Wilson County Quality Growth Project Report

Tennessee Valley Authority1101 Market Street | Chattanooga, TN 37402-2881

WILSON COUNTYG R O W T H R E A D I N E S S R E P O R T

1

The Wilson County Quality Growth project was a collaborative effort of local leaders from Wilson County, the cities of Lebanon and Mount Juliet and the Cumberland River Compact. The process was designed and facilitated by staff from the Southeast Watershed Forum and the Tennessee Valley Authority.

Quality Growth...Quality Communities

Wilson County Growth Readiness Report 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 3

Background ................................................................................................................................. 5

Workshop Summaries ................................................................................................................. 7

The Wilson County Action Plan ............................................................................................... 18

Figures

1. Population Growth in States of the Southeast (1980-2000) ................................................ 8

2. Land Consumption in States of the Southeast (1980-2000) ............................................... 8

3. Water Withdrawals in States of the Southeast (1980-2000) ................................................. 9

4. Energy Consumption in States of the Southeast (1980-2000) ............................................ 9

5. Wilson County Population Map (2000) ............................................................................... 10

6. Wilson County Projected Population Map (2035)............................................................. 10

7. Wilson County Impervious Cover Map (2000)................................................................... 11

8. Wilson County Projected Impervious Cover Map (2035) ................................................. 11

9. Wilson County Estimated Total Annual Vehicle Miles Traveled Map (2000) .................... 12

10. Wilson County Future Projected Total Vehicle Miles Traveled Map (2035) ...................... 12

11. Costs for Utilities and Local Roads – Projected Savings .................................................... 13

Appendices

A. Participants ............................................................................................................................ 21

B. Quality Growth Worksheet – Comparison of Community Scores .................................... 22

C. Multiple Jurisdiction Assessment of Opportunities for Improvement ............................. 25

D. Wilson County Quality Growth Action Plan ....................................................................... 28

Quality Growth...Quality Communities3

INTRODUCTIONThey’ve really got the best of both worlds in Wilson County, Tennessee—and they’d like to keep it that way.

A rural character founded in traditional values and a strong agricultural heritage, plus easy access to all the big-city amenities found in nearby Nashville. It’s a prime location and an enviable situation: the proximity you need, coupled with the laid-back lifestyle and the peaceful setting you want.

The area is rich in history. Remnants of mounds and other archaeological findings have established the presence of early Native Americans. The Trail of Tears ran through Wilson County, and a Civil War cemetery in Lebanon is the final resting place of scores of Confederate soldiers. Respect for the past is evident throughout the county, from the well-preserved quaintness of Watertown to the abundance of antique shops located around the Public Square in Lebanon.

Farming is and always has been a big part of life there—especially in the eastern part of the county. Beef and dairy cattle, horses, hay, corn, soybeans, tobacco, wheat, apples, and peaches are just some of the local agricultural activities. Wilson County farmers are also beginning to look to the possibilities offered by agri-tourism.

Wilson County is blessed with water resources that add substantially to its appeal. The Cumberland and Stones Rivers, Old Hickory and Percy Priest Lakes, and many other waterways provide recreational opportunities, habitat for aquatic life, and drinking water.

A variety of transportation options have made Wilson County attractive to prospective residents and commercial/industrial interests. From the Interstate 40 corridor to the Music City Star Regional Rail System, there are many ways to move efficiently to and from Wilson County.

Cultural and educational institutions, including Cumberland University and the award-winning Wilson County Fair, add to the mix. Recreation ranges from motorsports at the Nashville Superspeedway to camping at Cedars of Lebanon State Park to sportfishing on the county’s lakes.


For all these reasons and many more, the word has spread. Wilson County bills itself as “The Eastern Gateway to Nashville.” But the fact is, the gate swings both ways. Many people have chosen to leave the faster-paced urban environment of Nashville for a quieter and more rural lifestyle in Wilson County. Between the years 1990 and 2000, Wilson County experienced a 30% growth rate. Projections indicate that, by 2035, the county is likely to add another 97,370 residents—a growth rate of 110%.

It’s clear from these statistics that Wilson County is really just poised on the cusp of what promises to be significant growth in the coming decades. So it was perfect timing to bring together a variety of folks representing the county, local municipalities, developers, elected officials, and state and regional community development and resource protection organizations to talk about how to best plan for that growth. The prevailing wisdom indicates that it’s not a question of if Wilson County is going to experience more development, but rather when—and even more importantly—where and how.

A wide variety of backgrounds and perspectives were represented at the Wilson County Quality Growth Workshop Series, but it was clear that those in attendance were in agreement on one thing: that they wanted to preserve what was important and valuable about their community, while recognizing that change will be inevitable as the county adds population. They made the bold commitment to be actively involved in managing the coming growth. Experts agree that this kind of civic engagement—that is, first evaluating and then taking actions to bring about changes to development rules—will be a deciding factor in building, preserving, and maintaining communities that offer residents the kind of quality of life that they value.

Between the years 1990 and 2000,

Wilson County experienced a 30%

growth rate. Projections indicate

that, by 2035, the county is likely to

add another 97,370 residents—a

growth rate of 110%.


BACKGROUND

The decision to pursue the opportunity to host a Quality Growth Workshop Series in Wilson County was an outgrowth of a general predisposition on the part of local agency folks and community leaders to work together across jurisdictional boundaries. Several regional and local initiatives offering opportunities to manage growth were already underway, including the Tri-County Transportation and Land Use Study, a number of proposals for the redevelopment of downtown Lebanon, and many examples of low-impact development.

Though they each had their own special areas of interest, they were unified by a recognition of the impacts of growth that affect them all. With the introduction of regulatory mandates contained in NPDES Phase II permit requirements, the three affected stormwater agencies (Wilson County, Lebanon, and Mt. Juliet) face a number of daunting issues. The Army Corps of Engineers has placed a temporary moratorium on new water supply withdrawals (as well as increases to existing withdrawals) by municipalities or industries from Old Hickory Lake while a study is being conducted to determine the impacts of those withdrawals on other purposes for which the reservoir system is operated. There has been a lack of collaboration among the county’s water districts and local jurisdictions to plan water supply to meet growth. Wilson County had approximately 93 miles of impaired streams on the State’s 303(d) list for 2008.

While none of these issues were currently severe enough to drastically limit the county’s potential for the future, folks in Wilson County were conscious of the need to get a handle on these things NOW, before undesirable development patterns began to take hold in such a way that they could only react to it—instead of being able to proactively guide and manage it on the front end.

That realization led them to search for a credible approach to planning for the growth that will surely come. At approximately the same time, program managers from the Tennessee Valley Authority and the Southeast Watershed Forum were seeking a community in which to roll out a brand-new technical assistance curriculum: Quality Growth.

The equation is pretty simple, actually:

“Quality Growth = Quality Communities = Quality of Life”

That’s the basis of the program, which was developed cooperatively by the Tennessee Valley Authority, the Southeast Watershed Forum, and the Environmental Protection Agency. It was subject to technical and peer review by many additional partners. The idea behind Quality Growth is to help communities make informed choices about managing growth—planning for the future in such a way that quality of life, natural resources, and local values are protected.

Workshop participants are guided through a process designed to help them take an informed and active role in determining the type of growth they desire and where it will take place. They evaluate community plans and local development rules in light of 10 “principles” of Quality Growth and establish an Action Plan (formed through consensus during the course of

The 10 Principles of Quality Growth:

1. Encourage compact, mixed-use development2. Expand housing choice3. Create walkable and bikeable neighborhoods4. Create distinctive, attractive communities5. Preserve open space, resource lands, and environmentally sensitive areas6. Direct development toward existing communities or planned growth centers7. Increase transportation choices8. Make cost-effective, predictable development decisions9. Minimize stormwater runoff10. Protect water resources

While each principle is important individually, communities will realize the greatest impact by incorporating as many as possible into their plans.


the workshop series) that will, among other things, bring about changes to codes and ordinances and guide the development of community plans, policies, and programs.

A review committee composed of representatives from TVA, the Southeast Watershed Forum, EPA, and the Tennessee Local Planning Assistance Office used a competitive process to select the community that would pilot the new program. Five other communities were strong contenders, but Wilson County met all the requirements. It was a place where rapid growth was occurring—with even more anticipated in the future. It was a place with some emerging issues that needed to be addressed in a timely fashion. It was a place where a managed growth approach could potentially make a major difference, as the county braces itself for an influx of new residents and an anticipated surge in both residential and commercial development. Most of all, it was a place where thoughtful, forward-thinking community leaders were ready to work together to put a plan in place that would allow Wilson Countians to make informed choices about what growth and development will look and feel like.

In January of 2010, the planning process for the Wilson County Quality Growth Workshop Series began. A core group of local leaders from Wilson County, the cities of Mt. Juliet and Lebanon, and the Cumberland River Compact (along with facilitators from TVA and the Southeast Watershed Forum) set out to make it happen. They found venues, set dates and times, came up with a list of potential participants, sent out invitations, and encouraged their colleagues to join in the process. The stage was set for change.

So often, the different jurisdictions within a community fail to openly collaborate and communicate with each other—for a number of reasons. Sometimes, it’s a question of politics; in other instances, it’s more about bureaucracy, workloads, or just the traditional ways in which business is typically done. Thankfully, that is NOT the case in Wilson County.

— Vena Jones Program Director, Cumberland River Compact


WORKSHOP SUMMARIES

Around 50 people from all over Wilson County and also those representing state and regional interests participated in the workshop series, held over a five-month period in 2010. See Appendix A for list of participants.

Workshop 1 March 17, 2010

Understanding Quality Growth

The workshop series began with an introduction to the impacts of current growth patterns on a wide array of community resources, including the environment, society, the economy and community identity. Figures 1-4 show that while the Southeast had a high population growth rate, the impact of that growth on consumption of land, water, and energy was even greater. They discussed issues of local concern and were then guided through an interactive mapping exercise to identify where they believe growth will occur in their county over the next 25 years. Participants got a brief introduction to the 10 principles of Quality Growth.

Impacts of Growth in Wilson County

In addition to the data shown in Figures 5-8 (projected changes

to population and impervious surfaces in Wilson County), there

are more factors to consider when evaluating the impacts of local

growth. Development patterns affect the air, water, and land in

Wilson County; the health of its citizens; the local economy; and

the community’s fabric and identity.

For example, let’s consider the impacts of total annual vehicle

miles traveled. The estimates for the year 2000 (Figure 9) are

based on an approximate housing density of one household per

two acres. Estimates are that most households drove about 32,000

miles that year, for a total of about one billion miles traveled for all

of Wilson County. That required 47 million gallons of gas, with 41

million pounds of carbon emitted—which in turn requires almost

75,000 trees in order to store.

If housing densities in Wilson County remain the same, by 2035

estimates are that Wilson Countians will travel twice as many miles

in a year—for a total of two billion miles. That means 73 million

gallons of gas, with one million tons of carbon emitted, and close to

165,000 trees to store the carbon. (Figure 10)

Needless to say, the more development is dispersed, the greater

number of miles it becomes necessary to travel. And the greater

impacts to public health. In 2010, Tennessee has the fourth highest

adult obesity rate in the U.S. at 30.2%, according to the Robert

Wood Johnson Foundation and the Trust for America’s Health.

Communities like Wilson County can make a difference in the well-

being of their citizens by encouraging residential development that

features walkable and bikeable neighborhoods.


Figure 1: Population Growth

100% _

75% _

50% _

25% _

0% _

1980 - 2000

P

erce

nt C

hang

e

AL FL GA KY MS NC SC TN VA

Population US Census: 1980 - 2000

Figure 2: Land Consumption

100% _

75% _

50% _

25% _

0% _

Increased Faster Than Population: 1980 - 2000

P

erce

nt C

hang

e


Population Developed Land US Census: 1980 - 2000; NRCS NRI data for 1982 through 2003


Figure 4: Energy Consumption

150% _

100% _

50% _

0% _


P

erce

nt C

hang

e


Population Energy Consumption US Census Population Data 1980 - 2000; Energy Information Administration, 1980 - 2000; www.eia.doe.gov

Figure 3: Water Withdrawals

2500% _

2000% _

1500% _

1000% _

500% _

0% _


P

erce

nt C

hang

e


Population Water Withdrawal US Census Population Data 1980 - 2000; USGS 1980 - 2000; http://water.usgs.gov/watuse/50years.html


Figure 5: Population 2000

Figure 6: Projected Population 2035


Figure 7: Impervious Cover, 2000

Figure 8: Future Impervious Cover, 2035 (Projected)


Figure 9: Total Annual Vehicle Miles Traveled (Estimated)

Figure 10: Future Projected Total Vehicle Miles Traveled by Block Group


Workshop 2 April 28, 2010 Assessing Our Communities

In preparation for this workshop, members of the planning team self-assessed their local codes, ordinances, plans, and associated future scenarios to see how these either support or inhibit quality growth.

Participants reviewed the composite map generated from the growth projection exercise and saw how projected population growth would also impact impervious surfaces and vehicle miles traveled. They learned in some detail about the 10 principles of Quality Growth, including benefits of these best practices and the importance of including as many as possible in community plans and projects. Figure 11 illustrates the projected savings of quality growth on land, water, and water and road infrastructure in the Southeast. They discussed strategies for implementation and learned about key steps for making Quality Growth happen.

Making Quality Growth Happen — Key Steps for SuccessCertain strategic measures are a critical part of translating good intentions into effective actions. Key steps include:

• Buildingawareness–Developpresentationsaboutspecificprinciples,practices,andaboutQualityGrowthingeneral,targetingspecificaudiences. Startadialogue;takefieldtripstomodelprojects;createbuy-in.• Developingacommunityvision–Engagediversestakeholdersinaprocesstoconsiderwhatshouldbepreservedandprotectedandwheregrowth shouldoccur;developspecificgoalsandrecommendations;ensurethatthisprocessisintegratedintothecommunityplanningprocess.• Integratingprinciplesintoplans–Incorporatethequalitygrowthprinciplesintoallplans,includingthecomprehensiveplan,cityandneighborhood master plans, site plans, infrastructure plans, etc.• Evaluatingcodesandordinances–Measurelocaldevelopmentrulesagainstthemodelprinciples.UsetheQualityGrowthWorksheettodetermine how well they support or hinder quality growth; identify opportunities for change.• Buildingotherkeycommunitysupports–AdditionalavenuesforQualityGrowthcanberealizedthroughspecialdistricts,taxincentives,funding,land acquisition programs, community organizations/programs, etc.• Implementingprojects–Usingthequalitygrowthprinciples,tacklesomedoableprojects.Thesecanrangefromstreambufferregulationsand watershed protection projects to residential and commercial development, to downtown revitalization.

While the most comprehensive quality growth program would incorporate all of the steps, communities should start with opportunities that make the most sense and have the greatest chance of success. The idea is to become attuned to not missing opportunities for incorporating quality growth principles and practices. After initial progress has been achieved, then additional steps can be taken. What they say is true: success breeds more success!

By managing growth 2000 - 2025, the Southern US could save:2 million acres of land, 72 million gallons of water per day and over $43 billion water and road infrastructure costs

Southern US ConventionalDevelopment

ManagedGrowth

Savings in Managed Growth

Total water and sewer demand (million gpd)

7,942 7,870 72 million gal/day

Total water / sewer infrastructure costs ($ billions)

$84.5 $79 $5.5 billion

Total local road costs ($ billions) $376 $338 $38.9 billion

2000 - 2025; Conventional Development Versus Managed Growth: The Costs of Sprawl, Robert W. Burchell, PhD and Sahan Mukherji, BS

Figure 11: Costs for Utilities and Local Roads


The Quality Growth WorksheetAn Instrument for Change

The Quality Growth process involves the use of an innovative tool,

a worksheet specially structured to help communities evaluate

their current development rules and identify changes that can help

them encourage the type of growth they desire while discouraging

the kind of dispersed and haphazard development that threatens

to negatively impact natural resources and other factors that

contribute to the community’s quality of life.

Past efforts to either encourage smart growth or protect water

resources each used methods designed to emphasize strategies

and best practices associated with that particular goal. As

practitioners recognized that effective long-term progress could

only be made by aligning the two objectives, they decided to

develop a tool that would identify best practices that support both

smart growth and water resource protection.

National, regional, and state organizations with expertise in the

fieldsofwaterresources,planning,anddevelopmentcollaborated

to produce the Quality Growth Worksheet. Partners in this effort

included the Cumberland River Compact, the Environmental

Protection Agency, the Southeast Watershed Forum, the Tennessee

Department of Economic and Community Development, the

Tennessee Valley Authority, and the University of Tennessee

Municipal Technical Advisory Service. They drew upon several

nationallyrecognizedworksheetsforsourcematerialandthefinal

resultwasextensivelyreviewedbyprominentexpertsinthefield.

The Worksheet assigns a weight to best practices in the categories

of land use, street and sidewalk networks, parking, green

infrastructure, and water resources. The weighted values reflect

how well each practice can help communities accomplish the 12

Quality Growth principles. Assigned weights correspond to varying

degrees of implementation—whether a practice is currently in use

(even partially, or in certain locations), or is encouraged, required,

or even prohibited under local development rules.

The resulting scores are an effective “reality check” for

communities. They can see at a glance where they stand at

present, and also the direction and extent to which they need

to move in the future—in order to accomplish their goals for

managed growth.

The group was introduced to the Quality Growth Worksheet, a new tool for communities to use in comparing their plans and ordinances against the principles. They reviewed the previously-obtained assessment results for each of their jurisdictions, identifying strengths and considering priority areas on which to work together in order to improve development rules. Appendix B provides a summary of the results of the worksheet for each jurisdiction as well as their average scores. Figure 12 shows how development practices promote or hinder implementing the principles of quality growth.

Workshop participants used the average overall scores to identify the areas that presented the greatest potential and opportunity for improvement. The priorities included: directing development away from areas where it is not desired or appropriate; requiring sidewalks and bicycle lanes in new development; interconnecting sidewalks and biking trails; requiring buffers that encompass streams and environmentally sensitive areas; planting trees; and implementing low impact development practices. Appendix C shows the details of the brainstorming exercise. A quick review of their work reveals a strong link between the codes review and what would eventually become the Wilson County Quality Growth Action Plan.


Drawing Inspiration from Local ExamplesParticipantsintheWilsonCountyQualityGrowthWorkshopSerieswerefortunateinbeingabletolearnaboutsometerrificexamplesoflocalandregional quality growth initiatives from individuals who have been directly involved in the projects.

• Tri-CountyTransportationandLandUseStudy–MattMeservy,withtheNashvilleAreaMetropolitanPlanningOrganization,sharedinformationabout the study, which is bringing together government, business interests, and members of the public to discuss growth issues and recommend preferred growth patterns for consideration by the Metropolitan Planning Organization in its regional transportation plan and by local governments in their comprehensive plans.• CityofLebanonDowntownRedevelopment–WillHager,withtheCityofLebanonPlanningDepartment,sharedwiththegroupexistingillustrationsof quality growth principles in the City of Lebanon and opportunities for quality growth projects, including transit oriented development. • Lowimpactdevelopmentprojects–MichaelCochran,withGreshamSmithandPartners,highlightedavarietyofsustainablesitedesignpractices, especially those related to storm water management. His presentation showcased several commercial projects in the Nashville area, including Walmart Nashville South and a shopping center anchored by Vanderbilt Health.

Figure 12: Multiple Jurisdiction Worksheet Review by Principles

Quality Growth Principles

April 2010Encourage Compact

Development & Mixed Land Use

Expand Housing Choices

Create Walkable and Bikeable

Neighborhoods

Create DistinctiveAttractive Communities

Preserve Open Space, Resource Lands &

Env. Sensitive Areas

City of Lebanon 56% 75% 71% 54% 55%

City of Mt. Juliet 31% 29% 43% 46% 37%

Wilson County 31% 21% 31% 42% 41%

Average Score out of 100%

39% 42% 48% 47% 44%


April 2010

Direct Development toward Existing

Communities or Planned Growth Centers

Increase Transportation Choices

Make Cost-Effective, Predictable

Development Choices

MinimizeStorm Water Runoff

ProtectWater Resources

City of Lebanon 58% 69% 63% 49% 51%

City of Mt. Juliet 36% 45% 38% 49% 43%

Wilson County 34% 24% 33% 27% 30%

Average Score out of 100%

43% 46% 45% 42% 41%

The results show the average of each jurisdiction’s scores, as determined by how development practices meet the principles of Quality Growth. The scores are expressed in percentages of the total possible scores for each category. Within each of the different categories of Quality Growth principles, the scores ranged from 39% to 48%, with greatest strength being shown in creating walkable/bikeable neighborhoods, creating distinctive and attractive communities and increasing transportation choices.

The overall score (for Wilson County/Mt. Juliet/Lebanon) was 44%. Individual jurisdiction scores ranged from 58% for Lebanon, 45% for Mt. Juliet and 29% for Wilson County. While each jurisdiction is doing a number of things well, these scores indicate that there is room for improvement. The lower score for the county is to be expected, given the fact that many of the questions address development from the perspective of a municipal setting.

Workshop 3 June 3, 2010 Identifying Key Quality Growth Initiatives Local and regional initiatives were the focus of three presentations: the Tri-County Transportation and Land Use Study, the City of Lebanon downtown redevelopment proposals, and a variety of commercial low-impact development projects. Participants were asked to think back over all the information


presented in the first two workshops. Based on their self-assessment results and current initiatives/examples, the group was tasked with brainstorming responses to a single question: “What actions should we take to promote Quality Growth in our community?” Figure 13 provides the results of their brainstorming. After much discussion, participants identified three strategies as being most important to their community: green infrastructure, community design, and community education/outreach.

The group self-selected into three workgroups to develop priority initiatives—all of which would become part of a comprehensive Action Plan for Quality Growth in Wilson County. Meeting at different times over the course of the summer, these three workgroups established SMART (Specific, Measurable, Action-oriented, Realistic, and Time-limited) objectives, quarterly milestones, projected outcomes, and responsibilities. Their plans also highlighted which principles would be addressed.

Figure 13: Wilson County Quality Growth Workshop Series

Actions to Promote Quality Growth (6/3/2010)

Education / Outreach (11)* Bike / Pedestrian

Interconnectivity (2)Mass Transit (1) Community Design (6)

Quality Growth education for city and countyelectedofficials

Walking / biking health issue Bullet train (1) Mixed use

Localofficialsattendanceatworkshops

Implement bike lanes where no sidewalks (1)

Transit study Walkable communities (1)

Local development health assessment (1)

Creation of bike lanes Well designed density

Educatelocalofficials Sidewalk improvement (1) Sprawl?

Education / outreach Transit oriented development

Get non-business voters aware, interested and mobilized

Better design standards

Stress recycle / reuse / reduce Low impact development

Permobil tour (2)

InstitutelocalfieldtriptoLIDprojects

Green Business Development (6) Funding Sources Green Infrastructure (11) Green Infrastructure Continued

Create Green Chamber of Commerce Obtain grants County-wide green infrastructure plan (like / supplementary to comprehensive plan) (2)

Regional / watershed consistency in development policy

Green business incubator Local funding measures County-wide inter-jurisdictional MOU on stormwater issues

Expand/ engineer storm water programs

Telecommute incentives Interconnected wildlife corridor (1) Urban trees

Pick potential sustainable development candidate / developer (1)

More undeveloped parks

Permobil tour Recreational buffers along creeks

“Reduce” building within flood area (1)

Maintain / establish county-wide buffer zone regulations

Headwater protection zones

*Numbersrepresentvotesofparticipants.Thenumbersintheheadingsincludethenumbersnexttothespecificactions.


It was really interesting to observe the interactions that took place as part of the Quality Growth workshops. A number of participants fell into the category of those that write ordinances, while others represented the entities that have to comply with those ordinances. It gave us an opportunity to reach out to each other in meaningful ways.

— Chris Leauber Executive Director, Water & Wastewater Authority of Wilson County

Our community stands to benefit in important ways from having participated in the Quality Growth workshop series. Wilson County and its municipalities are growing rapidly. Fortunately, we are comfortable working across jurisdictional boundaries to accomplish goals—and the Action Plan we came up with contains a broad range of strategies and best practices that most constituent groups can support.

— Will Hager Planning Director, City of Lebanon

Workshop 4 August 25, 2010 Developing a Quality Growth Action Plan

This session is when all the pieces came together. The group evaluated what the various work groups had developed and formulated a three-pronged Action Plan, the specifics of which are discussed in detail in the Action Plan description.

These three strategies will be used in the effort to promote quality growth in Wilson County and the Cities of Lebanon and Mt. Juliet:

• Developingandimplementingatleastthreegreen infrastructure ordinances for adoption by all of the jurisdictions in the county to enable them to meet their requirements for stormwater management under NPDES Phase II;

• Recommendingtherevisionofurbangrowthboundaries to protect open space and direct development to appropriate locations, identifying sites for Transit Oriented Development, conservation subdivisions, and other quality growth development options, and removing barriers and providing incentives for quality growth development projects; and

• Increasingawarenessand“buyin”forqualitygrowth approaches and projects through a targeted community education and outreach program.

The group clarified the SMART objectives and outcomes. Next they developed a master timeline that indicated the milestones for each focus area, noting any over-lapping work that would need to be coordinated. They determined next steps, assigned responsibilities, and made plans to reconvene with a coordinating committee. Plans call for holding a fifth workshop to track progress on implementation.


THE WILSON COUNTY ACTION PLANPriority Actions Designed to Positively Impact the Community’s Future

This is the “work product” generated as the culmination of the Quality Growth Workshop Series. It’s really the heart of the process, and represents a great deal of thought, effort and commitment on the part of participants.

Perhaps the most impressive achievement was the fact that workshop participants seemed to truly embrace the 10 Principles of Quality Growth. They looked across the board and came up with actions that will address the entire range of recommended approaches. Figure 14 shows which action plans address which principles. The Action Plan they developed is solidly based upon the data obtained by completing the Quality Growth Worksheet; when implemented, the strategies they’ve generated will substantially improve the scores for their community.

Additional detail on the Action Plan can be found in Appendix D.

Figure 14: Impacts of Action Plan on Quality Growth Principles


Action Plan ObjectivesEncourage Compact

Development & Mixed Land Use

Expand Housing Choices

Create Walkable and Bikeable

Neighborhoods

Create DistinctiveAttractive Communities

Preserve Open Space, Resource Lands &

Env. Sensitive Areas

Green infrastructure ordinance change

X X

Urban growth boundaries and sites for quality growth development

X X X X X

Education / Outreach quarterlyevents,fieldtrips and meetings

X X X X X

Total Principles Addressed

X X X X X


Action Plan Objectives

Direct Development toward Existing

Communities or Planned Growth Centers

Increase Transportation Choices

Make Cost-Effective, Predictable

Development Choices

MinimizeStormwater Runoff

ProtectWater Resources

Green infrastructure ordinance change

X X X

Urban growth boundaries and sites for quality growth development

X X X X X

Education / Outreach quarterlyevents,fieldtrips and meetings

X X X X X

Total Principles Addressed

X X X X X


Community Education/Outreach

Objective:Developaspeakers/topics/eventsbureauforthepurposeofeducatingelectedofficials,appointedofficialsandotherstakeholdergroupsasinterestandnecessitydictate.Speakerswillbearrangedinaquarterlyschedule for implementation by December 31, 2010. Each of the topics will center around one or more of the 10 principlesforQualityGrowth.Theywillbetargetedtospecificstakeholdergroups.

The group felt that the most important strategy to promote Quality Growth was to convince key decision-makers that implementing quality growth plans, ordinances, and projects will be cost-effective, marketable, and will enhance and protect the quality of the community for future generations. They agreed that targeting the topics and messages to specific groups would be the most effective approach. Initial programs will include: a tour for elected and appointed officials of the new Permobil plant to showcase green building design concepts (Fall 2010); a program on green living technologies for

homeowners, realtors, and the building community at the Homebuilders Expo (Winter 2011); and a joint meeting of planning commissions to learn about the results of the work of the community design and green infrastructure work groups (Spring 2011).

Community Design

Objective: Create a Growth Planning Advisory Committee to develop recommendations for revising the urban growth boundaries within Wilson County based on watersheds, land use capability, and jurisdictional boundaries; identify viable locations for Transit Oriented Development (TOD), conservation subdivisions, historic preservation, and LEED for Neighborhood Design; identify barriers that may limit or discourage such development, and identify possible incentives for encouraging quality growth development by December 31, 2012.

The group felt that an important key to the implementation of Quality Growth was the designation of appropriate urban growth boundaries and identification of sites for developments utilizing the quality growth principles. They recommended forming a Growth Planning Advisory Committee. The 11-member committee would include: the planning directors from Wilson County, Lebanon, and Mt Juliet; one planning commissioner from each of the four jurisdictions (including Watertown) in the county; one representative each from the Joint Economic and Community Development Board, stormwater coordinators, and the water and sewer utility; and one resident. Representatives from regional agencies such as the Cumberland River Compact, Cumberland Region Tomorrow, and the Metropolitan Planning Commission would be invited to be ad hoc members as needed. GIS staff members from each of the jurisdictions would work together to identify the urban growth boundaries and recommended sites for development.

Changes to urban growth boundaries would have to be made by an appointed Growth Planning Committee, a

We are undergoing a transformation in how we approach the issue of growth and development. What people want their communities to look like and the benefits they want their neighborhoods to provide for them has changed. Bigger is not always better. Rapid growth cannot happen at the expense of good planning; there is a definite cost when it comes to unplanned, haphazard development.

— Mary Jo Bragan Smart Growth Program Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IV

What’s on the line here is way more then aesthetics; it’s really about the long-term viability of our local economy and the overall health and well-being of our community.

— Tom Brashear Planning Director, Wilson County


legal authority whose membership would be defined by law. The advisory committee would suggest the establishment of this committee, provide input, and work toward implementation. Recommendations would be made on prime locations for transit oriented development (TOD), conservation subdivisions, historical preservation, and LEED for Neighborhood Design. These recommendations will be presented initially to a joint meeting of the planning commissions in April 2011. A report on the sites and work on implementing changes to development rules and incentives will begin in the summer of 2011.

Green Infrastructure

Objective: Evaluate municipal and county development language with the EPA Water Quality Scorecard and identify at least three green infrastructure ordinance changes that positively affect water resources for implementation by all three jurisdictions. One of the three green infrastructure ordinances will involve establishing stream buffer zones. Work with each community to implement all three green infrastructure practices.

As NPDES Phase II communities, Wilson County and the Cities of Lebanon and Mt. Juliet are required by the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) to use EPA’s Water Quality Scorecard to evaluate their development codes and ordinances and make changes to increase the use of green infrastructure to manage stormwater. The group recognized the importance of consistency in regulations within the cities and county—especially for stream buffers—which not only protect water, but also provide corridors for wildlife and recreation. The Cumberland River Compact staff will work with local planners to educate the planning commissions on TDEC’s requirements, evaluate their codes and ordinances and prepare recommendations for language change. A synthesis of the recommendations will be presented at a joint meeting of the planning commissions in April 2011. The group was also interested in brainstorming about other green infrastructure best practices to be included in future education/outreach sessions.

Next Steps

The conveners of each of the three workgroups have committed to working with their members on implementation of the action plan. They have agreed to establish a monthly leadership meeting to discuss progress and facilitate interaction among the groups. An electronic mailing list of individuals on the planning team and workgroups will be established, and notes from the workgroup meetings will be posted by the conveners. The entire group plans to reconvene later in the fall to assess progress and modify plans as needed.

The real strength of the Quality Growth Action Plan we crafted is that it represents a unified approach. The message we’re sending to the development community is concise and consistent. Instead of just representing the proposed actions of Mt. Juliet, or Wilson County, or Lebanon individually, we are truly speaking with one voice.

— Gary Gaskin Stormwater Coordinator, City of Mt. Juliet


APPENDIX A Participants

Wilson County Quality Growth Workshop Series Participants

Paul Abercrombie Wilson County

Harvey Abouleta Efficient Energy of Tennessee

Robert Agee Wilson County Planning

Cynthia Allen Middle Tennessee State University

Phil Armor Greater Nashville Regional Council

Amy Arnold Tennessee Valley Authority

Dwight Barnette Tennessee Division of Forestry

H. Barry City of Lebanon

Pam Black City of Lebanon

Chuck Boyette City of Lebanon

Tom Brashear Wilson County

Robert Cesternino Lebanon Board of Zoning Appeals

Lee Clark City of Lebanon

Tom Clemmons Clemmons & Associates

Philip Craighead City of Lebanon

David Donaldsby Power Board Compass

Diane Fletcher Joint Economic and Community Development Board

Steve Foote City of Mt Juliet

Tiffany Foster Tennessee Valley Authority

Jane Fowler Southeast Watershed Forum

Beula Garrett City of Lebanon Planning Commission

Gary Gaskin City of Mt Juliet

Will Hager City of Lebanon

Ken House Wilson County


APPENDIX A Participants (continued)

Vena Jones Cumberland River Compact

Lynne Jordan Wilson County

Marlin Keel City of Mt Juliet

Dave Keiser Cumberland Region Tomorrow

Randy Laine The Laine Company

Chris Leauber Water Wastewater, Wilson County

Larry Lovelace Wilson County

Mac McCluskey Wilson County

Perry Neal BOZA

Gary Nokes Wilson County Planning

Allen Persinger USDA-NRCS

Lynn Pruett City of Lebanon

Regina Santana City of Lebanon

Chris Seaborn Wilson County Water Wastewater

Mary Speight Efficient Energy of Tennessee

Gary Tackus Clemmons & Associates

David Taylor City of Lebanon Planning

Magi Tilton City of Lebanon

Liz Upchurch Tennessee Valley Authority

James Vaden City of Lebanon

Diane Weathers Wilson County Board of Zoning Appeals

Tommy Williams Wilson County Planning

James Woods Wilson County Planning Board

Andy Wright Lebanon City Attorney


April 2010City of Lebanon, City of Mt. Juliet and Wilson County

City

of L

eban

on

City

of M

t. Ju

liet

Wils

on C

ount

y

Aver

age

Perc

enta

ges

Max

imum

Wei

ght

Aver

age S

core

s

1. LAND USE

DEVELOPMENT LOCATION

a.Is development directed away from or prohibited in areas where it is not desired or appropriate?

60% 100% 30% 63% 29 18

b.Is development encouraged in existing neighborhoods & other previously developedlocations(infill,brownfield&greyfields)?

50% 0% 30% 27% 29 8

c.Isgreenfielddevelopmentdirectedtocentersplannedforgrowthwhereinfrastructureissufficient?

100% 50% 70% 73% 19 14

DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY AND LAND USE MIX

d. Is higher density development permitted without additional reviews or submittals? 100% 30% 0% 43% 43 19e. Is mixed-use development allowed without additional reviews or submittals? 100% 40% 10% 50% 35 18

f. Are a variety of housing styles, sizes and placements allowed within a development? 70% 70% 30% 57% 13 7

g. Are a range of lot sizes allowed? 100% 50% 30% 60% 20 12h. Are setback and frontage requirements reduced in residential developments? 80% 30% 20% 43% 13 6

i. Is Traditional Neighborhood Development (TND) allowed without additional reviews or submittals? 50% 0% 20% 23% 38 9

j. Are live/work units allowed without additional reviews or submittals? 80% 0% 20% 33% 32 11

k. In residential neighborhoods, can an accessory structure be converted to a dwelling unit without additional reviews or submittals? 50% 0% 0% 17% 26 4

2. STREET AND SIDEWALK NETWORK

STREETS

a. Are interconnected street networks required in new subdivisions? 70% 80% 90% 80% 29 23b. Do street standards allow use of parkways, boulevards and avenues? 60% 40% 30% 43% 29 13c. Are neighborhood street types (yield streets, narrow streets and alleys) allowed? 40% 40% 0% 27% 29 8d. Are cul-de-sacs prohibited in new subdivisions? 70% 0% 50% 40% 17 7e. Do requirements result in street intersections that support walking? 80% 20% 30% 43% 17 7f. Are bicycle lanes required in new developments? 60% 0% 0% 20% 12 2g. Are standards established for bike lanes? 0% 100% 0% 33% 12 4

SIDEWALKS

h. Are sidewalks required on at least one side of the street in residential neighborhoods? 100% 100% 30% 77% 12 9

i.Are sidewalks required on both sides of the street in commercial, employment, industrial and mixed-use zones?

90% 70% 0% 53% 9 5

j.Are requirements for sidewalk width appropriate for their development context and expected pedestrian activity?

80% 80% 20% 60% 12 7

k.Are sidewalks separated from adjacent streets by a planter strip that is 3 feet wide or greater?

80% 20% 0% 33% 7 2

l. Are trees, planters, sculptures, street furniture, on-street parking and other streetscape features permitted where walking is desired? 70% 30% 0% 33% 10 3

APPENDIX B QualityGrowthWorksheet–ComparisonofCommunityScores

Quality Growth Worksheet



City

of L

eban

on

City

of M

t. Ju

liet

Wils

on C

ount

y

Aver

age

Perc

enta

ges

Max

imum

Wei

ght

Aver

age S

core

s

3. PARKING

a.Are parking standards or requirements differentiated by land use types to minimize land area devoted to parking?

80% 80% 80% 80% 32 26

b. Are alternative approaches to meeting parking requirements allowed? 20% 90% 50% 53% 32 17c. Is a centralized parking program in place? 80% 0% 0% 27% 9 2d. Is parking in the rear of buildings allowed? 70% 100% 50% 73% 9 74. GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE

REGIONAL OR COUNTY-WIDE

a.Are there plans and policies for an interconnected network of green infrastructure and open space?

60% 80% 80% 73% 17 12

b.Are mechanisms in place for implementing interconnected green infrastructure and open space plans and policies?

50% 30% 10% 30% 40 12

c. Are buffers that encompass streams, wetlands, floodplains and steep slopes required?

50% 90% 80% 73% 26 19

d.Is connecting and making accessible open space throughout the community required?

50% 80% 80% 70% 14 10

NEIGHBORHOOD

e. Are native vegetation, trees and soils in new developments required? 40% 60% 10% 40% 23 9

f.Is planting trees required along streets, and as part of storm water treatment infrastructure?

50% 0% 0% 7% 23 2

g. Are parks required in new subdivisions? 20% 0% 80% 43% 23 10h. Is open space required in new developments? 50% 0% 80% 43% 29 13i. Must preserved open space be managed in a natural condition? 50% 40% 40% 53% 13 7

j.Are interconnected sidewalks, walking trails or bike paths required within a development?

80% 40% 80% 67% 13 9

5. WATER RESOURCES

LAND USE

a.Do storm water management requirements encourage higher density and infillprojects?

0% 0% 0% 0% 33 0

b.Do existing capacity and funded plans for wastewater treatment and water supply support expected growth and development?

70% 0% 10% 27% 26 7

STREET AND SIDEWALK NETWORK

c. Are street rights-of-way less than 45 feet wide in residential developments?

0% 80% 0% 27% 7 2

d.Are alternatives to curb and gutter (open section roads, swales and other storm water practices) allowed where appropriate?

0% 50% 0% 17% 12 2

e. Can streets be constructed with pervious materials? 0% 0% 0% 0% 12 0f. Can sidewalks be constructed with pervious materials? 50% 70% 0% 40% 12 5


Quality Growth Worksheet (continued)



Quality Growth Worksheet (continued)


City

of L

eban

on

City

of M

t. Ju

liet

Wils

on C

ount

y

Aver

age

Perc

enta

ges

Max

imum

Wei

ght

Aver

age S

core

s

5. WATER RESOURCES (CONTINUED)

PARKING AND DRIVEWAYS

g.Do regulations have provisions and design standards for the use of LID practices, landscaping, tree planting, and pervious surfaces in parking lots?

50% 60% 0% 37% 14 5

h.Do regulations have provisions and standards for alternative solutions (such as “two track” design, shared driveways or reduced driveway widths) or pervious materials for residential driveways?

30% 0% 0% 10% 9 1

GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE

i.Are jurisdictional wetlands protected from storm water pollution and flooding?

90% 100% 50% 80% 23 18

j.Do public health standards and procedures allow alternative subsurface sewer disposal methods that support higher density residential development and cluster development?

0% 0% 90% 30% 30 9

k. Is off-site management of runoff permitted? 60% 100% 30% 63% 12 8

l.Are performance-based design criteria and maintenance standards for storm water best management during and after construction incorporated into ordinances?

100% 100% 30% 77% 17 13

SCORES

1. Land Use 76% 34% 24% 297 1252. Street and Sidewalk Network 67% 48% 21% 195 913. Parking 63% 68% 45% 82 524. Green Infrastructure 50% 42% 54% 221 1025. Water Resources 38% 47% 18% 207 70 OVERALL SCORES 58% 45% 29% 1002 440

RANGE OF SCORES

greatest improvement needed0 - 10% all requirements not permitted by rule in all of community

20% some requirements not permitted in some of community

good start 30 - 40% all requirements not informally encouraged in all of community

almost there50 - 60% some requirements informally encouraged in some parts of community

70% all requirements informally encouraged in all of community

excellent 80 - 90% somerequirementscodifiedforsomeofcommunity

no improvement needed 100% allrequirementscodifiedforallofcommunity


APPENDIX C Multiple Jurisdiction Assessment of Opportunities for Improvement


Score

Avg. Score

MaxPossible

Work Together to Change? Priority / Notes

1. LAND USE

DEVELOPMENT LOCATION

a.Is development directed away from or prohibited in areas where it is not desired or appropriate?

18 29 yes high

b.Is development encouraged in existing neighborhoods & other previouslydevelopedlocations(infill,brownfield&greyfields)?

8 29 no low - future

c.Isgreenfielddevelopmentdirectedtocentersplannedforgrowthwhereinfrastructureissufficient?

14 19 N/A low

DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY AND LAND USE MIX

d.Is higher density development permitted without additional reviews or submittals?

19 43 subjectivemedium - with

permission; more discussion

e. Is mixed-use development allowed without additional reviews or submittals? 18 35 subjective medium - more

discussion

f. Are a variety of housing styles, sizes and placements allowed within a development? 7 13 yes medium/low

g. Are a range of lot sizes allowed? 12 20 N/A low

h. Are setback and frontage requirements reduced in residential developments? 6 13 yes medium/high

i. Is Traditional Neighborhood Development (TND) allowed without additional reviews or submittals? 9 38 yes medium

j. Are live/work units allowed without additional reviews or submittals? 11 32 yes medium

k. In residential neighborhoods, can an accessory structure be con-verted to a dwelling unit without additional reviews or submittals? 4 26 no low

2. STREET AND SIDEWALK NETWORK

STREETS

a. Are interconnected street networks required in new subdivisions? 23 29 yes - all agencies high

b. Do street standards allow use of parkways, boulevards and avenues? 13 29

no - should be explored as

future optionsmedium

c. Are neighborhood street types (yield streets, narrow streets and alleys) allowed? 8 29 no - or by

variance only medium

d. Are cul-de-sacs prohibited in new subdivisions? 7 17 no - limited length low

e. Do requirements result in street intersections that support walking? 7 17

Wilson - noMt. Juliet - yesLebanon - yes

high

f. Are bicycle lanes required in new developments? 2 12Wilson - no

Mt. Juliet - noLebanon - yes

high - Wilson & Mt. Juliet

greenways will require

g. Are standards established for bike lanes? 4 12Wilson - no


medium/low


April 2010 (continued)City of Lebanon, City of Mt. Juliet and Wilson County

Score

Avg. Score

MaxPossible


SIDEWALKS

h.Are sidewalks required on at least one side of the street in residential neighborhoods?

9 12Wilson - no

Mt. Juliet - yesLebanon - yes

high

i.Are sidewalks required on both sides of the street in commer-cial, employment, industrial and mixed-use zones?

5 9 no low

j.Are requirements for sidewalk width appropriate for their development context and expected pedestrian activity?

7 12Wilson - no


medium

k.Are sidewalks separated from adjacent streets by a planter strip that is 3 feet wide or greater?

2 7 no low-medium

l.Are trees, planters, sculptures, street furniture, on-street parking and other streetscape features permitted where walking is desired?

3 10 no low

3. PARKING

a. Are parking standards or requirements differentiated by land use types to minimize land area devoted to parking? 26 32 yes medium

b. Are alternative approaches to meeting parking requirements allowed? 17 32 yes high - shared

parking

c. Is a centralized parking program in place? 2 9 yes high - shared parking

d. Is parking in the rear of buildings allowed? 7 9 no low

4. GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE

REGIONAL OR COUNTY-WIDE

a. Are there plans and policies for an interconnected network of green infrastructure and open space? 12 17

b. Are mechanisms in place for implementing interconnected green infrastructure and open space plans and policies? 12 40

c. Are buffers that encompass streams, wetlands, floodplains and steep slopes required? 19 26

#1 - EPA, TDEC regulations will

force this

d. Is connecting and making accessible open space throughout the community required? 10 14

NEIGHBORHOOD

e. Are native vegetation, trees and soils in new developments required? 9 23

f. Is planting trees required along streets, and as part of storm water treatment infrastructure? 2 23 #2a

g. Are parks required in new subdivisions? 10 23

h. Is open space required in new developments? 13 29 #2b

i. Must preserved open space be managed in a natural condition? 7 13

j. Are interconnected sidewalks, walking trails or bike paths required within a development? 9 13 #3 feeds #2a/b




April 2010 (continued)City of Lebanon, City of Mt. Juliet and Wilson County

Score

Avg. Score

MaxPossible


5. WATER RESOURCES

LAND USE

a.Do stormwater management requirements encourage higher densityandinfillprojects?

0 33 yes medium

b.Do existing capacity and funded plans for wastewater treatment and water supply support expected growth and development?

7 26 yes medium - discuss

STREET AND SIDEWALK NETWORK

c. Are street rights-of-way less than 45 feet wide in residential developments? 2 7 no ?

d.Are alternatives to curb and gutter (open section roads, swales and other stormwater practices) allowed where appropriate?

2 12 by variance medium

e. Can streets be constructed with pervious materials? 0 12 no - should be considered medium

f. Can sidewalks be constructed with pervious materials? 5 12 no - should be considered high

PARKING AND DRIVEWAYS

g.Do regulations have provisions and design standards for the use of LID practices, landscaping, tree planting and pervious surfaces in parking lots?

5 14

some landscape provisions, allow LID

high

h.

Do regulations have provisions and standards for alternative solutions (such as “two track” design, shared driveways or reduced driveway widths) or pervious materials for residential driveways?

1 9 no/yes low

GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE

i. Are jurisdictional wetlands protected from stormwater pollution and flooding? 18 23 #2

j.Do public health standards and procedures allow alternative subsurface sewer disposal methods that support higher density residential development and cluster development?

9 30

k. Is off-site management of runoff permitted? 8 12

l.Are performance-based design criteria and maintenance standards for stormwater best management during and after construction incorporated into ordinances?

13 17 #1


Objective:Todevelopaspeakers/topics/eventsbureauforthepurposeofeducatingelectedofficials,appointedofficialsandother stakeholder groups as interest and necessity dictates. Speakers will be arranged in a quarterly schedule for imple-mentation by 12/31/10. Each of the topics will center around one or more of the 10 model principles of Quality Growth. They willbetargetedtospecificstakeholdergroups.

Work Group: Tom Brashear (convener), Magi Tilton, James Vaden, Vena Jones and Dwight Barnett

Implementation Steps / Milestones 7-9/1010-

12/101-3/11 4-6/11

7/11-6/12

7/12-6/13

Recruit a team liason from the other 2 Quality Growth committees (Community Design and Green Infrastructure) to the Community Outreach/Education Committee (CO/E Committee) to ensure that the list of topics, speakers, and events address their needs.

X

PrepareforimplementationofafieldtriptoPermobilasaninauguralQuality Growth series education event. Audience will be elected and appointedgovernmentofficials.

X

Discuss making use of the Community Partnering Contract provided by Cumberland River Compact to further efforts on this objective.

X

Outlinetopics;findspeakers/eventsthatmatchthetopics. X

Develop a quarterly schedule of these topics and events. X

Obtain tentative commitment from speakers for 2nd Quality Growth education event.

X

HoldPermobilfieldtrip.Submitapressreleaseornewsarticle. X

Finalize speakers, locations, arrangements, and times for 2nd Quality Growtheducationevent.Topic:greenlivingtechnologies–attheHomebuilders Expo.

X

Hold the 2nd Quality Growth continuing education event. (green living technologies–attheHomebuildersExpo).Audiencewillbehomeowners,realtors, and the building community.

X

Secure additional speaker dates and arrangements for 3rd Quality Growth continuing education event.

X

Finalize speakers, locations, arrangements and times for the 3rd event (Planning Commission Workshop).

X

Hold the 3rd Quality Growth continuing education class. This will be the Planning Commission workshop focused on recommendations for changes to urban growth boundaries, update on multi-jurisdiction EPA water quality score card results and other topics of interest.

X

Secure additional speaker dates, commitments and arrangements for 4th Quality Growth continuing education event. Topic and audience to be decided.

X

Evaluate speakers and topics against current needs/interests in the community and adjust speakers/topics/events bureau accordingly.

X X

Repeatcycleofyearonewithpertinenttopicsandspeakersandfieldtrips, etc. that match the need of the community while still remembering to maintain focus on the 10 model principles of quality growth.

X X

Wilson County Quality Growth – Action Plan – Community Education / Outreach Quarterly Milestones

APPENDIX D Wilson County Quality Growth Action Plan


Objective: To create a Growth Planning Advisory Committee to develop recommendations for revising the urban growth boundaries within Wilson County based on watersheds, land use capability, and jurisdictional boundaries; identify viable locations for Transit Oriented Development (TOD), conservation subdivisions, historic preservation, and LEED for Neighborhood Design; identify barriers that may limit or discourage such development; and identify possible incentives for encouraging quality growth development by December 31, 2012.

Work Group: Will Hager (convener), Tom Brashear, Lynn Pruett, Steve Foote, Kenneth House


12/101-3/11 4-6/11

7/11-6/12

7/12-6/13

Convene organizational meeting to plan the Growth Planning Advisory committee(GAPC);identifypotentialmembers;defineresponsibilities;developagendaforfirstmeeting.

X

Conduct GIS analysis to develop recommendations to changes in urban growth boundaries and identify opportunities for TOD, conservation subdivisions, historic preservation, and LEED for Neighborhood Development.

X X

HoldfirstGAPCmeeting.(11/10) X

Analyze land use and government level of service from planning departments. (start 12/10)

X X

Hold second GAPC meeting. (2/11) X

Definerecommendationstochangesingrowthboundaries.(3/11) X

Identify barriers to TOD, conservation subdivisions, and LEED for Neighborhood Development, including existing zoning, community acceptanceandfinancing.

X

Identify possible incentives for quality growth, including feebates or fee waivers and density bonuses for developments within a .5 mile walk of transit.

X

Develop plans for Planning Commission meeting (all planning commissions in the county), including development of agenda focused on 3-4specificqualitygrowthtopics,includingrecommendationstochangesin urban growth boundaries and a multi-jurisdictional synthesis of the results of the EPA water quality scorecard.

X

Identify funding for food for the dinner. X

Host dinner and workshop for Planning Commissions. Present recommendations for changes to urban growth boundaries.

X

Have each planning commission act on the recommendations. X

CreatebooklettopostonlinetoidentifyspecificsitesforTOD,conservation subdivisions, historic preservation, and LEED for Neighborhoods.

X

Reevaluate direction of community design. X

Remove barriers to quality growth. X

Implement incentives for quality growth. X

Wilson County Quality Growth – Action Plan – Community Design Quarterly Milestones



Objective: Evaluate municipal and county development language with the EPA Water Quality Scorecard and identify at least 3 green infrastructure ordinance changes that positively affect water resources for all 3 communities to implement. One of the three green infrastructure ordinances will be stream buffer zones. Then work with each community to implement all 3 green infrastructure practices.

Work Group: Vena Jones (convener), Dwight Barnett, Chris Leauber, James Vaden, Allen Persinger


12/101-3/11 4-6/11

7/11-6/12

7/12-6/13

Review Quality Growth worksheets done by all communities. (9/10) X

Establish planning team that will assist in EPA Water Quality Scorecard workshops. (10/10)

X

Hold EPA Scorecard workshops. (11/10-4/11) X X

Develop educational sessions and hold opportunities. (11/10-4/11) X X

Synthesize EPA Scorecard data for all 3 communities and identify overlap of key green infrastructure practices. Present information at meeting of planning commissioners from all jurisdictions.

X

Work with each community to implement ordinance changes that promote a cohesive GI base in Wilson County.

X X

Wilson County Quality Growth – Action Plan – Community Education / Outreach Quarterly Milestones



NOTES


NOTES


Documents

Wilson County Quality Growth Project Report