do local governments have the fiscal capacity?
 Future Directions of our Project
► Ohio   Research
   Exurban Typological Analysis
   Continued Analysis of Ohio township zoning
   Continued Analysis of Ohio‘s Urban Agriculture
► National   Research
   USDA funded national study: ―Agriculture
    Adaptation at the Rural-Urban Interface: Can
    Communities Make a Difference.‖
   Spatial patterns of exurbanization in the U.S.
  For More Information on Population and Land
         Use Trends and Data in Ohio:

   Visit the Exurban Change website at

http://aede.osu.edu/programs/exurbs/index.htm
Sign up here for the latest in from the project.

								
To top