ARC COMMITTEE MEETING FOLLOW-UP
ENVIRONMENT AND LAND USE COMMITTEE
November 8, 2010 -- Meeting Notes
Members Present
Dennis Burnette
Dan Davis
Todd Ernst
Gene Hatfield
Ralph Moore
Richard Oden
Dan Post
Narender Reddy
Ray Christman
Chick Krautler
Tom Weyandt
Bucky Johnson
Mark Mathews
Kip Berry
Members Absent
Buzz Aherns, Chair
BJ Mathis, Vice Chair
Kerry Armstrong
Tad Leithead, Ex-Officio
Danny Lindsey
Dave Sjoquist
Mickey Thompson
GENERAL
1. Welcome
Ralph Moore, Member
2. Public Comment Period
Ralph Moore, Member
There was no public comment.
3. Approve October 14th Meeting Summary
Approved
Ralph Moore, Member
PLAN UPDATES
4. Begin Review of PLAN 2040 draft documents




Dan Reuter, ARC
UGPM
Development Guide
Local Standards
5-Yr Work Program
Dan Reuter gave a presentation on Plan 2040 Vision and Implementation and an overview of
where ARC is in the planning process right now. ARC staff has developed some draft principles
that nest under the Board-adopted goals and objectives, and ARC staff in the future will tie them
to the work program.
ARC staffs meet with non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in 7 separate meetings in
October coordinate the PLAN 2040 work program with the work programs of NGOs. Mr.
Reuter also provided a brief overview of the RTP and the availability of transportation funding
($170 B in transportation needs through 2040, but only $64 Billion available).
Tom Weyandt added that if HB277 is passed, only $8B in funds projected so it will still not fully
address the region’s transportation needs. Ray Christman asked what revenue is included in the
$64 B projected income? Mr. Weyandt replied that it includes all anticipated revenues, including
federal funds, MARTA penny tax, .
Mr. Reuter provided an overview of the development guide and UGPM (included in packets).
Gene Hatfield asked if its possible to show how much LCI might have altered the UGPM? Mr.
Reuter said that we track those changes through the LCI Implementation Report. Mr. Weyandt
stated that most recent update on LCI on website; LCI is about 3% of land area, and 9% of
housing, 2/3 of retail development and 80% of office development. ARC did computer modeling
analysis if LCI plan fully implemented vs pre-LCI development pattern – showed that reduced
VMT, reduced emissions, etc (in LCI Implementation Report available online). 80% of
communities have amended development codes. Kip Berry stated that the Hwy 92 corridor LCI
will change whole corridor.
Dennis Burnette asked what does PLAN 2040 replace? Mr. Reuter stated Envision6 which was
adopted in 2007. Mr Burnette followed up with asking, If PLAN 2040’s vision is sustainability
how is it different that Envision6? Dan Reuter replied; 10 years ago created LCI during Mobility
2030, continued the implementation of LCI in Envision 6. Mr. Burnette asked if our vision has
not come true from Envision6? Tom replied that Long term regional policy takes time to
implement but the components of sustainability were in Envision6
Ray Christman stated that there has been a lot of local community action through LCI and ARC
programs, and now market forces moving in this direction. In the end, the single biggest lever is
that ARC has is transportation program, how that next transportation priorities align or don’t
align, that’s the whole ballgame, or close to it.
ELUC Meeting Summary – 11/8/10
Page 2 of 5
Jon Tuley of ARC staff discussed the draft development guide included in packet, incorporates
ELUC and LUCC, TCC, ULI and other partners comments about the development guide and the
UGPM. The Development Guide is to help guide proposed development and policies that
support the adopted UGPM.
Mayor Moore stated that this is a very good document shows what’s on the ground, would like to
see guidance on industrial uses in office areas, guidance on FAR, etc. Dan Reuter replied that the
guide is still a draft, and that ELUC is one of the first committees to see it. In past, ARC had
very general maps and statements, and local governments wanted more detail, so this guide is
more detailed, with many categories, for example – regional town center, and town center –
show what’s appropriate in Acworth versus Marietta. ARC staff has received positive comments
about the approach.
Mayor Johnson stated that the document is hard to read and the colors don’t match up, graphs
should be next to maps. The recommended densities do not seem to relate to map. Mayor
Johnson also stated a few more people to look at it so it makes sense. Dan replied that
Communications Staff will work on it.
Jared Lombard of ARC Staff discussed the Local Performance Standards component of PLAN
2040. The Local Performance Standards are a list of actions that local governments can or are
required to do to implement Plan 2040.
Dan Reuter stated that this is a first draft and asked if ARC should require actions or allow local
governments just to consider? Mr. Lombard replied that the draft list devised by LUCC and TCC
and refined by ARC staff.
Dr. Hatfield asked if DCA requires that we have minimum standards, how do we decide that one
standard requires adoption but others state just require them to consider? Mr. Reuter replied that
most local governments want something clear. Tom Weyandt stated that ARC has clear
requirements for the Water District, but ARC does not have clear guidance for other
requirements.
Mayor Johnson asked where did 5,000 population come from and that is seems arbitrary. Dan –
it is arbitrary, but about approximately half the cities in the Atlanta region are under 5,000 and
most of them do not have a full time staff. Mr. Reuter also stated that the ARC is not required to
have thresholds. Mayor Johnson also replied that the document should state cities and not
communities.
Mark Mathews asked if communities above 5,000 will complete basic level plus advanced level,
but no basic level is listed. Mr. Lombard replied that it is not developed yet and it will develop
with input from ELUC, LUCC, and TCC.
Mr. Reuter stated that this is the first introduction of performance standards. ARC staff started
early with meeting with planners and will gather input throughout the process.
Mr. Weyandt stated that regarding Mr. Christman’s previous comment that ELUC should over
the next few months or years to use standards to decide how to prioritize transpiration funds.
And how to link land use achievements with transportation expenditures.
ELUC Meeting Summary – 11/8/10
Page 3 of 5
DATA ITEMS
5. Regional Snapshot
Mike Carnathan, ARC
Mike Carnathan provided an overview of the November Regional Snapshot which was
distributed at the State of the Region. The November Regional Snapshot compares Atlanta
region to other regions nationally. The Atlanta region is expected to add people and jobs, and
the housing market has not suffered as much as other locations in the county. In the past decade
the Atlanta Region added over a million new people and in the future will become a more
diverse region.
Narendeer Reddy asked why are we expecting high paying jobs in future? Mr. Carnathan
replied that the Atlanta region is a hub, that has been losing these jobs and adding low-paying
jobs, but that trend is expected to change.
Ray Christman stated that this is a great piece of work (Dennis Burnette seconded) and also
added that this is the toughest time to forecast future. The forecast is based on the period now
being considered a blip and it expected to continue as before, but another scenario is that this is
not a blip and may continue for next 10 years. Growth could be moderate. Tom Weyandt stated
that the only guarantee that ARC can make it that the forecast is not perfect and the Atlanta
region cannot be complacent about where it is with all the regional issues, and it could be at a
competitive disadvantage to make this a healthy sustainable region.
6. Research Division 2011 Activities
Mike Alexander, ARC
Mike Alexander of ARC staff presented information on the Cooperative Imagery Purchase
Program that ARC conducted in 2010. ARC identified the savings that local governments had
by purchasing the imagery cooperatively, and hopes it will further encourage other counties to
join the program in the future.
REVIEWS OR SPECIAL STUDIES
None
PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
None
MEMBER INTRODUCED TOPICS
None
OTHER
Ray Christman asked if ELUC members can get an update about the proposed ARC committee
changes because not all ELUC members are on the ARC Board.
ELUC Meeting Summary – 11/8/10
Page 4 of 5
ELUC Meeting Summary – 11/8/10
Page 5 of 5