Considering the implications of different scenarios in policy development

Key findings of scenarios analysis

The results of this analysis showed that compact scenarios compared to dispersed scenarios would bring the region closer to achieving the regional goals across all policy areas. To summarize: 

Land use: Compact development uses land more intensely and efficiently, regardless of how much the region grows. It also puts less pressure on the region’s agricultural areas and natural systems. These findings suggest that compact development makes it easier to protect the region’s natural systems by reducing the footprint of development. They also imply that compact growth patterns can make the region more dynamic and resilient by preserving its agricultural economy.

Transportation: Compared to dispersed growth, compact growth results in lower vehicle miles traveled, lower transportation-related greenhouse gas emissions, greater job accessibility, and better transit access, regardless of how much the region grows. These findings show that compact growth patterns are in alignment with the Met Council’s goal of being leaders in climate mitigation, adaptation, and resilience. They also imply that compact growth is more conducive to generating a more dynamic and equitable region.

Housing: The cost of meeting the affordable housing needs of the population is lower in compact-growth scenarios than dispersed ones. As such, compact growth promotes a more dynamic and equitable region. However, compact growth might lead to gentrification and displacement of low-income residents in areas where growth pressures make housing more expensive. If not addressed, gentrification and displacement risks can undermine equity in the region.

Water quality: Regarding surface water runoff and quality, each pattern of growth generates different types of pollutants and the results of each scenario depend on the type of pollutant. For instance, dispersed-growth scenarios produce larger reductions in nitrate runoff, while compact-growth scenarios produce lesser amounts of chloride runoff. Regionwide differences in scenario results do not tell the whole story since surface water impacts occur locally on small streams and lakes.

Water supply: In all scenarios, industrial development increases in very highly vulnerable areas of water supply. More industrial development occurs in high-growth scenarios. In dispersed-growth scenarios, the region relies more on groundwater than surface water and this brings the region closer to the sustainable groundwater limits. These scenarios also increase the pressure to use additional private wells in areas not served by municipal systems. In compact-growth scenarios, the region relies more on existing water systems such as the Mississippi River, which has higher monitoring, treatment, and costs. These scenarios create a higher risk of impact from sudden drought, making the region less resilient.

Wastewater management: In compact-growth scenarios, the region utilizes its existing wastewater infrastructure more efficiently. Dispersed-growth scenarios have the greatest potential to shift resources toward early and unplanned expansion efforts. They also increase the use of septic tanks and rural local treatment plants, which can lead to long-term environmental degradation if they are not appropriately managed. This implies that the region’s goal of protecting natural systems in the region may be harder to achieve in dispersed-growth scenarios.

Parks and trails: The amount of growth rather than its location plays a more important role in determining park and trail acquisition, protection, and use outcomes. High-growth scenarios increase the cost of acquisition, constitute a challenge for conservation, and might lead to overuse of parks and trails. In addition, higher growth could imply higher visitation, which might lead to the need for increases in funding appropriations for capital projects and operations and maintenance. The specific challenges and opportunities associated with acquisition, protection, and use of parks and trails depend on where growth happens, in mature or developing parks and trails.

Climate: Compact growth produces lower greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions than dispersed growth, no matter how much the region grows. This is also the case for transportation and residential building energy related GHG emissions. These findings suggest that compact growth patterns would serve the region better in terms of reaching its climate goals.

Natural systems: Dispersed development patterns pose a higher risk of natural systems loss, fragmentation, and species loss than compact patterns. This means that compact-growth patterns are better aligned with the region’s goal of protecting and restoring natural systems.  

The findings suggest that, compared to dispersed scenarios, compact-growth scenarios offer more opportunities for achieving the Council’s regional goals. However, compact-growth scenarios also pose some challenges, such as gentrification and displacement risk, that can get in the way of achieving these regional goals. These challenges need to be addressed for the region to be sufficiently prepared for all scenarios.