Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~ ,- <br />MARYLAND GIS DATABASE ~ <br /> <br />~ TotalAcr<ageofAU""", <br /> <br />Subtract land not zoned for <br />residential uses _____ <br /> <br />. ------. Residentially Zoned Acres <br /> <br /> <br />~"btract""-~'mptJ,md ~ <br />- I <br /> <br />'f' <br />Subtract protected and <br /> <br />'''''mom''''''t ,,",IT'"' ',"d <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Subtract land without capacity ______ . <br /> <br />(built out land) . ~ . <br />Acres with Residential Capacity <br /> <br />Maryland is the fifth most densely populated <br />state in the nation, and many communities <br />are expected to reach buildout within the <br />next 25 years. <br /> <br />the next 2S'years. In 2004, the Maryland <br />Department of Planning (MOP) organized a <br />task force to analyze development capacity <br />within the state. Maryland's Smart Growth <br />initiative requires jurisdictions to designate <br />growth areas as "priority funding areas" <br />(PFAs) that are to be eligible for future state <br />financial assistance for growth. Such areas <br />must be served by, or planned to be served <br />by sewer and water. meet minimum density <br />requirements, and be sized to accommodate <br />growth. However, relatively few jurisdictions <br />conduct a formal capacity analysis. <br />The task force chose 1.0 pilot communi- <br />ties (five municipalities and five counties) to <br />represent a diversity of geographic loca- <br />tions, growth rates, and data availability. <br />MOP used a GIS database compiled from <br />local jurisdictions. Data layers include land <br />uses, zoning, environmental features, sewer <br />avai'lability, and other criteria. Net residen- <br />tial development capacity was calculated <br />based on the flow chart shown above. <br /> <br />tJ Environmental tJ Uf;' <br />. Constraints '. 'liB <br />No Capacity . ; . ! <br /> <br />~~ ~am llf <br />am 1llUf <br />.. d llf <br />ill Built Out .~. <br />I[~, . No C.' apacity : <br />,~~ <br />ilf ill ill ~ <br /> <br /> <br />~arks I Recre.ation <br />( T No CapaCIty <br /> <br /> <br />JnliIl Potential <br />Medium Capacity <br /> <br />The task force found that data avail- <br />ability varIed across jurisdictions. The rural <br />town of Chestertown, with a population of <br />approximately 4,700, has no GIS and uses a <br />paper map to designate zoning districts. <br />Task force members were able to code the <br />information for GIS relatively easily, given <br />that the land area and number of zoning <br />categories were relatively small. Larger <br />jurisdictions often have more staff and more <br />data analysis capability, but their zoning <br />requirements may be significantly more <br />complex. In Montgomery County, with a <br />population of over one million, significant <br />assistance came from small area plans, <br />which have parcel-specific information <br />about redevelopment potential that can be <br />more accurate than the zoning data. <br />Overall, the study focuses more on the <br />process of collectrng and analyzing data <br />than the actual amount of acreage available <br />for development. <br />The process of collecting and analyzing <br />data brought up a number of important <br />questions regarding how to account for <br />pipeline projects, how to estimate capacity <br />where actual developed densities are less <br />than the maximum allowed by the zoning <br />code, or how to ensure data are standard- <br />ized and consistent. <br />The task forcerecommends continued <br />data analysis, including an annual report <br /> <br />Vacant <br />1Ii.g4 Capacity <br /> <br /> <br />is: <br />!J <br />[ <br />c <br />. <br />." <br />. <br />" <br />i <br />o <br />." <br />~ <br />s- <br />" <br /> <br /> <br />ZONING PRACTICE 1.08 <br />AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOClATION1 &Q <br />