City of Howell Community Profile 2015

Transcription

CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Nick Proctor, Mayor
Shea Charles, City Manager
Timothy Schmitt, Community Development Director
Erv Suida, Director of Public Services
Steven Manor
Robert Ellis
Jeffrey Hansen
Doug Heins
Jan Lobur
Scott Niblock
Jeanette Ambrose
Erin Britten
Stewart Howe
Jan Lobur
Robert Spaulding
Paul Streng
Maryanne Vukonich
Nick Proctor
Shea Charles
Erin Perdu, former Community Development Director
Carlisle / Wortman Associates, Inc.
Adopted by the Howell Planning Commission
June 17, 2015
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 5
Planning in the City of Howell ....................................................................................................................... 5
Location ......................................................................................................................................................... 9
Historic and Architectural Resources .......................................................................................................... 10
Population and household Demographics................................................................................................... 13
Housing ....................................................................................................................................................... 23
Economic Base/Socio-Economic Assessment .............................................................................................. 28
Community Facilities and Services .............................................................................................................. 34
Transportation and Traffic Analysis ............................................................................................................. 44
Environmental Resources ............................................................................................................................ 50
Existing Land Use ......................................................................................................................................... 54
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
Page intentionally left blank.
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
INTRODUCTION
An important prerequisite to preparing an update to the City of Howell’s Master Plan is to develop a
common understanding of the current state of the community as well as anticipated trends. Information
gathered through the planning process is critical to the accurate projection of future needs and
development patterns. The Community Profile is intended synthesize and communicate conditions and
trends, as well as the dynamic economic, social, and environmental forces brought on by various forms of
growth and change.
The City’s ultimate goals is to preserve and enhance quality of life within the community, and this qualitative
and quantitative data provides a solid footing for the formulation of goals, policies, and strategies designed
to help the community flourish. Although much of the background data is updated information from
previous City plans, new information that is relevant to current conditions has been added. Specifically the
release of 2010 Census data and 2008-12 American Community Survey (ACS) data allows for a detailed
analysis of the City’s demographics. The Community Profile also references recent publications and relevant
studies conducted by Livingston County and other regional planning organizations, including Southeast
Michigan Council of Governments (SEMCOG).
The Community Profile provides an inventory of existing conditions including population and household
demographics, housing, local economy, community facilities and services, natural features, land use
patterns, and transportation.
A common understanding of the community leads to a clearer vision, stronger support, improved decision
making, and better coordination between public agencies, developers, and citizens towards achievement
of common goals.
PLANNING IN THE CITY OF HOWELL
The City of Howell has a history of sound planning and innovative collaboration. The City has maintained a
Master Plan which has been updated several times over the past twenty five (25) years. The City adopted
its first Master Land Plan in 1966. The Plan was extensively revised in 1987, with a series of amendments
and/or revisions in 1991, 2002, and 2006.
In 1987, the Plan was extensively revised to provide a more dynamic tool to guide future development and
land use decisions. This update dealt with issues such as land shortage, aging housing stock, and
development competition from adjacent Townships. Specifically, the preservation of neighborhoods,
maintaining a strong Central Business District, improving traffic circulation, building a sound industrial base,
and extending utilities. As part of the planning process, a number of studies were conducted prior to the
Master Plan update. In 1981, the University of Michigan prepared a report entitled Strategies for the Future.
In 1984, a Regional/Urban Design Assistance Team (R/UDAT) of the American Institute of Architects (AIA)
conducted a study entitled Change with Continuity. The Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
of Michigan State University also developed a Transportation Plan.
The Master Plan was revised again in 1991, building on the established growth management approach and
introducing Mixed Use as a planned land use designation. The Mixed Use designation was intended to
5
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
encourage creative planning and encourage a mix of uses forming an identifiable unit. The area north of I96 and west of Lucy Road was the first area planned for Mixed Use development.
The City of Howell’s Downtown Development Authority (DDA) was established in 1991. At the time, one of
the highest priorities of the DDA was to improve the visual appearance of Grand River Avenue within the
Development Area. As a result, the DDA initiated the preparation of a streetscape plan and program to
guide implementation of improvements, including landscaping and street trees, pedestrian circulation,
parking, paving concepts, lighting, entryway signage, street furniture, and other unifying elements.
In the late 1990s, the City of Howell identified the need to prepare specific area plans to manage future
growth. In 1999, the Northeast Area M-59 Area Plan was created, followed by the Loop Road Area Plan in
2002. In 2002, the City’s Master Plan was revised and updated to incorporate the area plans. In 2000, the
College of Architecture and Design at Lawrence Technological University prepared a study of the City’s built
environment and historic character entitled Howell, Michigan, Plan for Preservation.
In 2003, the City of Howell contributed to the development of the Howell Area Recreation Authority Plan
and subsequent creation of the Howell Area Recreation Authority which also includes the adjacent
communities of Marion Township and portions of Genoa and Oceola Township.
Also in 2003, the Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) and Landscape Architects & Planners,
Inc. completed a Howell Area Non-Motorized Trail Study. The Crosstown Trail project originated out of a
local “Walkable Communities” conference. The City and MDOT were interested in developing a seamless,
non-motorized transportation system connecting M-59, Latson Road, and Grand River Avenue I-96 Business
Loop to provide for safe non-motorized transportation.
The most recent update of the Master Plan occurred in 2006. Of significance in this update was the addition
of the following planned mixed use categories: Mixed Density Residential, Office/Research Park Land Use,
and Mixed Use Commercial. This change helped to align the Master Plan and Loop Road Target Area Plan,
and provide for greater flexibility of use in the planned mixed use areas.
In 2008, the D-19 Corridor Concept Plan was created to encourage investment, improve the built
environment, alleviate traffic congestion, and create a gateway to the City of Howell from I-96. This Plan
provides the foundation for the City’s Michigan Avenue Form Based Code.
In 2011, the Howell Main Street/Downtown Development Authority (DDA) commissioned a Downtown
Howell Market Profile study to establish benchmarks and lay the groundwork for current and future
enhancement and business development in the DDA district. The study includes a demographic snapshot
and ESRI lifestyle profile, as well as focus group analysis and recommendations for the future.
In the late 1990s, the City began to feel the pressures of sprawling, suburban development patterns. In the
face of these pressures, the City desired to promote traditional neighborhood development in the large
open space portions of the City, establish coordinated land use patterns within the context of a mixed use
environment, protect natural features, and promote high-quality development. It was then that the City of
Howell identified the need to prepare specific area plans to manage future growth and development.
6
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
Nort he ast A re a and M -59 A re a Pl an
In 1999, the Northeast Area and M-59 Area Plan was created. The Study Area included proposed Planned
Unit Developments (PUDs) within the City of Howell, as well as adjacent properties which could be annexed
into the City at a future date.
Loo p Ro ad A re a Pl an
In 2002, the Loop Road Area Plan was created to establish a cohesive development plan for the area north
of I-96 and west of Lucy Road in order to study to the impacts of the proposed Pinckney Road (D-19)
alternative truck route loop road. Also in 2002, the City’s Master Plan was updated and Northeast Area/M59 Area and Loop Road Area Plans were incorporated in the Master Plan.
D-19 Co rridor Co nce pt Pl an
In 2008, the D-19 Corridor Concept Plan was created to encourage public and private investment, improve
the built environment, alleviate traffic congestion, and create a gateway to the City of Howell. This Plan
forms the foundation for the City’s S. Michigan Avenue Form Based District.
In 2005, the City of Howell contributed to the development of the Howell Area Recreation Authority Plan
and subsequent creation of the Howell Area Recreation Authority which also includes the adjacent
communities of Marion Township and portions of Genoa and Oceola Township. The Authority was created
with the purpose to construct, operate, maintain and/or improve recreational facilities, including, but not
limited to, parks, swimming pools, recreation centers, auditoriums and any other facilities
In 1991, the City created a Downtown Development Authority. The Development Area was defined as 125
acres and contains primarily commercial and residential properties in addition to some public and industrial
properties. The general goal of the Authority is to establish a favorable environment for downtown business
and residents, and to provide the resources and direction to implement improvement and revitalization
projects. The Plan divided the Development Area into six (6) planning subareas: Adjacent Residential,
Eastern Grand River, Central Grand River, West Grand River, and Central Business District Grand River.
7
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
In 2003, the Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) and Landscape Architects & Planners, Inc.
completed a Non-Motorized Trail Study for the Howell Area. The study identifies Grand River and M-59 as
the major links for the Crosstown Trail.
In 2006, the idea was proposed for a North-South Commuter Rail service between the City of Howell and
the City of Ann Arbor. The 27-mile long commuter rail service was intended to alleviate traffic congestion
along I-96 and US-23. The idea gained significant grass-roots support and interest from the public, local
government agencies, and the Great Lake Railroad. In 2008, a WALLY feasibility study and business plan
was prepared by R.L. Banks & Associates. While the study revealed the project was feasible, there were
many additional questions. The North-South Commuter Rail (WALLY) Feasibility and Conceptual Planning
Study (Phase II) is underway, and is being funded largely by a Transportation and Community System
Preservation (TCSP) grant.
In 2010, the City completed a Capital Improvements Program for the Waste Water Treatment Plant. This
CIP provides guidelines and a schedule for infrastructure repairs and replacement, treatment system
upgrades, and expansion of the WWTP to increase treatment capacity. This document was developed with
consideration of the age and condition of existing facilities and projections for future wastewater flow.
8
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
LOCATION
Once known as “Livingston Centre” and frequently marketed as the “Heart of it all,” the City of Howell is
located in the central portion of Livingston County, Michigan. The City is comprised of approximately 4.9
square miles. The City is bounded by Howell Township to the north and west, Oceola and Genoa Township
to the east, and Marion Township to the south. Over the years, the City has grown and expanded into
surrounding areas through annexation; however, there are still “islands” of township parcels located within
the City limits. In 2013, the City of Howell purchased 210 acres on the southeast side of town, known as
the Highland-Howell Property.
Genoa Lansing (35 miles) and Detroit (50 miles) along interstate I-96. The
The City of HowellMarion
is located between
City is linked to the metropolitan region via I-96, Highland Road (M-59), Grand River Avenue, Michigan
Avenue, and Pinckney Road (D-19), with convenient access to US-23. The City is also traversed by the CXS
Railroad and Great Lakes Central Railroad. Nearby urban centers include Brighton (10 miles) and Ann Arbor
(30 miles).
Figure 1.
Regional Map, Livingston County, Michigan
Livingston County
Howell
Oceola
9
CITY OF HOWELL
Figure 2.
COMMUNITY PROFILE
Aerial Image, City of Howell
HISTORIC AND ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES
When the City of Howell was first settled more than 180 years ago along the Grand River Trail, the area
became known as "Livingston Centre." The settlement offered safe haven for travelers and played an
important role in the completion of the Lansing-Howell-Detroit Plank Road.
Since the beginning, the City of Howell has been a center of government, trade, and culture. It is a tradition
that continues today. Beyond the downtown area – the physical core and symbolic heart of Howell – the
City of Howell has developed a rich network of residential neighborhoods, community facilities, commercial
corridors, and employment centers that serve as essential elements of the City and the Howell Area
community.
The first actual settlements in Howell were made by George T. Sage, John D. Pinckney, James Sage, and
David Austin in the year 1834. In 1935, the village of Howell was surveyed and plotted by Edward Brooks
and Flavius J. B. Crane. The village was originally designed with a public square to “be and remain open for
the use of the public” bounded by Grand River, Walnut, Sibley, and Centre Streets. The square is now
occupied by County buildings.
The first structure built in the City was the City Eagle Tavern, or hotel, which also served as the first post
office. Eagle Tavern was followed by Moses Thompson’s saw mill, Edward Gay’s mercantile store, and
10
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
William McPherson’s blacksmith shop. Howell’s first school house opened in 1837. The school house
became the center of community activity by providing a physical space for religious services, court of law,
local elections, and public meetings.
The Toledo, Ann Arbor, and Northern Railroads came to Howell in 1885. The railroad was vital to the success
of the Borden Milk Plant on West Street and to many other enterprises in Howell during the boom years.
The City of Howell is known for its rich architectural history including the Richardsonian Romanesque
County Courthouse (1889) and Neoclassical Howell Carnegie District Library (1906). Other prominent
structures include First National Bank (1873), Cleary’s Pub (1875), Opera House (1881), Howell Depot
(1886), McPherson Mansion (1915), Cobb-Hall Insurance Building (1928), Ann Arbor Railroad Building
(1936), and recently renovated Howell Theater (1936). The Lakeview Cemetery is another significant
historic site and the final resting place of many early settlers.
The City of Howell showcases a variety of architectural styles including Italianate, High Victorian, Victorian
Gothic, English Gothic, Tudor Revival, Craftsman, and Colonial. Preserving and promoting the City’s physical
and cultural history has been a collaborative effort between several groups including City Departments,
Livingston County, Howell Area Historical Society, Howell Downtown Development Authority, Friends of
the Howell Carnegie Library, Livingston Arts Council, and of course, the Howell residents.
The City of Howell has made a point to express and pay tribute to the community’s shared values, rich
history, and dedicated military service. Built in the 1940s, the Livingston County Veterans Memorial
recognizes the veterans from Livingston County who gave their lives in WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq,
and Afghanistan. Furthermore, significant community events are celebrated in the City’s public art pieces,
including the Native American bent limb topiary sculpture and “The Spirit of Howell” glass panel series.
The City of Howell is centered on the intersection of Grand River and Michigan Avenue. Grand River
originated as a trail established by the Native Americans and first used by European settlers in 1701. During
the 1820s and 30s, the Detroit-Howell Plank Road was constructed along the Grand River Trail. In the 1850s,
the Lansing-Howell Plank Road completed the link between the state capitol and Michigan’s largest
metropolis. The Lansing–Detroit Plank Road was a toll road until the 1880s, and it eventually evolved into
the eastern part of the modern Grand River Avenue.
While Howell’s main thoroughfare was established pre-settlement, the City’s circulation network continues
to evolve over time. Howell’s downtown is characterized by a dense street grid with square blocks.
Generally, the streets are fixed along the axis of Grand River, based on the original village plat. However,
the streets in section 35 are oriented to true north. Railroads lines and natural features, including
Thompson Lakes and numerous wetland areas, have also influenced road development in the City.
Other major roadways include interstate I-96, to the south, and Highland Road (M-59), which intersects the
northern portion of the City. This final section of I-96, connecting Eagle/Grand Ledge to Brighton, was
11
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
completed in 1962. The following year, M-59 was extended with the new Business Loop I-96 to end at the
newly opened freeway. Over time, distinctly different circulation networks developed in the City’s
residential, industrial, and public/institutional areas.
Roadways are only part of the city’s circulation network. The City of Howell is committed to a walkable
community that provides safe paths and walkways for public use. Pedestrian circulation and access is a
priority for all new development. In 2014, the City established a sidewalk replacement program for the
Central Business District and older residential subdivisions.
12
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
POPULATION AND HOUSE HOLD DEMOGRAPHICS
Past trends, current characteristics, and future expectations of the City of Howell community are all
important elements in determining future land use and facility needs. An analysis of population and
household demographics is important to determining the City’s development potential and future needs.
In 1930, the City of Howell’s population was approximately 3,751. By 1980, the City’s population had grown
to 6,980, an increase of eight six (86%) percent. This substantial growth continued through the 90s,
reaching a population of 9,232 by 2000. P resulting in a population of 9,489 in 2010 – corresponding to an
average annual growth rate of 0.57%. In 1980, Howell was the fifth most populated community in Livingston
County, today it is the ninth most populated.
While the City of Howell continues to grow, the City’s share of Livingston County’s total population is
shrinking, from its peak of 18.8% in the 1930 Census to a low of 5.2% in the 2000 Census. These changes
have resulted from the increased levels of population growth in the surrounding townships, together with
the fact that the City of Howell is nearly built out.
While the rate of population growth has decreased for many cities since the post-war housing boom (19501980), Livingston County and several of its townships continue to grow at a significant rate. In fact,
Livingston County was one of the fastest growing counties in the state between 1990 and 2000, with an
annual growth rate of 3.57%. The majority of growth within the County can be attributed to the townships.
Between 1980 and 2010, the County’s township population increased by 78,658 residents, while the
County’s cities and villages welcomed a combined 7,323 new residents.
Over the last four (4) decades, the adjacent communities of Genoa Township and Oceola Township have
experienced some of the most significant population growth, both in terms of the number of residents and
percent change in population. Still, Handy Township is unmatched in terms of population growth, with an
annual growth rate of 9.86% between 2000 and 2010.
Figure 3 shows the population trends of the City of Howell compared to the overall growth of Livingston
County over the past eighty (80) years. Table 1 shows population trends in relation to the total number of
persons per census year along with average annual growth rates and the percentage change over time for
all Livingston County communities.
13
CITY OF HOWELL
Figure 3.
COMMUNITY PROFILE
Population Trends, 1930-2010, City of Howell and Livingston County
200,000
175,000
150,000
125,000
100,000
75,000
50,000
25,000
0
1930
1940
1950
1960
Howell, City of
Howell, City of
Livingston County
1930
3,751
19,994
1940
3,747
20,863
1950
4,354
26,725
1970
1980
1990
2000
2010
Livingston County
1960
4,859
38,233
1970
5,224
58,967
1980
6,980
100,289
1990
8,188
115,645
2000
9,229
156,951
2010
9,489
180,967
Source: City of Howell, 2006, Community Profile; U.S. Bureau of Census, 2010 Census, Profile of General
Population and Housing Characteristics
14
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
Table 1. Population Trends, 1980-2010, Livingston County Communities
Average Annual
Percent
Growth Rate (%)
Change (%)
1980- 1990- 20001980
1990
2000
2010
1980-2010
1990
2000
2010
Cities and Villages
14,923
18,121
21,046
22,246
2.14
1.61
0.57
49.1
Howell, City of
6,976
8,184
9,232
9,489
1.73
1.28
0.28
36.0
Brighton, City of
4,268
5,686
6,701
7,444
3.32
1.79
1.11
74.4
Fowlerville, Village of
2,289
2,648
2,972
2,886
1.57
1.22
-0.29
26.1
Pinckney, Village of
1,390
1,603
2,141
2,427
1.53
3.36
1.34
74.6
Townships
85,366
97,524 135,905 164,024
1.42
3.94
2.07
92.1
Brighton
11,222 14,815 17,673 17,791
3.20
1.93
0.07
58.5
Cohotah
2,436
2,693
3,394
3,317
1.06
2.60
-0.23
36.2
Conway
1,722
1,818
2,732
3,546
0.56
5.03
2.98
105.9
Deerfield
2,611
3,000
4,087
4,170
1.49
3.62
0.20
59.7
Genoa
9,261
10,820 15,901 19,821
1.68
4.70
2.47
114.0
Green Oak
10,802 11,604 15,618 17,476
0.74
3.46
1.19
61.8
Hambburg
11,318 13,083 20,627 21,165
1.56
5.77
0.26
87.0
Handy
2,392
2,840
4,032
8,006
1.87
4.20
9.86
234.7
Hartland
6,034
6,860
10,996 14,663
1.37
6.03
3.33
143.0
Howell
3,999
4,298
5,679
6,702
0.75
3.21
1.80
67.6
Iosco
1,436
1,567
3,039
3,801
0.91
9.39
2.51
164.7
Marion
4,754
4,918
6,757
9,996
0.34
3.74
4.79
110.3
Oceola
4,175
4,825
8,362
11,936
1.56
7.33
4.27
185.9
Putnam
4,253
4,580
5,359
8,248
0.77
1.70
5.39
93.9
Tyrone
6,077
6,854
8,459
10,020
1.28
2.34
1.85
64.9
Undilla
2,874
2,949
3,190
3,366
0.26
0.82
0.55
17.1
Livingston County
100,289 115,645 156,951 180,967
1.53
3.57
1.53
80.4
Population
15
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
An overview of the population growth in Livingston County since 1980 is helpful to establish the
environment in which the City has served as county seat and “County Centre” (see Table 1); however, it is
the current demographic characteristics upon which the future needs and preferences of the community
can be derived.
Table 2 provides an overview of Livingston County general population characteristics by community from
the 2010 U.S. Census. The following observations highlight characteristics of the City of Howell that
distinguish the community from similarly sized cities and the adjacent townships in Livingston County,
herein identified as “sample communities.”
The median age in the City of Howell is 35.2 years, which is lower than the countywide average of 40.9
years. Twenty-three (23%) percent of the City’s population is under 18 years, while sixty three (63%)
percent is between the ages of 18 and 64, and thirteen (13%) percent of the population is over 65.
Compared to the Sample Communities, the City of Howell has a slightly lower proportion of residents Under
18 years and a slightly higher proportion of residents 18 to 64 years. Between 2000 and 2010, the number
of residents under the age of 18 actually decreased from 2,225 to 2,206.
Table 2. General Population Characteristics, 2010, Livingston County Sample Communities
Total
Population
Median
Age
Population by Age Group
Under 18 Years
18-64 Years
65 Years and Over
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
Cities
Howell, City of
9,489
35.2
2,206
23
6,006
63
1,277
13
Brighton, City of
7,444
43.4
1,414
19
4,415
59
1,615
22
Fowlerville, City of
2,866
35.2
775
27
1,705
59
386
13
Townships
Genoa Township
19,821
42.7
4,801
24
12,161
61
2,859
14
Howell Township
6,702
40.9
1,561
23
4,228
63
913
14
Marion Township
9,996
40.9
2,702
27
6,179
62
1,115
11
Oceola Township
11,936
37.5
3,574
30
7,274
61
1,088
9
Livingston County
180,967
40.9
46,237
26
113,086
62
21,644
12
Source: U.S. Bureau of Census, 2010 Census, Profile of General Population and Housing Characteristics
Note: 1. Tables contain adjacent Township and similarly sized cities. The following Livingston County
communities have not been included in the sample community comparison: Brighton, Cohoctah, Conway,
Deerfield, Green Oak, Hamburg, Handy, Hartland, Iosco, Putnam, Tyrone, and Unadilla Townships, and the
City of Pinckney.
Overall, the City of Howell’s population 16 years and over is well educated, with a majority of residents
having at least a high school diploma. The estimate for the current high school enrollment is 605 students.
16
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
While there is a margin of error with this estimate, subtracting the number of high school students from
the total population 16 years and over, the result is less than 100 people without a high school diploma
presently outside of the education system. As shown in Figure 4, nearly sixty (60%) percent of residents
have attended some college. Twenty one (21.7%) percent of residents have graduated college with a
bachelor’s degree or higher.
Figure 4. Education Attainment for Population 16 Years and Over, 2012, City of Howell
Less than 9th grade
9th to 12th grade, no diploma
High school graduate or GRE
2.5% 8.3%
31.7%
28.0%
7.8%
17.3%
4.4%
Some college, no degree
Associate's degree
Bachelor's degree
Graduate or professional degree
0%
50%
100%
Source: U.S. Bureau of Census, 2008-2012 American Community Survey 5 Year Estimates, Educational
Attainment
Since the 1960s, the City of Howell has experienced growth in both the number of residents and the
number of households, but the average annual rate of growth is slowing, particularly for households (see
Figure 4). The City experienced accelerated household growth during the 1970s, which is about the time
when Baby Boomers were becoming first-time homebuyers. Table 3 provides additional housing
characteristics for the City of Howell from 1960 to 2010. Between 1960 and 2000, the number of persons
per household has continued to decline beginning with 3.10 persons in 1960 to 2.29 persons in the year
2000. The medium household income has also increased steadily over the same period.
Between 2000 and 2010, the data shows a small increase in the number of households and small decreases
in household size and median household income. The data shows two snapshots in time but it does not tell
the full story. Incomes were actually on the rise during the early 2000s, but then in 2007-08, the country
experienced one of the worst economic recessions to date. The City’s population growth is just one of the
many factors influencing household characteristic. Other factors include the health of the housing market,
the number of high school graduates pursuing higher education, and the decision to wait on marriage and
family.
Figure 4. Rate of Growth Comparison between Population and Households, 1960-2010, City of Howell
17
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
12.0%
10.0%
8.0%
6.0%
4.0%
2.0%
0.0%
-2.0%
1960-1970
1970-1980
1980-1990
Population
1990-2000
2000-2010
Households
Table 3. Household Characteristics, 1960-2010, City of Howell
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
2010
Number of Households
1,529
1,344
2,664
3,266
3,857
4,028
Persons per Household
3.10
2.99
2.51
2.43
2.29
2.25
Median Household Income ($)
6,198
11,405
18,389
31,674
43,958
43,094
The high number of non-family households in the City of Howell is a unique characteristic compared to the
County average, as well as similarly sized cities and adjacent townships (see Table 4). Over thirty six (36%)
percent of Howell households are non-family. In 2000, the City’s portion of non-family household
accounted for over thirteen (13.6%) percent of the County’s total. Today, it accounts to just over ten (10%)
percent. As noted in Table 5, a significant fraction of non-family households consist of older adults (65
years and over) living alone.
In terms of family households, thirty one (31%) percent of households have children under 18 years living
at home. Of those family households with children, approximately forty (40%) percent are single parent
households. This data is also shown in Figure 5.
Table 4. Household Characteristics Comparison, 1960-2010, Livingston County Sample Communities
Number of Households
18
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
Total
Family
Nonfamily
Median Household
Income ($)
Cities
Howell, City of
4,028
2,554
1,474
43,094
Brighton, City of
3,603
2,065
1,538
46,731
1,198
825
373
41,721
Townships
Genoa Township
7,807
6,061
1,746
67,548
Howell Township
2,531
1,985
546
70,081
Marion Township
3,499
3,003
496
84,636
Oceola Township
4,057
3,490
567
80,996
Livingston County
67,380
53,804
13,576
72,129
Table 5. Household Characteristics Comparison, 2012 ACS, City of Howell
No.
Percent of Total
Households (%)
Total Households
3,905
Family Households (families)
2,117
54.2
Family Household, No Children
905
23.2
Family Household, With Children Under 18 years
1,212
31.0
Married-couple family
1,364
34.9
With own children under 18 years
723
18.5
Male Householder, no wife present, family
133
3.4
79
2.0
Female Householder, no husband present, family
620
15.9
410
10.5
Nonfamily Households
1,788
45.8
Nonfamily Household, Other
299
7.7
Nonfamily Household, Living Alone, Under 65 years
934
38.1
Nonfamily Household, Living Alone, 65 years and Over
555
14.2
Source: U.S. Bureau of Census, 2008-2012 American Community Survey 5 Year Estimates, Housing
Characteristics
Figure 5.
Household Type, 2012, 2008-2012 City of Howell
19
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
Family Household, No Children
23.2%
31.0%
7.7%
38.1%
14.2%
Family Household, With Children
Under 18 years
Nonfamily Household
Nonfamily Household, Living Alone,
Under 65 years
0%
50%
100%
Nonfamily Household, Living Alone, 65
years and Over
Source: U.S. Bureau of Census, 2008-2012 American Community Survey 5 Year Estimates, Educational
Attainment
The Southeast Michigan Council of Governments (SEMCOG) Regional Development Forecast provides
demographic projections for the entire southeastern Michigan region. Projected at 0.69%, the City’s rate
of population growth is expected to increase slightly as compared to the previous decade, but it will
nowhere match the population growth experienced between 1980 and 2000. According to the SEMCOG
report, the City’s population is projected to rise, and will reach 11,448 persons by the year 2040 (see Table
6). The rate of growth in Livingston County is expected to decrease over the next three (3) decades, as
growth and development gradually slow, and communities become more built out. The annual rate of
growth is projected to decrease in several Livingston County communities; however, the City of Brighton
and Howell Township are some of the communities expected to sustain a high rate of growth in the coming
years, with 0.98% and 2.57% average annual grow respectively. Howell Township is projected to experience
a seventy-seven (77%) percent change in population. Overall, the countywide population is anticipated to
grow by eighteen (18.4%) percent between 2010 and 2040. The City’s population is projected to increase
by approximately twenty (20%) percent during the same time period. In the coming decades the City of
Howell will likely have a declining proportion of the County’s population; however, Howell will likely remain
the largest City in Livingston County.
Table 6. Population Projections, 2010-2040, Livingston County Sample Communities
20
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
2010
2014
2020
2040
Projected Annual
Growth Rate (%)
Cities
Howell, City of
9,489
9,863
9,816
11,448
Brighton, City of
7,444
7,807
8,136
9,628
2,886
2,868
3,086
3,236
Townships
Genoa Township
19,821
19,962
20,969
23,061
Howell Township
6,702
6,671
8,200
11,866
Marion Township
9,996
10,426
10,083
12,339
Oceola Township
11,936
12,708
12,125
14,154
Livingston County
180,967 185,637 192,116 214,323
Source: U.S. Census and SEMCOG 2040 Regional Development Forecast
Percent Change
2010-2040 (%)
0.69
0.98
0.40
20.6
29.3
12.1
0.54
2.57
0.78
0.62
0.61
16.3
77.1
23.4
18.6
18.4
Today, thirty two (32%) percent of the City’s population is between the ages of 35-59. This age group is
generally categorized as families and in many ways represents the typical needs of Howell residents (see
Table 7). In the coming decade, however, Howell will experience an aging population. By 2030, the largest
age group will no longer be families but will consist of residents 65 years and over. By 2040, twenty seven
(27%) percent of Howell residents will be seniors (65+), which means the City will be expected to provide
housing and services for 1,849 seniors. In 2040, twenty five (25%) percent of the City’s population will be
families (35-59), and twenty one (21%) percent will be children (0-17). Projections show a decrease in the
18-24 and 60-64 age groups, -12.6% and -13.8% respectively.
Table 7. Population Projections by Age Group, 2010-2040, Livingston County
2010
2020
2030
Age Group
75 +
65 – 74
60 – 64
35 – 59
25 – 34
18 – 24
5 - 17
Under 5
2040
744
1,015
1,590
2,190
533
924
1,204
936
445
640
570
389
3,043
2,470
2,372
2,855
1,567
1,967
1,890
1,868
951
866
656
820
1,555
1,284
1,389
1,671
651
650
705
719
9,489
9,816
10,376
11,448
Source: U.S. Census and SEMCOG 2040 Regional Development Forecast
Change
2010-2040
Percent Change
2010-2040 (%)
1,446
403
-56
-188
301
-131
116
68
1,959
194.4
75.6
-12.6
-6.2
19.2
-13.8
7.5
10.5
20.6
According to the SEMCOG report, the City’s total number of households is projected to continue to
increase, and will reach 4,741 by the year 2040 (see Table 8). The rate is project to be slightly higher than
that experienced between 2000 and 2010. The County as a whole is anticipated to experience a slightly
faster rate of household growth, which again, is largely attributed to township growth.
Table 8. Projected Household Growth, 2010-2040, Livingston County Sample Communities
21
CITY OF HOWELL
Cities
Howell
Brighton
Fowlerville
Townships
Genoa Township
Howell Township
Marion Township
Oceola Township
Livingston County
COMMUNITY PROFILE
2010
2014
2020
2040
Projected Annual
Growth Rate (%)
Percent Change
2010-2040 (%)
4,028
3,603
1,198
4,227
3,882
1,223
4,148
3,726
1,308
4,741
4,098
1,408
0.59
0.46
0.58
17.7
13.7
17.5
7,807
2,531
3,499
4,057
67,378
8,094
2,648
3,712
4,376
70,655
8,333
3,147
3,722
4,414
73,620
9,133
4,380
4,570
5,235
82,223
0.57
2.44
1.02
0.97
0.73
17.0
73.0
30.6
29.0
22.0
Source: U.S. Bureau of Census and SEMCOG 2020 Regional Development Forecast









The City experienced significant population growth during the 1980s and 90s.
The rate of population growth slowed during the 2000s, reaching a population of 9,489 in 2010 –
corresponding to an average annual growth rate of 0.57%.
The majority of growth within Livingston County can be attributed to the townships.
Over the last four decades, the adjacent communities of Genoa Township and Oceola Township
have experienced some of the most significant population growth, both in terms of the number
of residents and percent change in population.
The median age in the City of Howell is 35.2 years, which is lower than the countywide average of
40.9 years.
The City of Howell experienced accelerated household growth during the 1970s.
The City’s slowing population growth is just one of the many factors influencing household
characteristics. Other factors include the health of the housing market, the number of high school
graduates pursuing higher education, and a common choice among millennials to postpone
marriage and raise a family.
The City will experience a growth in the aging population (seniors 65 years and over).
The City Projections show a decrease in the 18-24 and 60-64 age groups, -12.6% and -13.8%
respectively.
22
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
HOUSING
U.S. Census documents were consulted to compare the number of housing units between the 1980s and
the present. Table 9 displays housing unit per census year along with the average annual rate of change
and percentage change over time for sample communities. Between 1980 and 2000, the City of Howell
has ranked in the top five for number of housing units for all Livingston County communities. However, the
as compared to other communities within the County, the City of Howell has experienced significantly
slower housing growth.
During the 1990s, the housing growth moved to several of the outlining townships with a visible trail
extending along the I-96 corridor into Genoa, Marion, and Oceola Townships. The number of new housing
units within the Howell Area has grown an average of one hundred twenty seven (127%) percent, outpacing
housing growth countywide.
Overall, residential construction fell during the last decade (2000-2010). In some cases, projects were
completely abandoned, while other projects were only partially built-out. The economic recession and
housing crisis also affected existing residential properties; resulting in both mortgage and tax foreclosures.
Table 9. Housing Unit Trends, 1980-2010, Livingston County Sample Communities
Housing Units
1980
1990
2000
2010
Average Annual
Rate of Change (%)
1980- 1990- 20001990
2000
2010
Percent Change
1980-2010 (%)
Cities
Howell, City of
2,859
3,426 4,088
4,028
1.98
1.93
-0.15
40.9
Brighton, City of
1,875
2,509 3,241
3,603
3.38
2.92
1.12
92.2
Fowlerville, City
873
1,018 1,211
1,198
1.66
1.90
-0.11
37.2
of
Townships
Genoa
3,359
4,065 6,346
7,807
2.10
5.61
2.30
132.4
Howell
1,202
1,360 1,993
2,531
1.31
4.65
2.70
110.6
Marion
1,410
1,629 2,388
3,499
1.55
4.66
4.65
148.2
Oceola
1,322
1,578 2,944
4,057
1.94
8.66
3.78
206.9
Livingston County 34,951 41,863 58,919 67,378
1.98
4.07
1.44
92.8
23
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
An overview of the housing unit growth in Livingston County since 1980 is helpful to establish the
environment in which the City has served as county seat and central place (see Table 9); however, the
future needs of the community are largely derived from the characteristics of those households.
Table 10 provides the housing unit characteristics for the City of Howell from 1960 to 2000 which indicates
that the number of housing units has steadily increased during that 40 year time period along with a similar
increase in the percentage of renter occupied housing units. The inverse is therefore true for the
percentage of owner occupied housing units. However, there has been a steady increase in housing unit
values as well as rents, each of which are commensurate with the increasing cost of living since 1960.
Table 10. Housing Unit Characteristics, 1960-2010, City of Howell
Number of Housing Units
% Owner Occupied
% Renter Occupied
% Vacant
Median Value
Median Rent
1960
1,654
67.0
25.4
7.6
11,500
84
1970
1,812
66.8
29.0
4.2
N/A
135
1980
2,859
55.3
37.9
6.8
48,190
236
1990
3,426
52.6
42.7
4.7
75,400
457
2000
4,088
56.9
43.1
5.7
145,200
673
2010
4,551
53.4
46.6
11.5
131,500
775
N/A – not available
Source: U.S. Bureau of Census, ACS 2008-2012 5-Year Estimates, General Housing Characteristics
Table 11 provides a current comparison of general housing characteristic between the City of Howell and
Livingston County. Of significance is the number of rental units in the City of Howell. Forty two (42.5%)
percent of the City’s housing units are occupied rental units, while only thirteen (13.1%) percent of the
County’s housing stock are rental properties. Given the large percentage of rental properties, the City of
Howell recently adopted a rental registration and inspection ordinance to ensure the safety of rental
properties and renters within the City.
Table 11. General Housing Unit Characteristics, ACS 2008-2012, City of Howell and Livingston County
Housing
Units
Howell City
Livingston County
4,268
72,845
Occupied Units
All
OwnerRenterOccupied Occupied Occupied
3,905
2,090
1,815
67,399
57,867
9,532
All
Vacant
363
5446
Vacant Units
For
For
Rent
Sale
72
51
562
983
24
Inactive
240
3,901
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
Figure 6. Housing Tenure, ACS 2008-2012, City of Howell and Livingston County
Livingston County
Howell City
79.4%
49.0%
Owner-Occupied Units
13.1%
42.5%
Renter-Occupied Units
7.5%
8.5%
Vacant Units
In addition to housing cost and tenure, the physical condition of the City’s housing stock is another
important housing characteristic to consider. According to the 2008-2012 American Community Survey
estimates, Twenty four (24.1%) percent of all housing units in the City of Howell were built before 1939.
Eighty five (85%) percent of the housing units were built prior to 2000. The median number of rooms for a
housing unit is 5.1 rooms. Most housing units have between 2 and 3 bedrooms. Owner occupied units tend
to have a slightly higher average household size (2.55) as compared to rental units (2.07). All occupied
housing units have complete plumbing and kitchen facilities. Many units have telephone service; however,
some households are now relying solely on their cellular phones. Utility gas is the primary heating fuel
source at 81.6%, followed by electricity at 17.2%. The majority of current householders moved into their
current residence between 2000 and 2009.
As shown in Figure 7, almost half of the current housing units are single family detached units – which
corresponds to 1,907 units or 44.7% of housing stock. The next largest category is structures with 10 to 19
units (15.3%), followed by structures with 5 to 9 units (10.4%), and structures with 20 or more units (8.4%).
Estimates indicate 6.8% of the City’s housing units are mobile homes.
25
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
Figure 7. Housing Units per Structure, ACS 2008-2012, City of Howell
6.8%
8.4%
1-unit, detached
1-unit, attached
2 units
44.7%
15.3%
3 or 4 units
5 to 9 units
10 to 19 units
20 or more units
10.4%
Mobile home
2.7%
4.8%
7.0%
Source: U.S. Bureau of Census, ACS 2008-2012 5-Year Estimates, Selected Housing Characteristics
No formal projections have been completed for the number of housing units, but the upward trend is
anticipated to continue as long as land remains available within the City. However, beyond the complete
build out of the City, only the annexation of additional land will result in an increased number of housing
units.
There are some opportunities for infill and redevelopment, specifically with multiple-family apartments
and the Howell Estates mobile home park.
26
CITY OF HOWELL












COMMUNITY PROFILE
Between 1980 and 2000, the City of Howell ranked in the top five for total number of housing
units among the sample communities. However, as compared to other communities within the
County, the City has experienced significant less housing growth.
The number of housing units grew 11.3% to 4,551 between 2000 and 2010.
The number of new housing units within the Howell Area (City and adjacent townships) grew an
average of 127%, outpacing the countywide average for housing growth.
A large portion of the City’s housing is rental. Forty two (42.5%) percent of the City’s housing
units are occupied rentals, while only thirteen (13.1%) perent of the County’s housing stock are
rental properties.
The City’s character and charm is largely attributed to its historic structures and older residential
neighborhoods, however, these property can present many maintenance challenges. Twenty four
(24.1%) percent of all housing units in the City of Howell were built before 1939. Eighty five (85%)
percent of the housing units were built prior to 2000.
The median number of rooms for a housing unit is 5.1 rooms. Most housing units have between 2
and 3 bedrooms. Owner occupied units tend to have a slightly higher average household size
(2.55) as compared to rental units (2.07).
All occupied housing units have complete plumbing and kitchen facilities, and many have
telephone service. Utility gas is the primary heating fuel source at 81.6%, followed by electricity
at 17.2%.
Almost half of the current housing units are single family detached units – which corresponds to
1,907 units or 44.7%.
While the County is anticipated to continue growing at an unprecedented rate, the City’s growth
will likewise continue, but at a slower pace. Therefore, the growth factors within the County will
continue to greatly influence the City’s population and housing trends and characteristics.
Mobile Home park
Build out of planned unit developments
Housing for aging population 65 years and over. Particularly those living alone who may need
more services.
27
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
ECONOMIC BASE/SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT
While population and housing trends are important indicators of future demand for housing and public
facilities, employment trends and sales activities also play an important role in determining future demand
for retail space, offices and industrial sites.
The County Business Patterns for Michigan (2000 to 2012) reports that the number of Livingston County
businesses grew 7.3% between 2000 and 2012, to 4,093 businesses. Table 12 provides a more detailed
description of County businesses by industry sector, while Table 13 and Figure 8 detail business trends by
industry for the 48843 Zip Code, which encompasses most of the City of Howell and Marion Township and
parts of Genoa and Oceola Townships. Overall, the Howell area has experienced a loss in the number of
businesses, with a major shift around 2004 and 2008.
Between 2000 and 2012, the construction industry suffered a significant loss for the Howell area and
countywide – with approximately 50% reduction. Manufacturing and real estate industry also suffered for
both the City and the County. The City also experienced a loss in the number of retail trade, transportation,
and information businesses. During this same time period, there was an increase in the number of finance,
wholesale, professional, educational, health care, arts and recreation, and accommodation businesses.
Figure 8 shows the change over time for the Howell area industries with most dramatic shifts over the 12
year period.
Table 12.
11
21
22
23
31
42
44
48
51
52
53
54
55
56
61
62
71
Business by Industry, 2000 and 2012, Livingston County
All Sectors
Agriculture
Extraction
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale
Retail Trade
Transportation
Information
Finance
Real Estate
Professional
Management
Administrative
Educational
Health Care
Arts
2000
2012
3,799
2
1
3
784
278
252
518
76
35
157
139
374
19
225
31
281
49
4,093
3
3
4
545
248
286
599
101
39
252
118
511
21
249
45
377
66
Percent
Change 20002012 (%)
7.3
33.3
66.7
25.0
-43.9
-12.1
11.9
13.5
24.8
10.3
37.7
-17.8
26.8
9.5
9.6
31.1
25.5
25.8
28
CITY OF HOWELL
72
81
95
99
COMMUNITY PROFILE
Accommodation
Other Services
Auxiliaries
Industries
199
320
4
52
263
360
0
3
24.3
11.1
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000-2012, County Business Patterns: Livingston County
Note: Uses NAICS Codes.
Table 13.
21
22
23
31
42
44
48
51
52
53
54
55
56
61
62
71
72
81
95
99
Business Trends by Industry, 2000-2012, ZIP Code 48843, City of Howell
All sectors
Extraction
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale
Retail Trade
Transportation
Information
Finance
Real Estate
Professional
Management
Administrative
Educational
Health Care
Arts
Accommodation
Other Services
Auxiliaries
Unclassified
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
1,176
1
3
233
90
57
213
25
13
48
39
118
1
63
7
81
10
64
95
1
14
1,200
3
3
226
80
70
211
28
15
55
44
118
1,198
2
4
208
76
71
214
25
18
58
42
117
1
71
7
80
17
78
101
1,167
2
3
174
75
67
213
19
20
72
37
113
1
72
9
91
19
74
101
1,086
1
5
132
73
74
195
20
17
74
27
111
1
65
7
84
18
76
105
1,083
1
5
128
61
70
190
20
17
66
26
124
4
66
12
89
17
82
104
1,107
1
4
115
72
70
197
23
12
69
30
132
4
67
13
95
14
80
109
8
5
1
1
67
5
84
16
65
98
1
11
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000-2012, Zip Code Business Patterns: 48843 (Howell, Michigan)
Note: Uses NAICS Codes.
29
Percent
Change
2000-2012
(%)
-5.87
0.0
33.3
-50.6
-20.0
22.8
-7.5
-8.0
-7.7
43.8
-23.0
11.9
300.0
6.4
85.7
17.3
40.0
25.0
14.7
CITY OF HOWELL
Figure 8.
COMMUNITY PROFILE
Significant Business Trends by Industry, 2000-2012, City of Howell
Construction
250
Number of Establishments
Manufacturing
Retail Trade
200
Finance
Professional
150
Health Care
100
50
0
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 and 2012, County Business Patterns: Livingston County, Michigan
SEMCOG estimates the City of Howell’s current daytime population at 15,937 people. That includes 11,330
working and 4,607 non-working residents. Approximately twenty nine (29%) percent of the daytime
population is non-working. As shown in Table 14, employment trends are projected to continue in a similar
manner as compared to the last decade. Between 2010 and 2040, the number of manufacturing w is
projected to decrease and there is only slight growth in natural resources and retail trade. The most
significant job growth is projected in private education and healthcare, as well as knowledge-based
services, such as professional, consulting, and finance.
Table 14.
Projected Employment by Industry, 2012, City of Howell
SEMCOG
2010
11,330
63
1,731
500
Total
Natural Resources
Manufacturing
Wholesale Trade
Transportation
Retail Trade
515
Knowledge-based Services
3,424
Services to Households & Firms
990
Private Education & Healthcare
1,795
Leisure & Hospitality
495
Government
1,817
Source: SEMCOG, 2040 Forecast, Forecasted Jobs by Industry
30
SEMCOG
2040
14,040
84
1,433
653
Change
2010-2040
2,710
21
-298
153
599
4,032
1,355
3,101
625
2,158
84
608
365
1,306
130
341
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
The largest employers in the City of Howell, based on number of employees, includes Howell Public
Schools, Livingston County, Citizens Insurance, Livingston Education Service, St. Joseph Mercy Hospital,
Thai Summit, Key Plastics, Pepsi Cola Company, Centurion Medical Products Corp, and Kroger Corp. These
employers represent over eighty (80%) percent of the total city employment
Table 15. Major Employers, 2014, City of Howell
Company
Products/ Services
Total City Employment
Howell Public Schools
Livingston County
Citizens Insurance
Livingston Education Service
St Joseph Mercy Hospital
Thai Summit
Key Plastics
Pepsi Cola Company
Centurion Medical Products Corp
Kroger Corp
Education
Government
Insurance
Education
Health Services
Die Manufacturer
Plastic Injection Molding
Bottling
Health Services
Food Service
Employees
No.
%
5,800
700
12.1
674
11.6
635
10.9
577
9.9
550
9.5
434
7.5
415
7.2
367
6.3
240
4.1
147
2.5
Source: City of Howell Finance Department and the above listed companies via Howell Community
Profile, 2006
31
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
Property values in the City of Howell have been falling since 2005. In 2005, the estimated actual value of
property was nearly $980 million. In 2012, it dropped to $630 million. Over the last decade, the proportion
of real and personal property remained fairly consistent. Generally, 86-88% of the total value of property
has come from real property. In 2010, the City’s direct tax rate was increased to 15,9443. For the 2014
fiscal year end (FYEY0, the taxable value of property was $296 million.
Table 16. Estimated Actual Value of Property in Dollars ($), 2003-2012, City of Howell
As of Dec. 31
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
Real Property
540,130,678
538,622,774
604,625,400
684,617,000
806,555,950
838,471,000
856,348,600
859,172,600
806,534,800
769,924,000
Personal Property
89,917,800
97,333,600
97,962,600
94,007,800
107,997,200
111,755,156
121,043,000
120,749,800
132,635,400
123,138,400
Total
630,048,478
635,956,374
702,588,000
778,624,800
914,553,150
950,226,156
977,391,600
979,922,400
939,170,200
893,062,400
Table 17. Taxable Value of Property in Dollars ($), FYE 2005-2014, City of Howell
FYE June 30
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
Direct Tax Rate
15.9443
15.9443
15.9443
15.9443
15.9443
14.9443
14.9443
14.9443
14.9443
14.9443
Real Property
251,464,646
253,657,028
283,336,944
309,029,771
343,756,084
350,371,706
347,346,063
332,296,418
326,307,535
310,336,055
32
Personal Property
44,958,900
48,666,800
48,981,300
47,003,900
53,998,600
55,877,578
60,521,500
60,354,390
66,317,700
61,569,200
Total
296,423,546
302,323,828
332,318,244
356,033,671
397,754,684
406,249,284
407,867,563
392,650,808
392,625,235
371,905,255
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
Livingston County has experienced a strong growth trend in all sectors of its economy. The following
conclusions can be derived from the earlier analyses:




Local employment grew 50% between 1988 and 1998.
The number of local establishments grew 71% between 1988 and 1998.
The greatest increases during this same period were in the service sector.
The conclusions drawn from the Livingston County data apply equally to the City of Howell
because of its central location and general growth patterns. The area should continue to
experience higher income levels through white-collar employment growth. However, the local
labor force will continue to be greatly influenced by economic conditions in the surrounding
counties.
Industry Codes (NAICS)
Code
11 ---21 ---22 ---23 ---31 ---42 ---44 ---48 ---51 ---52 ---53 ---54 ---55 ---56 ----
Description
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting
Mining, Quarrying, and Oil and Gas Extraction
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale Trade
Retail Trade
Transportation and Warehousing
Information
Finance and Insurance
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing
Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
Management of Companies and Enterprises
Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services
61 ---62 ---71 ---72 ---81 ---95 ---99 ----
Educational Services
Health Care and Social Assistance
Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation
Accommodation and Food Services
Other Services (except Public Administration)
Auxiliaries (exc corporate, subsidiary & regional mgt)
Industries not classified
33
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND SERVICES
The responsibility of providing public services to residents of the City of Howell is shared by several public
entities, including the City, various Livingston County departments, various State offices, the Howell School
District, and others. Within the total development area of the City, the adequacy of the public facilities has
a direct influence on the City’s ability to attract and retain residents, businesses, and industries. Often the
impression created by a particular community is directly related to its schools, parks, libraries, public
buildings, public utilities, and police and fire facilities. The following summary focuses on City owned and
maintained facilities, but recognizes that these facilities are supplemented by private facilities.
The City owns and operates the water supply, sanitary, and storm systems that serves its residents, and in
some cases the adjacent Township residents as well. Each of these systems is summarized as follows:
Wate r S upply Sy ste m
The water system for the City of Howell was first constructed in 1894. The water supply system serving the
City of Howell consists of five (5) major elements: supply wells, raw water transmission main, water
treatment plant (WTP), storage tanks and distribution mains. Currently, water is supplied by six wells
located at the plant and throughout the City.
The City of Howell is a ground water system. Water is drawn from deep rock wells (over 400 feet) taken
from the Michigan formation and the deeper Marshall Sandstone aquifer. The WTP is a lime softening plant
removing about 70% of the hardness. The softened water is then chlorinated, fluoridated, filtered and
stored in reservoirs for distribution to our customers. The Howell Water Treatment Plant treats up to 3.1
million gallons of groundwater daily.
During the fall of 2012, the City of Howell and the Marion, Howell, Oceola and Genoa Sewer & Water
Authority (MHOG) were awarded a grant from the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ)
for specified activities related to Wellhead Protection. Of significance, this coordination resulted in an
update to the original 2001 Wellhead Protection Program (WHP) plan. The WHP will help protect public
water supply wells by controlling and/or managing all potential sources of contamination within a
designated area surrounding the well or well field. Additionally, the cooperative effort of working together
will result in a cost savings to both the City and MHOG.
The City is currently exploring possible engineering studies and services for future system upgrades. First,
the City is looking at the feasibility and cost assessment for modifying the City’s Water Treatment Plant,
changing from the existing sulfuric acid feed system to carbon dioxide system. The City is also investigating
possible rehabilitation options for one of the City’s two (2) existing 16” diameter water mains that run
parallel to Mason Road, under I-96. In addition, the City is looking to replace the 4” water mains along
Brooks, W. Crane, Gregory, Gay, E. Park, and W. Park Street.
Approximately 550 million gallons of water are treated annually. The City also maintains finished water
storage capacity of 930,000 gallons with one ground storage reservoir and one water tower. City crews also
34
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
maintain over 50 miles of water main ranging in size of 4” to 16” and in various pipe material types. This
also includes maintaining and repairing 409 fire hydrants and over 1000 gate valves.
Sanit ary Sy ste ms
The City’s WWTP is located at 1191 Pinckney Road and provides wastewater treatment for the City of
Howell and several areas in Marion Township. The original facility was constructed in 1936 and various
upgrades and improvements were implemented in 1960, 1978, and 2001.
The sanitary system serving the City of Howell consists of three (3) major elements: collection sewers,
pumping stations, and the wastewater treatment plant (WWTP). The system consists of a maze of gravity
pipes either located under the City streets or through a cross lot easement. These pipes begin at a building
through a small individual sewer line and connect into a larger interceptor sewer that transports the flow
of several small sewers to the pumping stations that direct the flow toward the WWTP. The 160,000 linear
feet of sanitary sewer within the City are regularly cleaned and inspected in order to ensure they can meet
their life expectancy.
In order to ensure that the flow reaches the WWTP, force mains have been used to create additional
pressure, however, the use of pumping stations is a more common form of conveyance. There are a total
of thirteen (13) pumping stations located within the City, with an additional eight (8) stations located in
Marion Township. The entire system flows into the WWTP for treatment, which includes the wastewater
from Marion Township. The current average flow is approximately 1.7 MGD and the design treatment
capacity is 2.5 MGD average flow, 5.0 MGD peak equalized flow and 8.6 MGD peak instantaneous flow. The
WWTP improvements completed in 2001 were designed to accommodate future expansion of the WWTP
to increase the design treatment capacity to 3.6 MGD average flow. While future expansion is inevitable,
the role of the treatment plant remains the same, that being the treatment of the wastewater to a water
quality level regulated by the MDEQ (Michigan Department of Environmental Quality). The treated water
is then discharged into an open stream and the cycle begins again.
In 2010, the City completed a WWTP Capital Improvement Plan to assess the current system and prepare
a project implementation schedule. The Howell WWTP is fortunate that most of the equipment is adequate
to provide ongoing service. This can be attributed to the City’s existing preventative maintenance program
providing adequate support. However, there are a few items that need immediate attention. Specifically,
the City plans to replace screw pumps and odor controls, install a new generator and dam site lift station,
and upgrade the final clarifier mechanicals at WWTP.
Storm S yste m
The storm sewer system serving the City of Howell consists of four (4) major elements: inlets, transport
sewers, storage and outlet sewers. This system is critically important to the City due to the stormwater
flooding being a widespread problem that has existed for a number of years. Because the City has
experienced more than one 10-year storm in the same season, the original design standards cannot handle
such an occurrence. As a result of recent growth levels within the City, the increased runoff from the areas
tributary to these existing sewers has effectively reduced the actual storm capacity of these sewers.
Therefore, the storm sewer capacity is estimated to be closer to a 1 to 2 year storm resulting in some
surface flooding throughout areas of the City every year or two. The Stormwater Study completed in 1972
outlined the recommendations for improvement to the system, some have been implemented.
35
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
The inlet capacity of the storm systems consists of various types of basins, culverts and open drainage ways
that are then directed into the underground storm sewers. The underground system consists of transport
sewers which are intended to transport the stormwater toward the outlet sewers or storage; however,
large areas of the City do not have such a system and therefore these areas often experience flooding of
streets and yards. The remaining portions of the City that do have such a system still experience flooding
because the sewers are small low-capacity pipes and the addition of new inlets only exacerbates the
problem. As a part of several recent roadway projects the transport sewers have been upgraded, but many
other sewers will still need to be modified in the future. Eventually the outlet sewers transport runoff into
storage basins which are typically located on-site in a detention basin or within a natural depression or
wetland, but due to the lack of outlet sufficiency, these storage basins end up having to hold runoff for a
longer than anticipated period of time. Therefore, a rain event larger than the 10-year design storm will
cause some storage flooding, as a result, improvements to inlet and transport sewer capacities are essential
to the storage systems function.
The City plans to make improvements to sump and storm lines to private subdivisions over the next three
years. Other stormwater projects include maintenance to the drains at the depot and ongoing storm
improvements in conjunction with roadway improvements.
Fibe r Opti c Net wo rk
In 2006, The City of Howell researched the possibility of linking together its seven facilities electronically
for the use of centralizing and sharing data, and also improving communications with a centralize phone
system. Upon retrieving proposals for Wireless communication, T‐1 communications, and Fiber Optic
communications, it was decided that a Fiber Optic wide area network was the best solution to suit the City’s
electronic communication needs.
To reduce installation costs, the City joined with the Livingston County and Fowlerville Schools to create a
Cooperative Fiber Wide Area Network Project, sharing the labor and installation costs for the fiber based
STAR network and also the DTE Pole Rental fees. The fiber was installed and labeled within a shared sheath
between the DTE Poles. The project time line was over two years. In the end, the City of Howell’s total
cost was $98,600 with a cost savings of $68,400 from the original proposed project.
The City owns and operates the water supply, sanitary, and storm systems that serves its residents, and in
some cases the adjacent Township residents as well. Each of these facilities is described below and mapped
in the body of the report.
City Hall
The City Hall is located at 611 E. Grand River Ave. within which are the following offices: City
Clerk/Treasurer, Mayor, City Manager, Building, Assessing and Engineering Departments. The City leases a
portion of the first floor to the First Merit Bank, while the Police Department and Clerk/Treasurers offices
occupy the rest of the first floor. The remaining departments are located on the second and third floors of
the building, with Council chambers, meeting spaces and a kitchen located in the basement. The City has
occupied the current City Hall building since 1992 when it relocated from its previous Michigan Avenue
36
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
address. The City Hall building is currently experiencing structural issues. The cost of a permanent solution
is estimated at $300,000.
Police He adquarters/ Cri me Pre ve ntio n U ni t
The police department is located on the first floor of City Hall and is a full service department with 21 full
time officers, 2 dispatchers and approximately 15 part time employees. The department services only the
City and therefore is contained exclusively within the headquarters. The type of services offered includes
street patrol, detective, D.A.R.E., school resource, crossing guard, traffic control, and bike patrol.
Howell A rea Fi re A ut ho rity
The Authority is responsible for the City as well as the six (6) surrounding townships of Cohoctah, Deerfield,
Genoa, Howell, Marion, and Oceola. While the main station is located in the City at 1211 W. Grand River
Avenue, there are a total of four (4) substations throughout the 170 square mile coverage area, one (1) of
which is located in the DPW complex at 150 Marion Street.
Depart me nt of Public Wo rks G arage
The Department headquarters are located on the same site as the Water Treatment Plant, which is located
at 150 Marion Street. All of the necessary equipment to maintain the City’s 34 miles of local and major
streets are stored and maintained at this site, along with fourteen (14) employees for the Public Works and
Public Services Departments combined.
Wastew ate r T re at me nt Pl ant
The Treatment Plant that is located at 1191 Pinckney Rd. was recently expanded to serve portions of Marion
Township and the build out capacity of the City of Howell. The current average flow is approximately 1.7
MGD and the design treatment capacity is 2.5 MGD average flow, 5.0 MGD peak equalized flow and 8.6
MGD peak instantaneous flow. The WWTP improvements completed in 2001 were designed to
accommodate future expansion of the WWTP to increase the design treatment capacity to 3.6 MGD
average flow. As part of the future expansion additional improvements to the Plant will be required, with
the ultimate capacity anticipated to reach 5.0 million gallons per day.
Pumpi ng St atio ns
A total of twelve (12) pumping stations are located within the City as a means to transport sewage to the
Wastewater Treatment Plant. These stations are located as follows: Highlander Way, Citizens, Rolling Oaks,
Dam Site, Peninsula, Rose Lane, Bush Street, West Street, Marubeni, Fowler, Browning and Town
Commons, while Thai Summit (formally Ogihara) has their own pumping station. There are an additional
eight (8) stations in Marion Township as part of the Phase I Treatment Plant expansion. Future pumping
stations will need to be constructed by developers as part of their development projects. Maintenance of
the existing stations is essential to their function, while costs for general maintenance has continued to
steadily increase and changes in the tributary flow to the pumping stations often require modifications to
the pump. Proper planning can diminish the costs of expansion.
Wate r Tre at me nt Pl ant
37
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
The Plant is located at 150 Marion St. at the south end of the City limits. The facility is currently rated at a
capacity of 3.1 million gallons per day with ultimate capacity projected at 4.0 million gallons per day. While
the current capacity has been sufficient to accommodate both the City and Township population demands
through blending filtered and raw water, new MDEQ standards will soon require an expansion of the
facility. The needed expansion will result in higher amounts of treated water with higher quality
characteristics. The current blended water was acceptable under the old provisions because the City is not
required to filter its drinking water. However, this type of water is higher in iron content that is less
beneficial to the area residents. The expansion could also eliminate lawn sprinkling bans and decrease the
labor required to operate the Plant.
Wate r S upply We lls
Two (2) of the six (6) active City wells are located within the City limits, while the remaining well are located
at the Norton Road well field approximately 2.5 miles west of the City. The well field was first developed
in the 1960’s with the most recent expansion completed in 1986. The two (2) wells located within the City
are contained within Water Treatment Plant and at 610 Henry Street, approximately ½ mile from the Plant.
The latter well is the newest in the system, but is a low production well, while capacity is available on site
for a second well head. The capacity provided via the five (5) wells in insufficient, despite the excellent
aquifer available at the Norton Road well field and the potential for the development of other well sites. In
addition, each of the wells needs a major refurbishing at a rate of one per each 3 - 5 years.
Storage T anks
The storage tanks provide a reservoir to store the water volume needed to provide the peak water
demands. The tanks are filled during lower flow times and water is drawn out to supplement the output
of the Water Treatment Plan. The two (2) large storage tanks also help to balance the pressure throughout
the distribution network and provide backup water for fire demands. A 300,000 gallon elevated tank is
located at Thompson Lake Park and a 630,000 gallon ground storage tank is located at the Water Treatment
Plant. While other portions of the system need immediate expansion due to the demands on the system,
providing water supply capacity is increased and other means of boosting the pressures north of M-59 are
implemented, the current storage tank capacity is sufficient to accommodate future growth.
Barnard Co mmunity Ce nter
The Center, located at 415 N. Barnard St., was purchased by the City in 1995, which includes the
surrounding 10 acres known as Page Field. The Parks and Recreation staff currently occupies the building.
The facility and its grounds provide year round activities and meeting space for the following programs:
Scouts, 4H, Association meetings, Community Mental Health programs, Home School Groups, etc. The
Recreation Department also houses many of the enrichment programs at the Center. A full size lighted
soccer field, two (2) multipurpose fields, a concession stand, press box, basketball hoop and a locker room,
currently occupies the adjacent park land.
The Barnard Community Center is currently in need of a new roof ($110,000) and new boiler ($20,000).
The City is also looking at a long term cost sharing agreement with the Recreation Center for maintenance
on all parks and recreation facilities. While several improvements are required, the Center is a facility that
is used to meet the every growing needs of the community.
38
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
Paul Be nnett Rec re at ion Ce nte r
The Center was constructed in 1965 at 925 W. Grand River Ave. and was initially intended to be used as a
youth center, but currently serves as the headquarters for the offices of the Howell Area Parks and
Recreation Department. Subsequent additions have resulted in the ability to provide a September to May
weekday preschool, weekday senior center with a nutritionist, recreation and community education
classes, craft shows, and a place for meetings, dances and parties. Future facility additions are anticipated
to include a year round Senior Center and a Teen Center, both of which have shown a growing need in the
community.
The Paul Bennett Recreation Center is currently in need of a new boiler ($27,000), major HVAC
improvements, and asbestos tile removal and replacement. Other projects include a new parking lot
($115,000) and tennis court improvements.
Lak evie w City Ce met ery
On April 28, 1915 Howell Township sold the cemetery, located at 920 Roosevelt Street, to the City of
Howell. At the time the cemetery was called Oakgrove Cemetery, but upon purchasing the property, the
City renamed the cemetery Lakeview Cemetery. The parcel contains thirty-two (32) acres, and at the
present time has 9,300 burials, and is near capacity. Due to the limited available land within the existing
cemetery, a second cemetery is under construction on a 36.4 acre parcel at the western end of M-59.
Lakeview Cemetery is currently in need of structural and safety improvements to the main building offices
($93,000). The two (2) mausoleums at Lakeview are also in need of significant façade and foundation
improvements ($165,000).
Howell Me mo ri al Ce mete ry
The Howell Memorial Cemetery is located at 1410 W. Highland Road, Howell.
39
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
In 1995 the City of Howell adopted the Howell Area Recreation Master Plan. The Plan was intended to
provide guidance for the recreational improvements needed between 1995 and 2000. Since that time,
various name changes have occurred and/or additional land purchased. The inventory of the facilities
owned and operated by the City through various taxing authorities include the following:
Argyle St reet Park
This small neighborhood park located on Argyle Street, east of Michigan Avenue, offers the community 0.2
acres of open space. Picnic tables and grills, as well as swings, slides, and spring animals are available to
provide recreation opportunities for people of all ages to enjoy.
Bal dwi n Park
The 0.8 acres that make up Baldwin Park offer a few more amenities than some of the other small parks in
Howell. Swing-sets, slides, and spring animals are popular among the park’s younger neighbors. In addition
to benches, picnic tables, and grills, a picnic shelter and tennis courts are also available to area residents.
Baldwin Park is located at Byron Road and Spring Street, and was previously known as Spring/Byron Park.
Barnard Co mmunity Ce nter/Page Fiel d
The Barnard Community Center, 415 North Barnard Street, located on 12 acres is an integral part of the
Howell Area Parks and Recreation Department. The building itself, retains Recreation Department Offices;
has 5 large and small rooms available for rental; hosts many different department special events; and will
soon be the new home of the Howell Area Teen Center. Open after-school, it will offer middle-school age
children with a drop-in teen lounge, weekly organized activities, and a quiet study room equipped with
volunteers there to help students with homework if they need it. Stepping outside of the building, the
community center boasts plenty of open space, including Page Field and a quarter-mile walking path
encircling a regulation lighted soccer field. A large open space area used for multipurpose use is located
behind the building. A slide, swing-sets, and spring animals have also recently been added to the area.
Benches and restrooms, and concession sales open during certain sporting events are also elements of the
Barnard Community Center’s various amenities.
Page Field is currently in need of several facility upgrades, including new lights ($150,000), track ($200,000),
press box ($75,000), bleachers ($25,000), and scoreboard and concessions ($104,000). Several of these
improvements impact safety for park users.
Ce ntral Tho mpson Lake Park
A small neighborhood park containing 0.2 acres that are currently undeveloped with no additional
amenities.
City B oat Launc h Site
40
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
The 1.6 acres that make up City Boat Launch is located inside of the City Park’s borders, at Lake Street and
Roosevelt. This launch lets boaters access Central Thompson Lake. Non-residents, boaters without
resident stickers, will be charged $15 for a daily boat launch permit.
Howell City Park
22.8 beautiful acres, set on the scenic shores of Central Thompson Lake, make up Howell City Park. A few
blocks north of historic downtown Howell, the City Park offers a multitude of year-round recreational
opportunities to park-goers of all ages. Ball fields, open fields, and volleyball courts are available to
interested park-users. Spring animals, swing-sets, and slides are on-hand for our younger park-enthusiasts.
Grills, benches, and picnic tables are also accessible. Three picnic shelters/pavilions in the park are available
for rental, including two large pavilions, (the May & Scofield and the Rotary--which accommodate 75-100
persons,) and one small pavilion, (which accommodates 25-40 persons.) Drinking fountains, restrooms and
seasonal concession sales are also available. Other seasonal recreation opportunities in the City Park
include a public beach and swim area, sledding hills, and ice-skating. The park’s entrance is located at the
corner of Barnard and Thompson.
The City intends to upgrade the Howell City Park restroom facilities for ADA compliance.
Lak esi de Dri ve Park
A small neighborhood park with grills, benches, and swings for the kids, Lakeside provides 0.3 acres of
welcome open space to its neighboring community. The park is located at Lakeside Street, on the north
side of Thompson Lake.
Luc y Ro ad Park
This 50.0 acre parcel of land was once occupied by a park, but has since remained vacant. The site is located
to the southeast of the City limits and is currently being considered for redevelopment.
Maple St reet Park
The 0.2 acres that make up Maple Street Park, located and Maple and Thompkins, is a great place to bring
the kids for an afternoon picnic. Picnic tables benches, grills, and playground equipment makes this small
neighborhood park a big asset to the community.
Jenny McPhe rson Park
The 0.3 acres that make up Jenny McPherson Park is located between Michigan and State, north of the
railroad tracks. Benches, picnic tables, and grills are the assets of this park located one block north of the
main four in downtown Howell.
Paul Be nnett Rec re at ion Ce nte r
The Paul Bennett Recreation Center, located at 925 West Grand River, currently serves as the headquarters
for the offices of the Howell Area Parks and Recreation Department. This building additionally functions as
the Howell Senior Citizens Center, and houses the Recreation Department’s Preschool Program. Large and
41
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
small rooms in the Recreation Center are available for rental. Tennis Courts, a gazebo, picnic tables, and a
playscape are also on-hand on the 3.8 acre Recreation Center site.
Paul Be nnett Fiel d
Paul Bennett Field is a 1.8 acre Baseball/Softball field located on the corner of Maple and Walnut, in
downtown Howell. A concession building is also open during games.
Park Street Park
The 0.2 acres that make up the small neighborhood park, located at Park Street and Clinton, with grills,
picnic tables, and playground equipment for the kids; Park Street Park, provides a terrific place relax and
enjoy with the whole family.
West St reet Park
A 2.0 acre neighborhood park, one of Howell’s largest neighborhood parks, West Street Park offers
benches, tables, and grills for afternoon picnics. Some of the park’s other recreational amenities include a
walking path, and a children’s accessible playscape. West Street offers plenty of open space, picnic shelters
as well as an array of playground equipment for the kids. A volleyball court is also readily available for
interested park-goers. The park is located at West Street and Factory.
Parke r Skat e Park
Located behind the Howell High School Freshman Campus, the Parker Skate Park was completed in 2006
and is open on a daily basis at no charge to youth and adults who are skateboarders and in-line skaters. The
park features many ramps and a restroom facility for the use of constituents. A day-long skateboard camp
is held yearly by the Howell Area Parks & Recreation Authority and two competitions are held each year in
the spring and fall.
Howell A quatic Cent er
The Aquatic Center is part of the Howell Public Schools and offers public activities, swimming lessons, lap
swim, and classes, as well as serving Howell school children. The Center has an indoor pool and hot tub. In
2010, a management agreement was signed with the Howell Area Parks and Recreation Authority to
manage and program the pool facility.
42
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
Due to local population growth within the past ten (10) years, the community facilities and services are
near their capacity. The following conclusions can be derived from the earlier analyses:



Continued improvements to the water, sanitary, and storm sewer systems are imperative, with an
emphasis on the water treatment plant and ongoing improvements to stormwater facilities.
Many of the community facilities have been upgraded overtime, but the wastewater and water
treatment plants need additional improvements, additional water supply wells are needed, and
expansion of Barnard Community Center as well as Paul Bennett Recreation Center are required to
meet the needs of the current population.
The acreage contained within the current parks is sufficient to accommodate the City of Howell,
but not the metropolitan area that also places demands on the system. Therefore, additional
acreage is needed, such as opening Lucy Road Park and providing additional amenities at the other
existing park facilities.
43
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
The relationship between land use and roads is a critical element of land use planning. The streets provide
the access necessary for land use and are important in setting the character of an area. Adequate
transportation facilities are, therefore, a major consideration in a community’s development.
The classification of roads is necessary in order to identify the type and amount of traffic that is appropriate
for each portion of the local road network. The road classifications identify the volume and type of traffic
that is appropriate for each segment of the roadway network. These classifications also have impacts on
the determination of land uses along each roadway. Within the City of Howell there are three (3) major
road types (arterial, collector and local), each of which us summarized below:
Pri nci pal Arte ri al s (N on -Inte rstate ) – Principal Arterials provide a connection to locations outside
the City, are designated as truck routes within the City, and handle a substantial amount of non-residential
traffic. These streets are built to carry heavier traffic loads and volumes for greater lengths, and at higher
speeds. Principal arterial roads within the City include Grand River Avenue and Highland Road/M-59.
Minor Arte ri al s – Minor Arterials tend to accommodate slightly shorter trips than major arterials. These
streets are also intended to carry intra-urban traffic loads at a moderate speed. The minor arterial roads
within the City include Michigan Avenue, Mason Road, McPherson Park Drive, and Highlander Way.
Majo r Collecto rs – These streets provide access and mobility within residential, commercial, or
industrial areas. The streets also provide a connection between minor collectors and arterials, and
sometimes permit on-street parking. The streets also provide access amongst varying land uses. On-street
parking may be permitted, but depends on the function of the street. Examples of collector streets include
Bryon Road and National Street.
Loc al St reet s – These streets are meant for the residents that live on that street and/or within the
neighborhood, and often permit on-street parking. Local streets are designed for low volumes and are
linked by collector roadways to other land uses or arterials. The majority of the streets within the City fall
within this classification, but one example is Fowler Street.
44
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
45
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
East G rand Rive r A ve nue – East Grand River is considered a principal arterial road that is used by an
average of 42,500 cars per day in 2013 between National Street and Catrell Drive, down from 43,203 cars
per day in 2001. As a result of the number of cars passing through the City on this road, the number of
accidents is higher than the majority of the other streets. The intersections that had the highest number
of accidents in 2013 was National Street with 13 accidents. Based upon the types of uses located along the
eastern end of Grand River Avenue, the traffic and accident numbers are high, but as per the Road
Commission, not unreasonable. However, as a result of the growth in the surrounding Townships along
with the potential for the conversion of residential to commercial uses, these numbers could continue to
increase. The speed limit is 35 mph.
West G rand Ri ve r Avenue – West Grand River is considered a principal arterial road just like the
eastern end, but is used by fewer cars per day. An estimated 18,900 cars per day traveled Grand River
between Highland Road and Highlander Way in 2013, and 16,300 per day between Walnut Street and
Michigan Avenue, down from 21,106 in 2001. Despite the fewer number of cars on this portion of Grand
River, there are still several intersections that have become prone to accidents. In 2013, the intersection
of Michigan Avenue and Walnut Street, had the highest accident rates, with 19 and 15 accidents
respectively. For a road that provides access to primarily residential and institutional uses, as per the Road
Commission, these numbers are very high. However, due to the high volume of cars entering, or passingthrough the City, from the west, the numbers may continue to remain high. The speed limit is between 4555 mph.
Highl and Ro ad / M-59 – Highland is another principal arterial within the City, but is not used by as
many cars as East Grand River Avenue. An estimate of 25,500 cars used the portion of M-59 between
Michigan Avenue and Eager Road in 2013, up from 14,205 cars in 2001. Recent development to the north
and south of M-59 has resulted in increased traffic and collisions. The most accidents occurred at Michigan
Avenue and at Brewer Road, with 16 and 10 accidents respectively. There is no traffic signal at Brewer
Road. The speed limit is 55 mph along Highland Road.
Nort h M ichigan A ve nue – North Michigan Avenue is considered a minor arterial. It functions as a
primary connection to places north of the City. As a result of the amount of traffic on the road (estimated
at 10,800 cars per day in 2013, down from 16,763 in 2001), there are several intersections that continue
to be prone to accidents, including Grand River Avenue and Highland Road. These numbers are typical for
a road that provides access to primarily commercial uses, but not one that contains predominantly
residential uses, as is the case for North Michigan Avenue. The speed limit is 35 mph along North Michigan
Avenue.
Sout h M ichigan A ve nue/Pinckney Ro ad – South Michigan Avenue is also considered a minor
arterial road that is used by a significant number of people as their primary connection to places south of
the City. South Michigan, between Sibley Street and Mason Road, was traveled by an estimated 16,600
cars per day in 2013, down from 24,389 in 2001. The speed limit is 35-45 mph.
Maso n Ro ad – Mason Road is a collector street that travels east – west along the southern portion of
the City. In 2013, Mason Road served approximately 9,500 cars per day between Michigan Avenue and
Walnut Street. The street contains residential and industrial uses, including the McPherson Industrial Park.
46
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
In 2013, a number of accidents occurred at the intersection of McPherson Park Drive. The speed limit is 3545 mph along Mason Road.
McPhe rso n Park Dri ve / S. H ighl ander W ay – McPherson Park Drive turns into South Highland
Way as it crosses the railroad tracks north. This street is considered a minor arterial and in 2013 there were
an estimated 6,400 cars per day between Mason road and Grand River Avenue and 3,600 between Grand
River Avenue and Highland Road. This street serves some of the major industrial and
educational/institutional uses in the City. The street experienced high crash rates at Mason Road and Grand
River Avenue. The speed limit is 35 mph.
Byro n Ro ad – Byron Road is a collector street in the City. It runs northwest from West Grand River
Avenue through a primarily residential area. It also provides access to the St. Joseph Mercy Hospital as well
as other uses. In 2013, this street was travelled by approximately 3,700 cars per day between Clinton Street
and Highland Road. The speed limit along Byron Road various between 25-55 mph.
Natio nal St ree t – National Street is also a collector street. It runs north – south across East Grand River
Avenue, up to Thompson Lake. This street primarily serves industrial and commercial uses, however, there
is also some residential. National Street is the proposed terminus for Loop Road alternative truck route
between South Michigan Avenue and Grand River. This street currently serves 3,100 cars per day between
Grand River Road and Clinton Street, as recorded in 2013. The speed limit is 25 mph along National Street.
While many of the City’s streets have been reconstructed or rehabilitated within the past ten (10) years,
there are still several streets that require attention. Therefore, the City has developed and maintained a
pavement management system to provide direction for the repair, maintenance and improvements to its
road system.
Majo r S treet s
Maintenance services provided by the DPS include: cleaning and repairing 16 linear miles of storm sewer
main and 847 catch basins, winter maintenance, signs, pavement markings, routine maintenance, and
storm water management. Priority road improvement projects include:
Table 18. Major Street Needs Assessment
Road
Road Section
Bryon
Highland to Henderson
Bryon
Highland to Highland
Grand River
Walnut to Michigan Ave
Highlander Way
Grand River to Highland
Mason
Walnut to Norton
S. Michigan Ave
Grand River to Mason
Pinckney
W I-96 to ramp
Source: SEMCOG Major Road Segments in Howell
Need
Pavement
Pavement
Pavement
Pavement
Pavement
Pavement
Pavement
47
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
Loc al St reet s
Maintenance services provided by the DPS include: cleaning and repairing 29 linear miles of storm sewer
main and 1,573 catch basins, winter maintenance, signs, pavement markings, routine maintenance, and
storm water management. Priority road improvement projects include:
Table 19. Major Street Needs Assessment
Road
Road Section
Need
Gay St
Tompkins to School
Pavement
Gregory St
Brooks to Washington
Pavement
Crane St
Jewett to Center
Pavement
Brooks St
Isbell to Gregory
Pavement
Park St
Clinton to North
Pavement
Source: City of Howell Department of Public Services
Other projects
Water, Sanitary
Water, Sanitary
Water, Sanitary
Water, Sanitary
Water, Sanitaryl
In recent years there has been a shift in focus from streets that are designed primarily to convey vehicular
traffic, to designing streets that accommodate all users—motorists as well as transit riders, people in
assistive devices, pedestrians, bicyclists, and people of all ages and abilities, including children, youth,
families, older adults and individuals with disabilities. In 2010, legislation was passed in Michigan (P.A. 135
and P.A. 134) amending the definition of streets in the Michigan Department of Transportation Public Act
51 and the Michigan Planning Enabling Act (P.A. 33). Those communities who have jurisdiction over their
roads are now required to consider complete streets principles in the planning and implementation of
transportation projects.
Existing non-motorized features include:



Crosstown Trail
Bike path
Local sidewalks
Recommended improvements include:



Pedestrian improvements for intersections and mid-blocking crossings
Proposes non-motorized trail through the Loop Road Area
Sidewalk gaps
The Area Plans contain more detailed information regarding conditions and recommendations.
48
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
49
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
The City’s goal has been to provide the best possible road system for its citizens at the lowest effective
costs. To this end, the City administration has historically sought the following:
 Grant applications have been submitted for all applicable road projects, and some roads have been
reclassified in the process.
 Storm sewer improvements have been incorporated into all applicable roadway projects.
 A significant number of City streets have been improved over the past ten (10) years, while many
more require attention. Therefore, there is no intention to falter in the City’s original goal of
providing a roadway and utility system that meets the needs of the residents, while minimizing
future tax burdens.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES
Many residents have settled in the City of Howell because its natural features, such as lakes, wetlands,
woodlands, and open spaces, have attracted them. These features are significant because of their strong
appeal to residents. While there are many opportunities for enjoyment and utilization of the natural
resource base, particular features of the natural environment are incapable of supporting development or
are of sufficient significance to be preserved. It is helpful to examine the various natural resource factors
in detail to determine the opportunities and constraints for development, as well as weigh the value of
preservation. Wise use depends on a keen awareness of the City's natural features. Accordingly, key
natural features are documented in the text and maps which are included within this document.
Topographic Features
The bedrock geology of Howell includes sandstone and shale beneath the central area of the City and shale
around the perimeter areas. The glacial geology of Howell is a layer of medium-textured till which includes
a glacially deposited unsorted mixture of clay, sand and gravel (heavy on the sand) that exists between the
topsoil and the bedrock. The topography of the City is gently sloping, with shallow grades and some
depressions, a few of which are quite extensive and contain wetlands.
For the most part the City of Howell is flat within minimal topographic relief. According to the USGS
topographic maps, the topography of the City varies from a low of 900 feet above sea level around the
various wetlands and open water, to a high of 940 feet above sea level within the western confines of the
City. The highest areas within the City are located west of Pinckney Road between I-96 and Grand River,
along with a pocket at the intersection of M-59 and Byron Road.
An understanding of soil characteristics is essential to the development of a community in a manner that
minimizes construction costs, risks to public health, and environmental damage. Soil types within the City
are identified in the Livingston County Soil Survey prepared by the U.S. Soil Conservation Service. Detailed
soils maps are available through County Planning or the Soil Conservation Service. The glacial geology of
Howell is a layer of medium-textured till which includes a glacially deposited unsorted mixture of clay, sand
and gravel (heavy on the sand) that exists between the topsoil and the bedrock. A soil characteristic that
is most important to City of Howell is susceptibility to wetness and flooding. This characteristic is typically
associated with low-lying wetland and floodplain areas and is discussed in a subsequent subsection.
Water Resources
50
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
Over the years, several of the prime residential developments in the City have been built around Thompson
Lake or one of the other three (3) water resources. Most residents appreciate the recreational or scenic
value of the lake. The lake is only one (1) component, though, in an inter-connected water resources
system that also includes streams, wetlands, and groundwater. This water resources system serves
multiple functions that should be preserved for the benefit of present and future residents of the City.
While private lands that have been developed for residential use surround the lake, there are several public
access points by which the general public can use the lake for recreational purposes.
Rivers and drains are another link in the water resources system. There is the south branch of the
Shiawassee River that runs along the western perimeter of the City as well as the Marion and Genoa Drain
that runs through the southern portions of the City. These water resources connect the lakes and wetlands
with each other, and then conveying storm water runoff from wetlands and upland areas to downstream
lakes and eventually to branches of the Shiawassee River. Wetlands are a third component in the water
resources system.
The term "low lying wet areas" encompasses a variety of wet environments, inland marshes, wet meadows,
mudflats, ponds, bogs, bottomland hardwood forests and wooded swamps. The City contains several acres
of “low lying wet areas”. Such areas play an important role in stormwater management and control of
water quality. Low lying wet areas help to moderate the flow of stormwater to lakes. During wet periods,
these areas absorb water, thereby reducing shoreline flooding around lakes. During dry periods, these
areas release water to the lakes to help maintain lake levels. Low lying wet areas also help to maintain
water quality by absorbing sediment and pollutants before they reach the lakes and streams, and provide
critical wildlife habitat.
There are numerous small pockets of low lying wet areas scattered throughout the City, with a
predominance of such features located north of Grand River Avenue and around the perimeter of
Thompson Lake. While there are two large areas associated with the water resources noted above,
including a ribbon along Thompson Lake, they are also contained within the soil depressions that may have
resulted in their creation. The City has attempted to preserve the larger areas (west of Michigan Avenue
and north of the railroad tracks, within the Howell City Park, southwest of Michigan Avenue and M-59, and
pockets within the northwest and southeast) to the greatest extent possible by creating a park around its
confines and/or working with developers to enhance the features as part of their development.
Tree stands and woodlands are another important component in the City’s natural resource inventory. The
tree stands in the City are found in conjunction with other natural resource features, including wetlands.
The pockets of woodlands located within the City, while acknowledged not to be inclusive of all small
wooded areas, have been imp part impacted in recent years by various development projects. However,
the City has actively preserved the remaining areas. The largest woodland area within the City is contained
within the Howell City Park and is intended to be preserved into perpetuity.
The following are among the values secured or enhanced by woodland protection.
51
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
Ene rgy Co nservatio n – The contribution made by trees to cooling of homes and other buildings and
parking areas, roads, and walkways in summer, while protecting against harsh winds, snow, and ice in
winter has become increasingly recognized. This is especially true in climates of temperature extremes.
According to the American Forestry Association, for example, air-conditioning costs can be cut by 20-25%,
with the proper positioning of shade trees near a dwelling.
Improve me nt i n Ai r Q uality – In addition to the indirect effects on air quality achieved by reduction
in emissions resulting from lessened use of heating and cooling, trees use carbon dioxide and emit oxygen
in their own growth process. It has been estimated that public and private woodlands could compensate
for very large amounts, perhaps as much as 25%, of carbon dioxide released annually in the United States.
Anti-Erosion Benefits – Preserving (or planting) trees and shrubs stabilizes soils, especially when slopes and
steep grades are involved, thus preventing erosion. Curtailing erosion helps to prevent the degradation of
lakes and streams.
Wildlife Habitat – Trees and shrubs provide homes of birds and other forms of wildlife; many provide food
for these creatures as well. Trees offer protection against predators. Birds make a significant contribution
to insect control.
Aesthetic Values – The growing appreciation of natural beauty has heightened citizen awareness of tree
buds, fruits and foliage. The public has become increasingly appreciative of the shape, bark, spread and
sheer size of trees in all seasons. Specimen trees become the object of neighborhood pride, while the
public has come to understand that common so-called 'weedy" trees are often essential for the growth and
development of the more dramatic hardwoods. This beauty is translated into increased value of property.
Home-buyers will pay additional thousands of dollars if there are trees on a home-site. The value of trees
and shrubs, especially those of the evergreen type, in screening, is inestimable. Properly designed
greenbelts also protect against noise.
The importance of local ordinances in protecting existing trees and woodlands, and stipulating their
replacement or addition when this is necessary, is well-established and increasingly accepted by all
segments of the community.
Recent growth levels have had an impact on the City’s environmental resources. The following conclusions
can be derived from the earlier analyses:



The low permeability of the soils within the City have caused storm water runoff problems in many
areas of the City, and the various natural depressions have not been sufficient to accommodate
more than a 1 to 2 year rain event.
The water resources, wetlands and floodplains are essential to the City’s storm sewer system, as
well as its attraction for its residents.
The few remaining large woodland areas are needed as a means of improving air quality, aesthetics,
erosion control and energy conservation.
Therefore, the maintenance of the City as an historic community that has well established roots requires
that active preservation methods be adopted. Recent growth pressures have had an effect on their
52
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
viability, but several large pockets of environmental resources have been preserved through the location
of parkland around its confines. However, additional means of preservation may need to be evaluated.
53
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
EXISTING LAND USE
A basic element in planning the future of the City of Howell is the consideration of existing land use types
and patterns. Previous existing land use data was compiled in 2006, however, due to the abundance of
development proposals since the 1991 update, the inventory has been updated to reflect the land use
transitions within the City and perimeter Townships. The result of this mapping is presented in Map 1,
while a description of the recent development proposal trends are noted below.
During the 1990s and early 2000s, the City of Howell approved a significant number of large development
proposals including residential and commercial, mixed-use developments. Since the adoption of the 2002
Master Plan, and subsequent amendment in 2006, there has been significantly less development proposed
and ultimately built in the City. In recent years, the regional and state economy has made significant strides
towards recovery. The housing market is stronger, employment is rising, and the City has seen a recent
increase in residential and non-residential construction. Some of the major projects approved by Planning
Commission and City Council include:
2008: Victoria Park
2012: Heart of Howell renovation, Grand Plaza Apartments, Medilodge
2013: Family Dollar renovation, Town Commons Phase I single family, Livingston County Animal Shelter
2014: Kroger Fueling Station, Thai Summit expansion, McDonald’s remodel, Taco Bell, Livingston County
Jail, 1450 McPherson Park expansion, Pepsi Bottling Group expansion
The following land use classifications were used in updating the City’s existing land use map (see Map 1).
Single Family Re side nti al – Areas in which single family residential dwellings are located.
Mul tiple F amily Residenti al – Areas in which two (2) family or multiple family dwellings are located.
Mobile Ho me Park Re sident ial – Areas in which mobile home or manufactured residential
dwelling are located.
Gove rnme nt – All areas used for government purposed including City and County complexes.
Public - Land areas and facilities such as schools, churches, hospitals, and fraternal organizations, which
are available to or used by the public.
Ce mete ry – Areas in which cemeteries are located.
54
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
Recre atio n - Lands owned by public agencies or private organizations for the purposes of recreation.
Offi ce- All areas used for office purposes including professional and medical office complexes.
Co mme rci al - All areas used for commercial purposes including the retail sale of goods and services.
Indust ri al - Where raw or semi-finished material is processed, fabricated, and/or manufactured.
Warehousing and storage applies to land areas that are used for the storage of materials, whether
enclosed in a building or not.
Transport atio n / RO W – Areas used for transportation and right of way including roads, sidewalks,
landscape buffer, and stormwater facilities.
Utilities - Lands owned by public agencies or private organizations used for utilities or services.
Vac ant / O pe n S pac e – Vacant land not used for any purpose and areas occupied by wetlands,
drainage courses, and other bodies of water are assigned to this broad classification.
Wate rco urse – Areas occupied by streams, lakes, and other significant bodies of water.
55
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
The following land use patterns and trends have been observed since the adoption of the 2002 Master Plan
and subsequent 2006 amendment:
Single Family Re side nti al
The single family residential land uses identified in 2002 have been maintained in the majority of the City,
with the exception of Victoria Park which is now identified as multiple family, Howell Estates which was
reclassified as a mobile home park, and McPherson Mansion which is now office. Generally, the City’s single
family lots fall into three categories: small traditional, medium suburban, and large suburban lots.
Most of the City’s older single family residential neighborhoods are located close to downtown, along Grand
River Avenue and north of the central business district between Michigan Avenue and Thompson Lake.
Town Commons is more recent development located north of Highland Road but it follows the pattern of
tradition neighborhood development. Generally, these small traditional lots tend to be 60 feet wide, with
a lot area of around 6,000-8,000 square feet. Residential front yard setbacks may vary based on age of
housing and changes to the road right-of-way, between 15 and 30 feet. These areas are characterized by a
dense street grid with sidewalks and street trees, the network is almost always oriented to one of the major
thoroughfares, either Grand River or Michigan Avenue.
The medium suburban lots are typically 80 feet wide, with a lot area of around 10,000-12,000 square feet.
These residential properties tend to follow a consistent 25 foot front yard setback. The areas northwest of
Highland Road and Bryon Road and southwest of Grand River Avenue and Tompkins Street are
characterized as medium suburban. These areas have a more curvilineal street network, with multiple culde-sacs.
The large suburban lots are typically 135 feet with, with lot sizes around 1 acre. These residential properties
tend to be setback substantially farther from the road, with typical front yard setbacks of 40 to 50 feet. The
properties along Inverness and Caledonia are characterized as large suburban.
There are two residential areas in particular that diverge from these three pattern of development, largely
due to the City’s natural features. The area bounded by Riddle Street, Michigan Avenue, and the railroad is
characterized by narrow, deep lots, as a result of a large wetland area. Additionally, the lake residential
properties, particularly on the north side of Thompson Lake tend to vary in size and shape.
Mul tiple F amily R esi denti al
Since the 2002 existing land use inventory, all previously identified multiple family residential uses have
been maintained, with the greatest concentration located within the northwestern portion of the City.
The major multiple family development include Victoria Park, Gallery Park, Burwick Farms, and Brandon
Chase to the north. Yorkshire Place and Grand Plaza Apartments to the west along N. Highlander Way.
Other large multiple family residential areas include Quail Creek Apartments and Pine Hill Apartments. The
Howell Estates mobile home park is also designated as multiple family residential for the existing land use
map.
56
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
Co mme rci al
A few existing parcels along Grand River Avenue, Barnard Street, and Highland Road have been converted
into commercial uses, while all other commercial uses identified in the 2002 land use inventory remain.
The largest clustering of commercial uses is along East Grand River, S. Michigan Avenue, and at the City’s
periphery, while the greatest concentration is within the downtown core.
Town Commons, Gallery Park, and Crossroads Town Center are Planned Unit Developments in the northern
section of the City, along Highland Road. These areas were designed based on traditional neighborhood
land use patterns; encouraging a compatible mix of use, pedestrian scale, and walkability. Design Guidelines
and zoning regulations facilitate this vision and ensure high-quality development. All of these sites still have
development potential. The East Grand River area is generally small scale and strip commercial. The area
supports the adjacent neighborhood and day-time work population with retail, service, and restaurant
uses. The S. Michigan Avenue area is characterized by highway commercial and small scale commercial
uses. Both the East Grand River and S. Michigan Avenue areas are characterized by older properties, with
outdated facades and auto-oriented site design.
Offi ce
Office uses are primarily located adjacent to commercial uses within the City’s main corridors. As noted in
the 2002 Master Plan, the greatest concentration of office uses is within the Grand River corridor, along
Byron Road and west of Highlander Way with other small pockets scattered throughout the City. Some of
the larger office developments include Medilodge and Citizen’s Insurance on West Grand River, Hanover
Insurance on W. Highland Road and the full restored McPherson Mansion recently converted to executive
offices. The office uses along Bryon Road are primarily medical offices, creating a medical corridor adjacent
to the St. Joseph Mercy Hospital. The office uses along Grand River are predominantly professional offices,
many of which are located is historic homes that have been converted for non-residential use.
Public /Q uasi -Public
The largest institutional use in the City is the City of Howell school system, while the Livingston County
complex is a close second. The remainder of public uses includes City Hall and the associated Police
Headquarters, Lakeview City Cemetery, Fire Stations (Fire Authority and substation), Water Treatment
Plant/Department of Public Works Building, Wastewater Treatment Plant, 13 Pumping Stations, 2 Water
Supply Wells, and 2 Storage Tanks. Several churches are also located in the City. No new public/quasipublic uses have been added since the 2002 land use inventory.
Ce mete ry
There are two cemeteries in the City of Howell. Lakeside Cemetery, located at 920 Roosevelt Street,
contains thirty-two (32) acres, and at the present time has 9,300 burials, and is near capacity. Due to the
limited available land within the existing cemetery, a second cemetery was recently construction on a 36.4
acre parcel at the western end of M-59. The Howell Memorial Cemetery is located at 1410 W. Highland
Road.
Park s
Since the 2002 land use inventory, there have been no additions to the parks facilities. The Lucy Road Park
has not been redeveloped for recreation and is currently designated as vacant/open space. Altogether,
parkland accounts for 96.2 acres of City land, and includes a total of fourteen (14) facilities.
57
CITY OF HOWELL
COMMUNITY PROFILE
Indust ri al
Industrial uses have not changed significantly since 2002. However there has been some development in
the McPherson Park Drive Industrial Park. There are also large pockets of industrial land off of Catrell as
well as adjacent to Pinckney Road and the railroad tracks.
Vac ant
Some of the vacant land identified in the 2002 existing land use inventory has been developed, with the
exception of land along S. Michigan Avenue near I-96 and on the west side of the City along the railroad
corridor. However, additional vacant land has been annexed into the City within the past few years, while
the majority of it is under consideration or was recently approved for construction by the City. The largest
areas of annexed lands are located north of M-59 in the Northeast Area and along I-96 in the Loop Road
Area. A few small parcels of land within the S. Michigan Avenue corridor have also been annexed into the
City, but they remain vacant.




The City of Howell is largely composed of single family residential.
The amount of multiple family housing has increased over the last 15 years in order to meet the
needs of a growing and aging population.
Public and industrial uses are the next largest existing land use categories in the City.
The annexation of township property in the Loop Road area has significantly increased the amount
of open space available for future development.
58

City of Howell Community Profile 2015

Transcription

Similar documents

the slides

straight talk - Howell Orthodontics

ISO 9001

Daily Prophecy - Aria Booksellers

to the Michigan Challenge Balloonfest Brochure

Untitled - Livingston County Hell Michigan Convention and Visitors