This dataset explores the physical reality of the population growth from 2005 to 2060
without changes to existing land use policy or gross urban density. The land use
suitability analysis displayed in this dataset was performed by the GeoPlan Center for
1000 Friends of Florida and is a companion study to "A Time for Leadership: Growth
Management and Florida 2060" prepared for 1000 Friends of Florida by researchers
at Georgia Tech's Center for Quality Growth and Regional Development. GeoPlan's
project was undertaken using relatively straightforward geographic information
systems (GIS) suitability analysis constructed on a foundation of clearly articulated
assumptions. The three key assumptions were: 1) Population projections derived
from the Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR) moderate population
projections and interpolation (used for calculating population beyond BEBR year
projection horizon); 2) 2005 gross urban density figures would remain the same
through 2060; and 3) population would be allocated to the most suitable land for
future urban development.
The Florida 2060 population distribution scenario was developed using relatively
straight forward geographic information systems (GIS) suitability analysis. While the
results of the population distribution scenario are not guaranteed, they do represent
a viable snapshot of Florida in fifty years.
This population distribution scenario was created using the Land Use Conflict
Identification Strategy (LUCIS). Through proximity and advanced statistical analysis
of GIS datasets, LUCIS identifies lands that are appropriate for future development,
conservation, and agricultural production. The GIS datasets used during analysis
originate from various sources. GeoPlan and the creators of this dataset relied upon
the various input dataset originator's completeness and accuracy.
Generation of the Florida 2060 population distribution scenario was based on a series
of key assumptions. These assumptions are as follows:
1. The Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR) moderate population
projection from 2005 to 2030 was used as the basis for determining a trend line
extending to 2060. At the time this study was undertaken, BEBR's projections existed
in five year increments up to 2030. BEBR's middle population projection was used in
the following way: The average annual population change between 2000 and 2030
was calculated. For each five year increment following 2030, projected population
was calculated by adding five times the average annual population increase to each
preceding projected population. For example, the BEBR middle range 2030 population
for Alachua County was 320,506. The average annual change population increase
between 2000 and 2030 was calculated to be 3,418. Therefore the 2035 Alachua
County population was projected to be:
(5 [years] x 3,418 [average annual increase]) + 320,506 = 337,596
For the period 2005-2060 the regional starting population was determined to be
17,872,295 and the ending regional population was determined to be 35,814,574.
2. It was assumed the existing gross urban density of developed lands in each county
will remain the same as in 2005. Gross urban density was calculated by taking 2005
population and dividing it by 2005 existing urban lands resulting in an expression of
people per urban acre for each county. The 2005 gross urban densities ranged from
a high in Dade County of 15.45 people per acre to a low in Gilchrist County of 0.45
people per acre. The total acres required to accommodate each county's additional
population was determined based on the calculated 2005 gross urban density.
Appendix 2 of the "Florida 2060: A population Distribution Scenario for the
State of Florida" contains a table of the calculated 2005 gross urban densities by county.
3. The lands to which the new population was distributed were determined to be the
most suitable using a set of eight criteria of which proximity to existing urban areas,
road density, and absence of wetlands were most heavily weighted.
4. Existing urban lands were defined as all lands that support existing urban uses.
These include but are not limited to residential, office/commercial, retail, industrial,
roads, urban parks, utilities and utility corridors, golf courses, cemeteries and airports.
Vacant platted residential properties were also included in existing urban lands for the
counties and partial counties with tax parcel data. The rationale for this assumption was:
As new residential areas are developed in counties with vacant residential parcels, there
will continue to be a backlog of vacant residential parcels always equal in area to the
sum of existing vacant residential parcels.
5. Existing conservation lands were defined as all lands with a measure of permanent
protection (both fee simple and less than fee simple). These included areas under federal
and state ownership managed by public agencies including the National Park Service,
US Fish and Wildlife Service, USDA Forest Service and US Department of Defense.
They also included lands managed by state agencies including the Department of
Environmental Protection, Division of Forestry, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation
Commission and the water management districts. A few private preserves owned and
managed by non-governmental organizations were included as were lands with conservation
easements held by public agencies and non-governmental organizations. The recently
approved Babcock Ranch acquisition was included in the mask because of its size and its
strategic location in Charlotte and Lee Counties.
6. Open water was defined as areas of the state that are covered by surface waters the
majority of the time. These include lakes greater than 10 acres, rivers, streams, canals and
major wetland systems.
7. An urban development mask was created so that only lands suitable for future urban
development could be considered. Existing urban lands, existing conservation lands and open
water were excluded. The Miccosukee Indian Reservation lands in western Broward County
were also excluded from consideration for future urban development, because future land use
on the reservation is the decision of the tribal leaders and it would be in appropriate to assume
that future urban development will be allowed on those lands.
8. The projected populations for three different target dates, 2020, 2040, and 2060, were
distributed. To accomplish this, the acres needed to accommodate the new projected
population were calculated for each county based on its existing gross urban density.
Population was allocated to the most suitable lands equal in area to the acres needed to
accommodate the projected population. Once the new 2020 population was distributed, the
results were fed back into the determination of urban suitability for 2040, and subsequently the
2040 population distribution was fed back into the determination of urban suitability for 2060.
9. Weights were assigned to each criterion used to determine overall urban development
suitability. Appendix 3 of the "Florida 2060: A Population Distribution Scenario for the State of
Florida" displays the rationale for each criterion and those weights. The weights were chosen
based on the degree to which each criterion was assumed to contribute to the suitability of any
given cell for future urban use.
10. The mapping units used for the 2020 target date were each of Florida s 67 counties. In 2040,
however, a number of counties in the central Florida region did not have sufficient land to
accommodate the projected population at the assumed development density. So, to allocate the
2040 population for those counties, it was assumed the additional population would spill over into
adjacent counties. This happened to such a degree in central Florida that it was necessary to cluster
fourteen counties together for the 2040 population distribution. In 2060, these same fourteen counties
remained clustered and two more regional clusters proved necessary, one in south Florida and one in
northeast Florida.
In 2040 and 2060 for the clustered counties, population was allocated by first calculating the
additional acreage needed to accommodate the new population for the target date for each county.
Then the acreage needed for all counties in each cluster was totaled and the population was
distributed beginning with the lands most suitable for urban development in the regional cluster
until the total regional acreage needed was reached. For the counties that remained unclustered,
the new population was allocated county by county as for all counties in 2020.
This dataset was developed using numerous inputs including, but not limited to, existing conservation
areas, major roads, and parcels. A list of these inputs and their sources can be found in Appendix
4 of "Florida 2060: A Population Distribution Scenario for the State of Florida".
|