--- 1. INTRODUCTION --- 2. MAP OF GROWTH --- 3. WATER SUPPLIES ---
--- 4. WASTEWATER --- 5. TRANSPORTATION --- 6. GLOBAL WARMING --- 7. HOUSING ---
--- 8. ECONOMY --- 9. OPEN SPACE --- 10. MIX LAND USE --- 11. TOD --- 12. PEDESTRIAN ---

Marketing by the Greater Danbury Chamber of Commerce with
Danbury, New Milford and the eight other municipalities
portrayed as a coordinated unit.

8-1. INTRODUCTION
The role of HVCEO in support of the area's many economic development efforts is to provide perspective, policy support and data of value.

Some specific roles for HVCEO in economic development will be to a) make available to outside market researchers the data they need to invest wisely in the Region, b) provide in-depth geographic overviews, and c) use its transportation programming authority to enhance the regional economy.

Fortunately, the ten communities of the Housatonic Valley Region form a unit that is dynamic and growing. The area can fairly be labeled one of the prime economic engines of Connecticut.

The 1.3 million square foot Corporate Center in
Danbury is the largest office building in Connecticut.

A 2007 economic analysis for the Housatonic Valley Region, prepared by the CT Economic Resource Center, documents a strong economic base here. Between 2000 and 2006 the largest employment increase was in healthcare, the largest decrease was in manufacturing. During the same period the HVCEO region gained more than 900 jobs while the state lost 2,670.

Relative to the nation as a whole, Connecticut has a high concentration of corporate headquarters, which for employment data reporting purposes are classified as “management of companies” jobs. To compare relative concentrations of employment types, a “locational quotient” methodology is often utilized:

National employment concentrations are used as the baseline and are set at 1.00. If a particular comparison area (such as a state, region or municipality) has a lower concentration of a certain type of employment than the nation, its locational quotient will be less than 1.00. If the area has a higher concentration of a certain type of employment than the nation, its locational quotient will be greater than 1.00.

Relative to the United States, Connecticut has a locational quotient of 1.19 for the “management of companies” employment category. In comparison the Housatonic Valley Region has an impressive 2.72.

Similarly, for the retail sector Connecticut has a quotient of only 1.02, while the Housatonic Valley Region has a quotient of 1.42.

Even in manufacturing, which has comprised a significantly declining share of Connecticut’s employment over the past few decades, the state has a quotient of 1.11 while the Housatonic Valley Region has 1.33.

Looking into the future, the Connecticut Economic Resource Center (CERC) forecasts the following strengths and weaknesses by economic sector for the Housatonic Valley Region:

RETAIL TRADE: current strength
MANAGEMENT OF COMPANIES: current strength

UTILITIES: emerging strength
WHOLESALE TRADE: emerging strength
EDUCATIONAL SERVICES: emerging strength
ARTS, ENTERTAINMENT AND RECREATION: emerging strength
ACCOMMODATION AND FOOD SERVICES: emerging strength
OTHER SERVICES, EXCEPT PUBLIC ADMIN.: emerging strength

CONSTRUCTION: limited prospect
MANUFACTURING: limited prospect
WAREHOUSING: limited prospect
INFORMATION: limited prospect
FINANCE AND INSURANCE: limited prospect
PROF. AND TECHNICAL SERVICES: limited prospect

HEALTH CARE AND SOCIAL ASSISTANCE: high priority retention target

Such classical regional assessments as above must be seen from the perspective of the global economy. Capitalizing on the increased connectivity of the world economy is the path to a bright economic future. Globally related economic opportunities are available to industrial sectors as well as cities and regions that know how to exploit them.

However, globalization has also created unforeseen problems and economic consequences. Changes in economic conditions over which municipalities, regions, states and even entire nations no longer have control can now have destructive consequences for the average citizen.

8-2. HOUSING OPTIONS AND THE TAX BASE
Introduction. Over the last decade in Connecticut there has been increasing community dialogue over the relationship between economic development and housing and their relative impacts upon the tax base. The common conclusion has been that residential development “does not pay its way” like economic development, due to the costs of public education for additional children from new housing.

This shared opinion has often manifested itself in community as well as planning and zoning commission opposition to new residential development. On the flip side, it has lent support to the growth of age-restricted housing as a popular development form. Yet all types and price levels of housing are needed to support economic development.

Review of Studies. The dialogue over the fiscal impact of residential development has generated numerous studies. For purposes of background, three of these studies are described and their findings summarized below.

One of the more exhaustive geographically proximate studies of this subject was the Fiscal Impact Regional Report prepared for the nearby Council of Governments of the Central Naugatuck Valley (COGCNV) by Planimetrics in 2000.

That study examined the costs of services and tax revenues for 1-4 family dwellings as compared to a range of other land uses including commercial, industrial, Public Act 490 open space, public utilities and tax-exempt uses. Not surprisingly, the cost of services for residential uses exceeded the tax revenue received from residential properties.

The report did correctly point out that a negative fiscal impact is not always a community negative. For example, tax-exempt facilities enhance quality of life and land trusts preserve open space.

It further points out that the fiscal impact analysis used average costs rather than marginal costs in its methodology. The marginal cost approach requires an assessment of how much capacity remains in the current systems to absorb growth before investments must be made.

When the average cost rather than the marginal cost approach is used to estimate educational costs on a per pupil basis, this can lead to an overstatement of education costs resulting in a negative fiscal impact from residential uses.

Looking at other research, in 2007 the University of Massachusetts Donohue Institute prepared a report entitled The Fiscal Impact of Mixed-Income Housing Developments on Massachusetts Municipalities. The study examined eight mixed-income homeownership developments in seven communities.

The study concluded that the fiscal impact of these developments was similar to residential uses overall in the communities. In terms of specific developments, some had negative impacts overall while others with higher-end sales prices in the mix produced tax revenue in excess of the amount needed to cover municipal costs.

Similar to the COGCNV study, this research found that the use of the average cost of education on a per pupil basis created the greatest negative fiscal impact for residential uses.

The Institute study points out that the marginal or fair share approach makes more sense. Between 1999 and 2004 school enrollments in Massachusetts were essentially flat, experiencing only 0.2 percent total growth. During this same time period, total school expenditures grew by 28.6 percent.

The fair share approach spreads the cost of education across all properties which more appropriately takes into consideration the life cycle concept of a particular property’s revenues and associated costs to a municipality.

Beyond fiscal impact implications, there is some sentiment in communities that multi-family, mixed-income housing developments may negatively impact single-family housing values. In 2005 the MIT Center For Real Estate published a study on this subject entitled Effects of Mixed-Income, Multi-Family Rental Housing Developments on Single-Family Housing Values.

The MIT study examined the impact of seven such developments in six communities in the Boston metropolitan area. The study concluded that large, dense, multi-family mixed income rental developments do not negatively impact the sales price of nearby single-family homes.

The study does make the point that the developments examined were high-quality housing and when built represented the top of the local market. It is reasonable to assume that such housing was developed on sites appropriate for the density. The design, amenities and quality of construction were also of a high-quality.

Implications For The Housatonic Valley Region. The issue of education costs is high on the agenda of communities in the region. However, as found in the Donohue Institute study, education costs continue to increase despite minimal increases in enrollments. Therefore, the direct relationship between housing development, increased enrollments and increased education costs appears to be either weak or non-existent.

It is clear that communities must retain a workforce to support the local economy as well as to have households at different points in the life cycle to support overall quality of life. Development decisions cannot be based solely on a “debits and credits” financial ledger approach.

As the energy and environmental costs of journey to work distances increase, the availability of housing more proximate to employment centers will become a crucial economic and planning determinant in the Housatonic Valley Region.

8-3. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND ZONING
In pursuit of economic development, perceived barriers raised by local zoning regulations are often cited by developers and investors as unnecessary nuisances and cost factors. But this is not usually the case. Consider the perspective offered by the 2002 Danbury Plan of Conservation and Development:

Though many developers may customarily view zoning regulations as impediments, zoning can also assist economic development by helping to protect private investment and ensuring that sufficient land is reserved to meet the long term needs of the municipality for different kinds of development.

Proper zoning will insure that lands zoned for different uses are truly capable of supporting their designated uses, and that they are free from constraints that may render future development prohibitively expensive or otherwise impossible.

See full regional zoning patterns map.

Concern is expressed about the merits of holding vacant land open for manufacturing uses. Manufacturing has been in decline in Connecticut in recent decades, and there is both private market and public sector pressure to convert vacant industrially-zoned land from manufacturing to more immediately marketable commercial and business uses.

The debate is sometimes categorized as between those eager for tax revenues by bringing in "big box" retail versus those wishing to wait for low traffic impact warehousing, office uses, or other alternatives.

4. MARKETING DANBURY AS
THE DYNAMIC REGIONAL CENTER
Even after decades of rapid economic growth by its major suburbs, the City of Danbury remains as the location for fifty percent of the region’s total employment. Danbury's economy is at the area's desirable central geographic crossroads. The City has consistently retained its historic role as regional economic leader.

Why is this so, when so many other cities in the Northeast have declined? Planning consultant Richard Harrall offers HVCEO this perspective:

Unlike other central cities in Connecticut with long legacies of manufacturing employment such as Hartford, Bridgeport and New Haven, Danbury has continued to grow in population, maintain and even expand its economic strength, and remain the dominant community in its region in terms of employment and population size.

The reasons that Danbury has had a different development outcome than other central cities in Connecticut are numerous. However, three factors have been the most critical: economic adaptability, proximity to the New York City market and availability of developable land.

While each of these factors have been important on an individual basis, the combination of the three and their inherent interconnectedness have been particularly potent.

Manufacturing jobs began to leave Connecticut’s central cities and established industrial centers during the 1940s. This job loss accelerated rapidly in the years after World War II, particularly in the decades between 1950 and 1980.

At first, many of the jobs moved to the southern and western sections of the United States; now many of these same jobs have moved again to overseas destinations such as China, India, Indonesia and the Philippines.

This process of industrial dislocation hit cities such as Bridgeport particularly hard, but also caused considerable economic distress for smaller cities such as Meriden and the communities in the Naugatuck Valley area. Danbury was not immune to manufacturing job losses; however, the City was much more adaptable to the changing economic conditions.

While cities such as Bridgeport had significant difficulty “reinventing” their economy and found themselves in a downward spiral of job loss, poverty and subsequent social isolation and disintegration, Danbury shifted its economy to corporate and office uses.

The City also maintained a complimentary balance of retail, medical, educational and service uses which made for a well-rounded economic base that could better withstand economic changes in the future.

Developed land in Danbury and vicinity shown in red.

See Danbury's development in larger context.

Danbury also held on to a core manufacturing base centered around highly-skilled and precision manufacturing jobs that could not be easily outsourced to areas with inexpensive labor.

A key reason for Danbury’s ability to adapt was its close proximity to New York City. High business costs in and around New York made the Danbury market area look relatively inexpensive.

Offices and businesses tied to the New York market could save money by locating in the Danbury area, yet still be close enough to New York to maintain connectedness with national and international markets. Other Connecticut cities that have benefited from this close proximity to New York City are Stamford and Norwalk.

Finally, Danbury’s relatively large geographic size provided the City with land available for new development of both a commercial and residential nature. While the development of land for commercial uses was clearly critical to adapting the City’s economy to changing times, what truly gave Danbury an advantage over cities such as Bridgeport, Hartford and New Haven was the availability of land for single-family homes.

For many residents of other central cities, attaining the “American Dream” of single-family detached homeownership meant moving to the suburbs. Invariably, jobs followed the population shift out of the central cities. Crucially, in Danbury’s case the desired single-family homes could be provided within the geographic boundaries of the City itself.

Thus, the availability of raw land for development allowed Danbury both to adapt economically and retain the workers needed for new jobs. Similar situations occurred in Stamford and Norwalk, where the more rural northern sections of those cities have become the prime location for new single-family homes.

It is also important to point out that significant percentages of nearby suburban populations commute to Danbury daily for their livelihood. For this reason alone, the continued economic health of the City is important to the residents of surrounding towns.

8-5. MARKETING NEW MILFORD
AS THE MAIN REGIONAL SUBCENTER
For the purpose of enhancing their name recognition and marketing potential, many suburbs would like their name included in the regional title along with Danbury.

For local promotional purposes in Danbury's suburbs, it is certainly permissible on occasion to include their town name in the regional title, such as “The Danbury-Ridgefield Area” or the “Danbury-Bethel Area.”

But there a clear cut “Number Two” community in the Greater Danbury Region that is most deserving of the slot in the regional title on a permanent basis. This is the Town of New Milford.

New Milford stands out from the other Danbury suburbs, evidenced by significant statistical indicators.

For example, while New Milford is part of the state designated ten town Greater Danbury Area, it ranks second only to Danbury in the dominant indicator of total population. It is also the second in zoning development holding capacity to Danbury.

An index of regional centrality is a high percentage of daily commuter trips that remain internal to a community. That is, a high percentage of residential origin and work destination pairs are located within the same municipality.

Within the Housatonic Valley Planning Region Danbury has the highest percentage of its residents remaining within the City for work, at 47%. But not surprisingly, next ranked is New Milford at 36%.

See full regional zoning patterns map.

And consider that while the commuter orientation of each municipal labor pool varies significantly, all have major percentages with destinations to the Housatonic Valley as their home planning region.

As expected, Danbury has a high figure for this regional variable, 68% of its employed residents oriented to the regional economy. Then Danbury's closely proximate economic allies, Brookfield and Bethel, share in this core function, with 64% and 62% respectively.

But then New Milford tops them and all other area towns at 73% of employed residents supporting the regional economy. This is more evidence that New Milford can claim a distinctive regional economic status.

Indicator of employed residents, by municipality,
who work in the Housatonic Valley Region,
with Danbury and New Milford in the lead.
See map above in full detail.

On the map above, blue identifies regional cores Danbury and New Milford that have over 65% of their employed residents working within the Region.

Then green on the map shows Bethel, Brookfield, Bridgewater, New Fairfield and Sherman at 51% to 65%. Light green categorizes Ridgefield, Redding and Newtown at a lesser 31% to 50%, as many residents of those southern tier towns are attracted to coastal jobs further south.

Orange on the map then represents six towns to the region's northeast with 11% to 30% and yellow 3% to 10%.

Note that the attractive pull of our employment opportunities for residents of New York State, even with major economic magnet Danbury bordering the state line, is quite limited.

The geographic luck of having capacity for local wastewater receiving streams to assimilate discharged wastewater is also crucial for economic development. For the long term, New Milford has a substantial advantage over Danbury and all other regional towns in water quality constraint regulated sewer treatment plant discharge capacity, should it choose to develop it.

The key to this is that the Housatonic River has 250 million gallons per day to discharge into, while Danbury on the Still River has lesser 16 million gallons of dilution capacity.

Examining the role of New Milford as a retail center, it is relevant to note that in the 1997 New Milford Town Plan the “Downtown New Milford Primary Retail Trade Area” is defined to include all of New Milford, then parts of adjacent Brookfield, Sherman, Kent, Washington, Roxbury and Bridgewater.

Kimberly Clark manufacturing plant in New Milford.

Retail and commuter patterns clearly document New Milford as a secondary regional economic center, having its own small suburbs, to a greater extent than towns of similar population size such as Newtown or Ridgefield.

From yet another perspective, consider that hospitals have historically located in regional centers. Danbury and New Milford Hospitals are good examples.

Also of interest is a recent state study of restoring rail passenger service on the Danbury Branch Line. The results found that if service were restored to New Milford, more rail passengers would board there than at any other town on the line, even at regional leader Danbury.

In sum, New Milford's demographic, economic and land use indicators differ significantly from the other eight Danbury suburbs. New Milford has earned the distinction of being one of the two poles in the regional title “The Greater Danbury - New Milford Area.”

Thus the rapidly growing Housatonic Valley Region has more complexity and sophistication to its urban form than presented in traditional 1990's style marketing, which focused on one center with multiple suburbs. The growing dual pole Danbury - New Milford axis is an economic asset for the entire area, not just themselves.

8-6. MARKETING PROXIMITY TO NYC
The Housatonic Region’s proximity to New York City is of great economic value. The advantage of that business link first became apparent around 1850 with the building of a connecting railroad.

Today, some of the tangible benefits are the accessibility of the City’s unparalleled attractions including high paying jobs, museums and galleries, professional sports, historical sites, ethnic neighborhoods and restaurants, rail and airport facilities.

The Manhattan skyline. Some of the tallest
buildings can be seen from Ridgefield, CT.

Consider these relatively short mileages; the straight line distance from Ridgefield Town Hall to Manhattan’s Central Park is only 41 miles, to Danbury’s City Hall 48, to Newtown’s Town Hall 54 miles away from that park and New Milford 61.

Our region also has the attraction of being part of the Manhattan commuter shed. This is a "safety backup" for persons newly employed here; Manhattan jobs are distant but commutable in a pinch.

Westchester County businesses seeking to move further out from the high priced and congested outer core often want to document that Danbury is indeed within, if admittedly near the outer edge of, the Manhattan commuter shed.

While Greater Danbury shares I-84 corridor economic interests with Greater Waterbury, that area is too far east to make a claim of feasible NYC commuter access and cannot rival us in that way.

By municipality, percentage of employed
residents who work in New York City.

As projected by noted economist Michael Gallis, the New York Metro area is expected to retain a strong position in the new global economy. He recommends that the Housatonic Valley benefit by positioning itself as a distinct submarket of that area, refreshing its marketing image of the past.

An example of a traditional method for marketing Greater Danbury's New York connection is a promotional map from about 1980 available on hvceo.org.

These days, well educated and high tech potential employees do not seek out a company to work for regardless of where it is located. While Greater Danbury might be a great spot for businesses due to the New York proximity as described above, that is not the worker's primary concern. It is an old problem, how to be near "the big city" and the "rural countryside" at the same time.

Again Greater Danbury emerges with winning marketing, for in this region you can both view distant Manhattan skyscrapers from a hilltop at the region's south end in Ridgefield, and walk the pristine Appalachian Trail at the north end in Sherman.

8-7. HIGHLIGHT ADVANTAGES OF
I-684/I-84 CORRIDOR IN METRO NEW YORK
In today’s vastly enlarged worldwide competition for high tech knowledge based industries, by standing alone each municipality or even the larger Housatonic Valley Region is too small for effective visibility.

We should consider the advice of economic theorist Michael Gallis in 2003:

The Connecticut Sourcebook identified three main economic regions that dominated Connecticut. Each of the three economic regions crossed a state line.

Both the western portion of I-95 and I-84 were included as corridors within the New York economic region in competition with the other radial corridors that extended out from the City of New York.

The Sourcebook identified nine total corridors — three in New York, four in New Jersey, and two in Connecticut. Of the two in Connecticut, one was shared by both New York and Connecticut — the I-684 / I-84 corridor...

Only by aggregating resources and positioning the I-684 / I-84 corridor as one of the nine choices within the New York region can the corridor develop the visibility necessary to compete.

Relative traffic volumes in and near the Region. Note
the substantial influence of I-684 arriving from the southwest.

Gallis graphic of recommended
"nine spokes" orientation for Greater Danbury
marketing, featuring I-684. (Red added to denote Danbury).

As for New Milford as the economic subcenter, while north of the I-84 / I-684 corridor itself, new and fast multi-lane Route 7 connections to Danbury were completed 11/2009. This massive transportation investment will draw I-84 corridor access benefits north to Greater New Milford.

The map on the right projects future travel time in ten minute intervals
from I-84 Exit 7 north towards New Milford if the entire Route 7
Expressway had been built. The map at left shows travel times without the
Expressway. The ten minute contour lines reach further north with
the expressway, affecting the spread and intensity of land use. The final
compromise plan, a combination of a limited expressway segment with
widening of existing Route 7, provides most of these time benefits.

8-8. HIGHLIGHT ADVANTAGES OF I-84 ACCESS
WESTWARD AND OTHER TRANSPORTATION NEEDS
Economist Gallis also found that our area has another emerging locational high card. While access to New York to the southwest has been historically valuable, in many ways the City, its extensive environs and the Hudson River are increasingly barriers to quick access to the remainder of the country. One symptom is traffic jams on the Cross Bronx Expressway, which can idle a long haul commercial vehicle for 2-3 hours.

His main thesis is that geographically much of New England has the characteristics of a “dead end” from the perspective of the emerging world economy. This geography presents both the I-84 oriented Danbury and Waterbury Areas with great opportunity.

Gallis says that congested I-95 and Hudson River crossings present a barrier to global competitiveness for southern Fairfield County, but not here in Northern Fairfield and southern Litchfield Counties. Incidentally, the long time motive of I-95 oriented Greater Bridgeport interests in supporting a Route 25 Expressway north to I-84 was their recognition of exactly this problem.

I-84 thru Danbury, Bethel and Newtown holds the high card of a relatively free flowing connection across the New York City and Hudson River barriers.

The position of I-84 through western Connecticut serves the New England market, then also the New York Metro market, then triple duty as a bypass for congested I-95 and NYC.

His key prediction:"as the I-95 corridor becomes more impacted and congested, the I-84 corridor will increase in importance.”

Thus as the decades move on, easy flow to the west will be crucial for securing Greater Danbury’s economic niche in the global market.

Yet due to area growth, congestion on I-84 thru the Region is increasing. A second factor is peak hour congestion on parallel I-95, so slow that at times it just is not a viable means of traveling through Connecticut. Congestion on I-84 will reach a critical point where the productivity of this interstate, a pillar of the locational advantage of the Housatonic Valley Region, is damaged.

The future for I-84?

An additional economic issue for Greater Danbury concerns the upgrading of Stewart Airport, accessed from I-84 about 40 miles to the west in New York State.

The Region also relies upon Metro North to provide commuter rail service on the Danbury Branch Line and the Housatonic Area Regional Transit District to provide local and interregional bus service. These services need to expand to provide a greater share of total daily person-trips.

The Housatonic Railroad Company and Providence and Worcester Railroad provide rail freight services in the region. Rail freight services are an important contributing component of the regional economy and need to be maintained and expanded, especially as an alternative to trucking.

8-9. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
GOAL: Diversified economic growth producing quality jobs and tax revenue, well coordinated with other Regional Plan elements.

1. The Housatonic Region's most important economic resource is its highly skilled workforce. The greatest risks to the regional economy are loss of current skilled employees or an inability to attract more.

2. Congestion on I-84 will reach a critical point where the productivity of this interstate, a pillar of the locational advantage of the Housatonic Valley Region, is damaged. The private sector productivity gains of recent decades due to "just in time delivery" and digital inventory control will be dissipated due to traffic congestion. To prevent these problems develop I-84 traffic management and I-84 traffic capacity expansion strategies.

3. Encourage plans for affordable housing to match the housing needs of planned economic growth. It is clear that communities must retain a workforce to support the local economy as well as to have households at different points in the life cycle to support overall quality of life. Development decisions cannot be based solely on a “debits and credits” financial ledger approach.

As the energy and environmental costs of journey to work distances increase, the availability of housing more proximate to employment centers will become a crucial economic and planning determinant in the Region.

4. HVCEO will use its federal transportation funding programming powers to assist with economic development, and will continually update traffic improvement planning reports for each community.

5. Encourage further investment in established commercial centers at a degree of intensity appropriate to the character of each individual community. Maximize local control of aesthetic design, consider mixed use projects, and facilitate pedestrian links within these centers.

6. Market the Region’s locational advantages, such as its proximity to both national/international markets (New York City) and important regional markets (Hartford, Hudson Valley, Stamford-Norwalk-Bridgeport).

The vast Chinese market meets the Housatonic Valley
Region, an economic jewel in Connecticut

7. Improved rail connections to Stamford and New York City should be vigorously pursued, coupled with restoration of passenger rail service north to New Milford and the placement of transit oriented development at some rail stations. Expand rail freight services to be more competitive with trucking.

8. Foster connectivity between key employment sectors in the Region, such as healthcare and precision manufacturing, with secondary and post-secondary educational institutions to provide a continuous stream of skilled workers for critical industries in the Region.

9. The impacts of federal recognition of the large hydropower industry in the Region remains a significant special issue requiring attention from elected leaders. Seek ways to make hydropower a building block of future economic development.

10. Recognize the Region's remaining agricultural areas as viable economic assets.

11. Work with state and federal agencies having authority over the siting of telecommunications, energy facilities and air service routes to achieve a balance between the need for expanded services and preservation of the natural environment and community character.

12. To assist with effective marketing of the region, HVCEO will:
A. Maintain a demographic and economic overview and its supporting tables, documenting the high quality of life here. As industries driven by intellectual capital such as research, technology and services still need face to face idea collaboration they can be attracted here by the documented high quality of life.

B. Keep current a web listing of local economic development groups including chambers of commerce, economic development commissions, etc. to facilitate access to local economic development officials.

C. Keep current a list of major employers by municipality to showcase the quality and variety of the regional economy.

The creative contributions of consulting
planners at Harrall - Michalowski Associates to this
section of the Regional Plan are gratefully acknowledged.

--- 1. INTRODUCTION --- 2. MAP OF GROWTH --- 3. WATER SUPPLIES ---
--- 4. WASTEWATER --- 5. TRANSPORTATION --- 6. GLOBAL WARMING --- 7. HOUSING ---
--- 8. ECONOMY --- 9. OPEN SPACE --- 10. MIX LAND USE --- 11. TOD --- 12. PEDESTRIAN ---