PLANNING BOARD WORK SESSION
On August 25, 1998 evening, the Planning Commission hosted a work session on the design guidelines project. Planning team members presented an overview of the types of design management systems that may be used and summarized the description of design character in the community.
The team presented a summary of issues for earlier discussions and their field analysis. Design issues were presented in three categories:
1. Neighborhood-wide Design
At the broadest level of consideration, urban design concepts should be considered. These should provide a framework for individual parcel development decisions. These urban design variables should include an overall vision for the design of the public sector, including streetscape and civic facilities that can give a distinct identity to an activity center. In addition, neighborhood-wide design variables include the manner in which individual properties link with their neighbors, both visually and functionally.
While the city's 2020 vision plan provides a policy base for establishing stronger identities for these activity centers, no regulations exist to implement that policy. Design standards for these issues are needed.
2. Site Design
At this level, considerations for retaining open space, buffering service areas, and positioning buildings on a site occur. In many respects, the city's current site development standards provide a good level of landscaping. However, in some cases, the details of the execution fail to realize expectations. For example, while retaining a cut in a hillside may be required, the design of the retaining wall is not closely reviewed.
In other cases, opportunities to maximize the benefit of an investment in site improvements are missed. For example, when two abutting properties are both required to retain a certain amount of pine trees, they don't necessarily combine these areas to increase the perceived mass of plantings.
Related to this issue is a "doughnut effect" that occurs when a thin perimeter of landscaping buffers screen a large parking lot. Dividing these large lots into smaller areas should be considered.
3. Building Design
Concern for building design occurs primarily in larger commercial developments of the "big box" type. Here, the impact of a national corporate image is felt the greatest and often the buildings fail to blend with the natural landscape setting that is promoted in the city's existing site development standards. Large, blank walls discourage pedestrian activity and even some materials and colors contrast strongly with the natural setting that the community values.
Again, the 2020 plan calls for architecture that reflects the local context, but not regulations exist to implement this policy.
Alternative Development Scenarios
Then, planning team members presented a set of alternative development scenarios that illustrated how individual parcel development schemes can be planned to coordinate with adjacent properties. Three types of development were illustrated. In each case, two approaches were shown. First, sketches that illustrate good landscaping practices as current regulations would promote. A second set of sketches illustrated how individual parcels could be planned to coordinate with adjacent parcels to create a strong sense of place and enhance value and function. The three scenarios:
Multi-family Scenario
First, sketches for a multifamily project demonstrated how buildings could be clustered to maximize the use of open space.
Scheme A: Independent site
· Parking is located along the perimeter
· Forest reservation area is isolated from residential use
Scheme B: Coordinated site
· Parking is located in the interior
· Building masses are reduced
· Open space is accessible to residential uses.
Strip Commercial Scenario
A typical row of commercial buildings was then studied.
Scheme A: Independent site
· Parking is located around the perimeters of sites
· Edges are buffered with landscaping.
Scheme B: Coordinated site
· Public spaces are sited to link together to create a central space.
· Parking is located to the center of the sites.
· Corners of properties are anchored with buildings.
· Continuous pedestrian routes link the parcels.
Big Box Scenario
A large anchor retail store, with supporting free-standing commercial spaces, also was illustrated.
Scheme A: Independent site
· Parking is located in front and along street edges.
· Buildings are freestanding
· Landscaping serves as a buffer around perimeters.
· Service areas face residential uses.
Scheme B: Coordinated site
· Shared public spaces are created where parcels converge.
· Parking is located internally
· Edges abutting residential uses are screened or active with uses.
· Pedestrian connections lead to abutting residential uses.
· Buildings anchor corners of lots.
In general, these scenarios illustrate some basic principles:
At a minimum, site plans should be organized to minimize negative impacts of commercial development.
· Parking should be screened
· Buildings should be oriented to the street.
· Open space should be planned such that it can be accessible to users.
Many of these principles can be achieved without increasing costs. It is simply a manner of strategically organizing the site improvements.
Greater benefits result when site plans are coordinated with adjacent parcels to create a "sense of place."
· Open spaces may be linked to create a larger mass.
· Pedestrian circulation should be continuous, providing access through parcels.
· Street edges should be defined, either with buildings or landscaping.
· Edges along abutting uses to be active and visually attractive.
Design Exercise
Finally, participants engaged in a hands-on exercise, in which they produced site development concepts for a set of parcels focused around a major intersection. The exercise tested approaches for creating identity for the area and enhancing the environment for pedestrians while also meeting a program of uses and building sizes.
Three teams derived different approaches:
Team 1: Individual Village Centers
The first group created an internal space for each of the parcels that would serve as focal points. These plazas were then linked with a trail system. A major retail facility formed an anchor at the key intersection, and some other commercial uses also were placed along street edges. Residential uses were substituted for some of the required commercial and were located as transitions to other uses. In general, parking was located in the interior of sites, although some remained exposed to the street.
Team 2: Regional Pedestrian Network
The second group developed a series of parcels that were generally more independent of each other but linked them with an extensive network of pedestrian routes, which extended to outlying uses. Many buildings were positioned at key intersection or along street edges. In some cases, some of the commercial space was scattered on "infill" parcels, rather than concentrating all the space on the new sites. A mix of parking approaches was used, including locating some internally while other portions were located along street edges.
Team 3: Creating a Main Street Identity
The third group sited buildings on each of the parcels to combine together to create an edge of storefronts along the street that would encourage pedestrian activity and establish an identity for the entire area. Parking was located to the interior of the parcels and residential uses were substituted for some of the required commercial space. This was sited to serve as a transition to adjacent multifamily properties.
Want more information? Call: (520) 774-5281
Return to Flagstaff Community Character Management Project Page
Return to Flagstaff Chamber of Commerce Home Page
Return to RACESTUDIO Home Page
