Parks and Public Landscaping Advisory Board Agenda and Packet 2017 07 06

Home Browse Search

Hwy 42 Revitalization Area Urban Renewal Plan Below is copied from the City website: 4.3 Development Standards All development in the Plan Area shall conform to the Comprehensive Plan, the Zoning Code, International Building Codes, applicable Design Standards (emphasis added here and below in italics) and any site-specific zoning for properties in the Urban Renewal Area, all as in effect and as may be amended from time to time. In conformance with the Act and Urban Renewal Plan, the Commission may adopt additional design standards and other development requirements applicable to properties in the Urban Renewal Area; provided, however, that any such standards and requirements adopted by the Commission shall be consistent with and no less restrictive than the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Code, International Building Codes, applicable Design Standards and any site-specific zoning for properties in the Urban Renewal Area, as well as all other zoning and development policies and regulations of the City. Unless otherwise approved by City Council resolution, any such standards and requirements adopted by the Commission shall be consistent with all other zoning and development policies and regulations of the City. The above information from the City Web site raises questions, including: 1. Where are the "applicable Design Standards" that are to be followed? 2. Can our board review these Design Standards? 3. Are there defined paving colors? Signage and lettering standards? Lighting standards? Re -design of the Hwy 42 bridge Project. During the public presentation of this project we learned that some of the options for the materials and the design of the railings were taken from historical bridge structures. It was well voiced that this bridge (was) seen as a gateway to our community. While it was exciting to see these materials and design options proposed, sadly it looks as if reality ended this (strategic) vision and cost won over community identity. A lessor element of this project was the pedestrian underpass. This element did not gain much public discussion. However, several questions can be raised about the underpass: 1. What are the design standards for under passes in our community? 2. What materials/finished/texture was spec'd? 3. Would these materials match our existing Cherry St. and McCaslin underpasses? 4. Should the underpasses be looked at as a key element to unify our pedestrian walks and bikeway system as visual aspects of wayfinding? South Street Underpass Project. This project was reviewed for board comment about 2 years ago (at what was then the HFAB as the board began taking on review of city projects). This project has a lot of architectural detail: paving materials, retaining walls, planters, bollards, fencing as some examples. These are some of the questions raised at that meeting: 6