Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Introduction The case studies profiled herein are intended to help rural planners and decision makers under- stand the challenges and processes their peer communities have gone through to identify and solve problems and envision new and specific approaches to improve their own processes. The 13 com- munities selected for case studies (See Figure B-1 and Table B-1) were chosen on the basis of regional balance and for a diversity of strategies and approaches used. The profiles discuss both the outcomes and the processes used to achieve the communityâs goals. While each communityâs process was tailored to its own situation, each incorporated the elements of the context-sensitive solutions (CSS) approach. As described in Chapter 5, CSS enables communities to develop effective plans in collaborative, creative ways. CSS projects incorporate an understanding of local issues, involvement by key stakeholders, and thoughtful statements of core problems and key issues. They rely on community-generated criteria to evaluate and select alternative solutions and include clear documentation of the steps taken to consider issues and reach decisions. The CSS method inspires, within an open, interdisciplinary framework, a transportation planning process that fully considers aesthetic, historic, and scenic values, along with safety and mobility. A âshorthandâ way of summarizing the key factors that distinguish this type of holistic approach is as follows: ⢠Listen to the People: Foster meaningful public involvement from a wide variety of people and interests. Communicate in a variety of ways, using new and traditional technologies, ⢠Listen to the Land: Consider environmental factors as determinants in decisions, rather than impacts to be mitigated ⢠Listen to Each Other: Use an appropriately structured, interdisciplinary, decision-making process that clearly respects and responds to public input and supports the iterative nature of thoughtful planning. ⢠Look at All Possibilities: Assess a wide variety of options, being fully open to new ideas and perspectives while staying grounded in the particular place, time, and situation at hand. Burlington, Iowa: Revitalizing a Struggling Small Downtown Major Challenge How to revitalize a struggling small downtown Burlington, Iowa, was a significant transportation hub for the Midwest, from its founding in the 1820s until the mid-twentieth century, due to its location on the Mississippi River and its status as the birthplace of the Burlington and Missouri River Railroad in 1852. While Burlington 34 A P P E N D I X B Case Studies
Appendix BâCase Studies 35 Northern-Santa Fe (the successor railroad) continues to pass through the city, its status as a major port has diminished. Manufacturing remains an important component of the local economy (the city is known as âThe Backhoe Capital of the Worldâ), but sprawling development on the cityâs outskirts has made it difficult for the downtown area to compete. The city of West Burling- ton has attracted much of the new development in the area. In the 1960s, the community college moved from downtown to West Burlington. Major retailers, such as J.C. Penney, left for a mall there in the 1970s. And in 2000, Burlington lost 1,500 downtown jobs when the area hospital moved west as well. In the face of these challenges, the Burlington community has rallied around its downtown and formed a successful public-private partnership to support reinvestment. The Project In 1986, community leaders applied to the National Trust for Historic Preservation and the newly created Main Street Iowa office (housed in the state Department of Economic Develop- ment) to receive funds to become one of Iowaâs first Main Street communities. The community Figure B-1. Case studies locator map.
36 Appendix BâCase Studies Community: B ur lin gt on , I A : M ai n St re et re de ve lo pm en t a nd e -c om m er ce Cu tle r-O ro si, C A : C om m un ity B as ed tr an sp or ta tio n Pl an ni ng Ed ga rto w n, M A : i nf ill & d es ig n gu id el in es H ay de n, C O : s ce na rio p la nn in g an d 3D v isu al iz at io n H ut ch in so n, M N : r oa d tra ns fe r & lo ca l a cc es s m an ag em en t Li nc ol n Ci ty , O R: C SD st re et re de sig n M os s P oi nt , M S: P os t-K at rin a re v ita liz at io n N or th w es t V T: re gi on al sc en ar io pl an ni ng Se do na , A Z: T SM , m ul tim od al to ur ism m an ag em en t Tr av er se C ity , M I: ca r-s ha rin g pr og ra m U ni ty , M E: g ui di ng g ro w th in to to w n, m ul tim od al c on ne ct io ns V irg in ia C re ep er T ra il, V A : su cc es sf ul e co no m ic d ev el op m en t W es te rn P ie dm on t R eg io n, N C: co rr id or p la ns , a cc es s m gm t, ov er la ys Municipal population: < 2,500 2,500 - 5,000 5,000 - 20,000 > 20,000 Region Population growth rate (from 2000-2004): Growing Declining Significant minority, tribal, or elderly population: African American Hispanic Native American Elderly Economic base: Exurban Destination Production x x x x xx x x x x x x x xx xx x x x x x x x x x x x xx x x x x x xx x x x x x x x x x x x x xx x x Strategies employed: Regional Framework Strategies Access management Overlay districts Rural land conservation Local Accessibility Strategies Compact growth Street connectivity Complete streets Transit planning Community Design Strategies Context Sensitive Solutions Road transfers Access management Land development regulations/design guidelines Planning tools: Scenario planning Visioning Regional planning Corridor planning Key principles Collaborative partnerships Quality of life/sustainability Public involvement/education Strong local leadership x x x x x x x x x x x x x xx x x x x x x x x x x xxx x x xx x x x x xx x x x x x x xx x x x x x x xxx x x xx xx x xx x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Table B-1. Matrix of case studies.
partners established Main Street of Burlington to become the organization vehicle for focusing reinvestment efforts. One of Main Streetâs first successes came in 1988, when the organization got the Hotel Burlington listed on the National Register of Historic Places. This landmark hotel, once known as the finest hotel in the Midwest, fell on hard times with the downtownâs decline, eventually closing in 1980 and becoming a major eyesore. After years of struggle, advocates for preserving the hotel put forward a plan to renovate the building and turn it into senior housing, with half of the 75 apartments set aside for lower-income residents. For this project, the city council put up $1.2 million as an incentive to a private developer, who also received state his- toric tax credits, tax-increment financing, and Iowa Finance Authority funds. Other successful restoration projects include the conversion of an old warehouse into a community-run restaurant called Drakeâs Eatery and establishing an 1860s-era stone mill as the anchor for an antiques district. Schrammâs Department Store, which closed in 1996, was purchased by a private developer and now houses 13 luxury condominiums, a bookstore, an insurance agency, and the Southeast Iowa Entrepreneurial Center (SIEC). The SIEC provides low-cost office space to small businesses in their start-up periods and has accommodated as many as six new businesses at once. Electronic commerce has also played a role in the revitalization of downtown businesses. Sev- eral of the businesses participate in a common Web portal, www.ShopDowntownBurlington. com, and the Main Street program has provided training to business owners in managing and marketing their electronic sales. While the success of downtown Burlington is largely due to well-planned economic initiatives, transportation does play a role. Transportation investments in the 1960s and -70s actually may Appendix BâCase Studies 37 Burlington City Profile: Population (2005 US Census estimate): 25,436 Annual pop. growth rate (2000-2005): -1.0% Economic base: Manufacturing Community Classification: Production. Strategies employed: Downtown revitalization; compact growth; Context Sensitive Solutions.
have done more harm than good. The reconstruction of US 34 as a freeway through downtown provided easier automobile access, but also required the demolition of more than 100 historic homes and businesses. In an early attempt to revive downtown in the 1970s, city leaders converted one block of Jefferson Street (a major east-west street dividing downtown) into a pedestrian mall. The move proved controversial, disrupted traffic flows through downtown, and arguably hurt some businesses. The mall was removed in the late 1980s, and vehicular traffic was restored. Ten years later, the city embarked on a massive streetscape reconstruction project. As of summer 2006, all but one block had been completed. The reconstructed street provides diag- onal parking on one side, and parallel parking on the other. A volunteer-run committee with the Main Street program was heavily involved in the design of the new streetscape and facilitated communications with business owners and customers about the construction timetable. As the result of a downtown plan completed in 2004, the city has identified $300,000 worth of addi- tional reconstruction work needed on three other streets that intersect with Jefferson. Burlington also has a reasonably good public transportation system for a city of its size. The Burlington Urban Service (BUS) provides service on 40-minute intervals during the morning commute period and demand-responsive service during the rest of the business day. The South- east Iowa Regional Planning Commission is planning regional bus service that will feed into the city-based bus system; regional planners expect this service to be operational by early 2007. The city has plans to create a multimodal transportation hub at the edge of downtown, which would incorporate the existing Amtrak station, private long-distance bus services, and the local and regional bus systems. The Process Main Street of Burlington was founded in 1986, with support from NTHPâs National Main Street Center and the Main Street Iowa office. In 1996, the program reorganized as Downtown Partners, Inc. The new organization has been funded in part for the past 10 years through a Self-Supporting Municipal Improvement District (SSMID). Similar to a Business Improve- ment District, the SSMID is supported by a voluntary 3 percent add-on to the property tax paid by commercial properties in the district. This covers slightly less than half of the organizationâs $166,000 annual budget, with the regional chamber of commerce and other contributors cover- ing the rest. According to Val Giannettino, the executive director of Downtown Partners, Inc., volunteer hours represent a substantial in-kind contribution to the organizationâs bottom line. Results and Lessons Learned This case study highlights the importance of community involvement. As noted, the number of volunteer hours contributed significantly to the success of many of the projects. In some cases, like the Drake Eatery and the Old Stone Mill, sweat equity directly resulted in increased returns to investors, including the Main Street volunteers. This âcommunity-initiated developmentâ is a hallmark of the Main Street approach, which has been successfully implemented in hundreds of communities. Downtown redevelopment in Burlington has not been without challenges. Maintaining tran- sit operations has been a struggle. At one point, the city purchased a historic trolley, which Downtown Partners, Inc., leased with the intention of using it to provide highly visible and attractive service to the downtown. According to Giannettino, the business plan was not well thought out, and the organization ended up abandoning trolley service when it turned out to be financially unsustainable. The city also faces parking challenges. Like many in the United States people in Burlington rely heavily on automobiles, even in the walkable downtown area. Some residents and business 38 Appendix BâCase Studies
owners have complained that too little parking is available, even with the additional parking pro- vided as part of the Jefferson Street project. In an effort to make parking more convenient, the city took out parking meters and replaced them with time limits enforced by a parking officer. Because fines are so low, many people ignore them. Paradoxically, providing lots of free parking often ends up making it more difficult to find parking, as more drivers anticipate cost-free park- ing and alter their driving habits.1 Nevertheless, Burlington demonstrates how relatively small amounts of public moniesâand a great deal of volunteer effortâcan leverage more than $10 million in private investment. Transferability The Burlington case study illustrates that local leaders recognized the interrelated link between transportation, economic development, and revitalization. Their process was characterized by a strong community involvement component that engaged business owners and residents in plan- ning and revitalization. Their experiment with a pedestrian mall did not succeed (similar to many such efforts across the country), but, rather than giving up, they shifted the focus toward streetscaping and reconstruction. Contact Information Val Giannettino, Executive Director, Downtown Partners, Inc. Email: val@downtownpartnersinc.com, Phone: 319.752.0015 Websites and Background Articles Downtown Partners, Inc. www.downtownpartnersinc.com. National Main Street Center. â2004 Great American Main Street Awards: Burlington, Iowa.â Available at http://www.mainstreet.org/MediaLibrary/2004GAMSABurlingtonIA.pdf. Cutler-Orosi, California: Community-Based Transportation Planning Major Challenge Transforming a very poor, rural, agriculture-based community that has inadequate water and sewer capacity and whose main street is a state highway Cutler and Orosi, two rural communities surrounded by agricultural land, are about a half- mile apart, and together constitute the largest unincorporated area in Tulare County, California. They are also one of the poorest communities in California with a combined poverty rate of about 35 percent. Cutler-Orosiâs total population is 12,800, of which 87.5 percent are Latino (2000 Cen- sus figures). The majority of Cutler-Orosiâs Latinos are of Mexican descent. Many are agricultural workers for whom employment is closely linked to seasonal harvest periods in both Tulare and surrounding counties. Many families only speak Spanish. The lack of water and sewer capacity in Cutler-Orosi is a major constraint for any kind of new commercial and industrial development. Because they are unincorporated, they rely upon Tulare Appendix BâCase Studies 39 1This paradox is extensively reviewed in Donald Shoupâs The High Cost of Free Parking. A shorter discussion of efficient park- ing strategies in downtown environments can be found in âParking Spaces/Community Places: Finding the Balance Through Smart Growth Solutions,â available at http://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/parking.htm.
County for financing, zoning, governance and planning resources and staff. The two towns are linked north-south and intersected by State Route (SR) 63, which had especially high speed as well as high truck traffic although posted at 35 and 40 MPH. Both SR 63 and the east-west El Monte Way of Orosi (Avenue 416) are not pedestrian-friendly. Both SR 63 and Avenue 416 are main streets and have heavy pedestrian use. Along or adjacent these highways are five schools. Many pedestrians are children, and safety is a major concern for area residents. Transportation needs for a highly migratory, agricultural workforce are also an issue for these communities. In 1999, a van accident in neighboring rural Fresno County killed fourteen farm workers. This focused political attention on the transportation needs and safety for rural work- ers. This tragic event, as well as a number of pedestrian fatalities along SR 63, helped set the stage for the Caltrans Community-Based Transportation Planning Grant in support of a Cutler-Orosi community design charrette. The Project For 5 days in November 2001, Cutler-Orosi conducted a Community Design Charrette, an interactive series of collaborative events engaging design professionals, the general public, environmental justice communities, and local and state government staff. The goal was to cre- ate a broad, community-based vision for the design of future development along Highway 63 and its intersecting streets downtown and to improve access, pedestrian, bicycle, and automo- bile safety. The charrette did not occur in a vacuum. Recommendations would influence a 40 Appendix BâCase Studies Cutler-Orosi Census Designated Place Profiles: Population (2000 US Census): Cutler 4,491; Orosi 7,318 Annual pop. growth rate (1990-2000): Cutler 0.1%; Orosi 3.3% Special populations: Cutler is 96.2% Hispanic/ Latino; Orosi is 82% Hispanic/ Latino. Economic base: Agriculture Community Classification: Production, exurban. Strategies employed: Context Sensitive Solutions; access management; pedestrian orientation; effective public involvement.
Commercial Development Plan of the Tulare County Redevelopment Agency (TCRA). Its out- puts would offer community input for the Tulare Countyâs Circulation Elements update of its General Plan. It would also provide community-based participation and guidance to Caltrans financing for road improvements, as well as county and school board community investments. The Process The charrette was designed and implemented to be authentic, meaningful, and carefully tailored to the community. The workshops were carefully designed to be informal and non- intimidating. An emphasis was made on making them festive and to allow the ability to provide community input. Music and food were provided, and work sessions were kept short, usually no more than 15 to 20 minutes. Numerous breaks were planned that allowed lots of informal chat periods. Child care was provided, allowing mothers to attend. Youth were also encouraged to participate, and special workshops were held at a school and the YWCA. Events were carefully tailored to the Mexican cultural traditions of the areaâs population. The process intentionally encouraged a family-friendly, multi-generational, festive, and informal atmosphere. An exten- sive outreach campaign of letters, mailings, announcements, and portable signage in Spanish preceded the charrette events. Participation was high. Over 130 people attended the opening event, and approximately 300 people, including County and Caltrans District 6 staff took part during the 5-day event that included focus groups, multiple venues, field tours, and design sessions. The charrette events produced a community-based, multi-phased plan with several short- term, low-cost implementation steps, as well as long-term goals for improving community safety, livability, and economic development investments. Recommendations that required more time included interim safety and beautification measures such as sidewalk completion, curb extensions at critical crossings, the narrowing of SR 63 north of Avenue 416, and street tree plantings. Many of these elements have already been completed by Caltrans. Other elements are still pending completion. There was some discussion of routing commuter and truck traffic off of SR 63 as one of the scenarios. However, business and landowners along SR 63 argued that such re-routing would detract from the life and business vitality of these main streets. Instead an intensive program of traffic calming, signage, and other roadway enhancements appropriate for a pedestrian-friendly town is what has been implemented since the 2001 workshops. A median, on-street parking, bicycle lanes, and the removal of two traffic lanes were recommended for nearly the entire cor- ridor. Safety and beautification measures were all important to the community. A full report detailing the charrette process and outcomes was written by one of the facilitators, Dan Burden of Walkable Communities (http://www.walkable.org/). Results and Lessons Learned Dedicated and committed staff and citizens are critical to community-based planning efforts. Steve Hoyt of the LGC took particular care to capture participation of the local farmworker community. Caltrans officials interviewed highlighted the invaluable role of Rosalinda Avitia work- ing with Catholic Charities at the time, who was brought in to help with facilitation and public out- reach. She knew the community well, including its working schedules and cultural characteristics, and was very effective in building trust in the community that proved useful for this process. She remains involved and active to this day. All charrette events were completely bi-lingual in both Spanish and English. Paul Zykofsky, a planner at the LGC who had lived in Mexico City, was par- ticularly effective at translating the peculiarities of planning and design âlingoâ for a Mexican farm- worker audience. Caltrans officials acknowledge that much of the credit needs to be given to the Appendix BâCase Studies 41
commitment and involvement of the Local Government Commission2 (LGC) staff and chamber of commerce members. The charrette project coordinator for the LGC was very sensitive to the many issues and played a key role in bringing everything together. The community of Cutler-Orosi made many context-sensitive design recommendations for their main streets to improve pedestrian and bicycle uses, lighting, and sidewalks. Their solu- tions were geared toward safety and livability. Improved economic development goals were incorporated into the charrette design recommendations as many businesses and landowners who had actively been trying to improve community vitality learned how this could be accom- plished through the interrelated issues of safety, access, and design enhancements. Since the 2001 workshop, Caltrans has repaved entire stretches of the study area, using reflective materials for foggy seasons and visibility. All intersections now have crosswalks. ADA-compliant ramps have been added, and tree wells have been put in to make way for tree plantings that are to be con- tributed and maintained by community and civic groups. New traffic lights are being added or upgraded, as well as new and upgraded signage to alert drivers that they are in downtown and school areas. Caltrans engineers were introduced to the project immediately upon completion of the charrette, and communications and collaboration with them helped expedite the accelerated process of roadway improvements. Steve Covell, the lead TCRA engineer was very receptive to reviewing the proposals and implementing recommendations and worked closely with Caltrans engineers. The Caltrans Permits Office has special provisions for expediting improvement or maintenance projects if they are recommended by an organized community involvement effort. The TCRA combined roadway improvements with California Conservation Corps workforce training. In collaboration with Caltrans and local contractors, numerous citizens participated in concrete pours along a 5- to 6-mile stretch. Agricultural workers had an opportunity to learn construction skills and heavy machinery operation. Funding for implementation has been the typical patchwork of local, state, federal, and pri- vate contributions. The County has committed approximately $900,000 for sidewalks and street and sidewalk beautification. A variety of Caltrans investments have been near $6,000,000. The school district received $300,000 in grants for Safe Routes to Schools. A State safety grant in 2005 was awarded to the California Highway Patrol for increased law enforcement. Recommenda- tions from the charrette were taken seriously and many acted upon. Results of efforts since 2001 are already being realized in slowed traffic and fewer accident reports. Improvement efforts are still underway, and many are by no means complete or even started. The communities are still struggling with funding, and a significant amount of the landscaping is still needed. Tulare County has some important tax allocation decisions on the 2006 election ballot that may influence the feasibility of future projects. Sections of SR 63 and Avenue 416 remain in need of improvements. However, significant progress has been made. Many in the community remain committed to the visions, design elements, and recommendations estab- lished in 2001 and momentum has not slowed. Transferability The Cutler-Orosi project optimized the local dynamics and cultural character unique to every community. Important investments in funding and resources were made up front to engage local community activists and civic groups. These key individuals and organizations had built strong 42 Appendix BâCase Studies 2The Local Government Commission is a nonprofit organization based in Sacramento that provides technical assistance to local elected officials and other community leaders. See www.lgc.org.
relationships and trust throughout the community, and they were ideally placed to ensure effec- tive participation. In addition, the community sought statewide resources such as Caltrans Community-Based Transportation Planning Grants, optimizing the agencyâs commitment to environmental justice and community-based collaboration. Dialog between the community and Caltrans engineers and staff was established immediately, which increased trust and helped expedite the improve- ment processes. Additional benefits accrued from other relationships established as the process moved along. The charrette, for example, opened avenues of communication between different groups within the community and Tulare County. Such relationships helped bring about a half-cent sales tax allocation for public transportation primarily aimed at serving local farmworkers. Contact Information Marta Frausto, Environmental Justice Coordinator, Caltrans - District 06, Office of Trans- portation Planning, Email: marta.frausto@dot.ca.gov, Phone: 559.488.4168 Paul Zykofsky, Local Government Commission, Phone: 916.448.1198, Email: pzykofsky@ lgc.org Websites and Background Articles Local Government Commission. âCutler-Orosi Charrette Report.â December 2001. http://www.lgc.org/reports/cutler-orosi/ Caltrans. âState Route 63 Transportation Concept Report.â July 2006. http://www.dot.ca.gov/dist6/planning/tcrs/sr63tcr/sr63completedoc.pdf Tulare County Community Development & Redevelopment (CD&R) Branch http://www.co.tulare.ca.us/government/rma/redevel/default.asp Edgartown, Massachusetts: Promoting Walkable, Attractive Development on Upper Main Street Major Challenge How to ensure the character, quality and pedestrian orientation of a historic, downtown main street facing typical, strip commercial, auto-oriented development patterns Edgartown, Massachusetts, was the first village settled on Marthaâs Vineyard and thrived dur- ing the 19th century as a whaling community and the Dukes County seat. Today, the economy revolves around serving vacationers and retirees drawn to Edgartown by its seaside character, a busy harbor, and a well-preserved town history. The forces that draw visitors to Edgartown have also brought pressure for expanding commercial development outside the historic commercial district and subsequent traffic congestion, especially during the peak summer travel season when the population peaks at nearly 20,000 people in Edgartown alone. The pressure for growth reached Upper Main Street in the early 1980s, attracted by the highly accessible, undeveloped land along this primary entry corridor into Edgartown. The Upper Main Street commercial district is half a mile northwest of the historic commercial district and Appendix BâCase Studies 43
provided an opportunity to develop businesses that would better serve the local population, in contrast to the historic center which became more of a tourist draw with historic attractions and boutique shopping. Early development in the Upper Main Street corridor resembled typ- ical automobile-oriented strip development found in many towns, resulting in development that generated negative aesthetic, traffic, and environmental impacts for the Town. The Project In response, the Edgartown Planning Board applied for and received a grant in 1988 from the Massachusetts Council on the Arts and Humanities to address these concerns and develop a new plan for the Upper Main Street commercial district. Following award of the grant, the Planning Board hired a consulting firm to work with a stakeholder group to develop a vision, a master plan, and general recommendations for future development in the Upper Main Street corridor. The Process The consulting firm held weekly meetings throughout the winter of 1988 with the stakeholder group, consisting of Upper Main Street land owners, Upper Main Street business operators, the Board of Trade, the Board of Health, the Police Chief, the Board of Selectmen, and the Planning Board. The group determined that the vision was to transform the automobile-oriented strip into a pedestrian-oriented commercial area, and they decided to use innovative site planning and design techniques to help manage growth and generate development better suited to match the existing character of Edgartown. 44 Appendix BâCase Studies Edgartown Town Profile: Population (2005 US Census estimate): 3,779 Annual pop. growth rate (2000-2005): 0.8% Economic base: Service Community Classification: Destination Strategies employed: Compact growth; community design
The consultant developed a set of design guidelines to implement this vision, which included the following recommendations: ⢠Locate buildings up to the street with parking to the rear and screened with landscaping; ⢠Encourage building heights from two to three stories to allow for residential uses above shops and offices and to create a sense of enclosure for the pedestrian; ⢠Scale buildings to the pedestrian and to meet the surrounding character; ⢠Use variety in building materials and design, and base them in the historic Edgartown con- text; guidance is included for the design of massing, height, rooflines, fenestration, signage, lighting, and other architectural elements; ⢠Cluster buildings to retain or create significant open pedestrian spaces; ⢠Use transfers of commercial development rights to help preserve the remaining open spaces; ⢠Build sidewalks and plant street trees to create a pleasant pedestrian atmosphere; ⢠Preserve and re-use existing buildings; ⢠Consolidate and share parking between buildings for more efficient use of land; ⢠Create parallel local roads and inter-parcel connections to relieve traffic from Upper Main Street; ⢠Consolidate driveways into clearly defined entrances and intersections; ⢠Use the park-and-ride lot outside of town to reduce local traffic; and ⢠Bury utilities to improve aesthetics. Results and Lessons Learned Since the guidelines were developed, some zoning along the Upper Main Street corridor was amended to allow for the recommended type of development. However, the Town chose not to codify most of the design standards into the zoning code and instead pursued a more flexible and creative permitting process. The master plan presents the basic policies and drawings that illus- trate the design concepts. To develop and operate a business in the Upper Main Street corridor, an applicant must receive a special permit that acknowledges that the design of the development meets the intent of the master plan. The Master Plan and implementation process were approved by the Town in a public meeting in the Spring of 1989. Although the Town has not experienced as much pressure for commercial development as anticipated during the planning process, the development that has been proposed has demon- strated that the permitting process is a major success. With some negotiation, developments approved closely meet the intent of the Master Plan. The master plan and illustrations have helped to provide clear expectations for applicants, which they appreciate; clear expectations typically lead to a faster and less contentious review process. In contrast, a few businesses have been proposed that clearly would not meet the design standards; those applicants withdrew their proposals early on in the review process. Upper Main Street business owners continue to be highly involved in the review process, ensuring the continued integrity of the Master Plan goals. The Marthaâs Vineyard Commission (MVC), the regional planning agency for Dukes County, provides complementary strategies to help âprotect the unique natural, historical, ecological, sci- entific, [and] cultural qualitiesâ of Marthaâs Vineyard. The MVC is responsible for reviewing the design for any development projected to have a significant regional impact. Through this review process, the MVC promotes infill development and smart growth in existing towns, residential clustering and open space protection outside of towns, and access management, preservation, and context-sensitive building design on the islandâs two-lane rural roads. Marthaâs Vineyard also has a substantial network of on and off-street cycling facilities with plans to further expand and improve connections within this network. Appendix BâCase Studies 45
Recent traffic counts demonstrate that traffic volumes in the Upper Main Street corridor have not increased in the last 10 years. More pedestrian activity can be observed in the Upper Main Street corridor as compared to other commercial corridors on Marthaâs Vineyard, although the ingrained culture of driving from business-to-business has yet to change drastically due to the expressed ease of loading into a nearby vehicle after shopping. The park-and-ride lot has been highly successful, with many tourists and some Vineyard residents and employees choosing to use the Vineyard Transit Authority busses that circulate through Edgartown and around the entire island. Despite the numbers, local residents are still concerned about traffic issues and a citizen committee discusses these concerns and potential solutions regularly. Potential strategies include adding a third lane to Upper Main Street, prohibiting left turns on Upper Main Street, or building a bypass road around the northwestern side of Edgartown. Although these strategies warrant continued discussion, the committee has never been able to justify any of these alterna- tives as being more beneficial for transportation mobility than they would be harmful to the character of the community. Transferability Edgartownâs process was locally driven, geared toward the communityâs unique context, and structured to engage a diversity of community stakeholders. Town Planner, Christina Brown, also noted the value of finding a good consultant to support the process. She said, âNot only does this person need to be well-educated, the consultant also needs to be patient, kind, and under- standing of local concerns.â She adds, âTake your time with public involvement. Get the right people to the table, listen to their concerns, and make sure they are invested in the process. And it doesnât hurt to provide cold cuts and Oreos.â Contact Information Georgiana Kingsbury, Edgartown Planning Board Assistant, Phone: 508.627.6170, Email: edgplan@vineyard.net Mark London, Marthaâs Vineyard Commission Executive Director, Phone: 508.693.3453 Ext. 11, Email: London@mvcommission.org Reference Arendt, Randall. Rural by Design. American Planning Association (1994). See specifically Chapter 8, âCommercial Infill Development Along a Major Street,â Pages 103â110. Hayden, Colorado: Community Visioning Using 3D Scenario Planning Tools Major Challenge How to efficiently and quickly determine community preferences for balancing new growth and development in a small, rural, mountain town Hayden is a rural town of 1,700 in the Yampa Valley of Colorado, 25 miles west of the resort community of Steamboat Springs. Its economic base is agriculture and mining, though many residents also work in Steamboat Springs or in power plants west of town. Hayden sits along Col- orado State Highway 40. As the town was largely overlooked during the Colorado real-estate boom cycles of the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s, its population and character remained fairly con- sistent as a small, rural, agricultural and mining town. 46 Appendix BâCase Studies
As land became increasingly scarce and housing prices rose in Steamboat Springs, develop- ers began to view Hayden as the next place for residential expansion. When ideas about a sub- division of 2,000 new units were proposed just outside Hayden, many citizens in this town of 1,539 became alarmed. Over the past few decades they had watched many boom-and-bust real- estate cycles transform other small Colorado towns. They knew they needed to act, and soon, if they were to be proactive about future growth. Their existing subdivision ordinances and codes had very little provision for guiding physical development and had not been updated since the 1970s. Another concern of town officials was that increased residential development would not bring the local tax revenues necessary to meet increased demands on roads, water, and sewer infra- structure, and schools. Town staff and local government officials were keenly aware that new res- idential growth would need to be balanced with commercial and business development as well. The town residents had their share of pro-growth and anti-growth proponents, but there was no consensus on how to balance growth. Town managers knew they had to be proactive on how to specifically guide streetscape design, access management, and connectivity between older and newer streets, managing the flow of traffic from new development, and ultimately how to pay for new infrastructure. Consensus was needed for a new comprehensive plan and updated land use codes for growth management in Hayden. The Project Haydenâs response was to postpone a decision on the new subdivision and take proactive steps to create a new comprehensive plan. They needed to engage citizens and build consensus quickly. Appendix BâCase Studies 47 Hayden Town Profile: Population (2005 US Census estimate): 1,539 Annual pop. growth rate (2000-2005): -1.2% Economic base: Service Community Classification: Destination Strategies employed: Consensus building for planning and regulation; growth management; compact development; access management; community character
Hayden applied successfully for grants to the Gates Foundation and the Orton Family Founda- tion. An Orton family member residing in Steamboat Springs had recently witnessed the effec- tive use of CommunityVizâa real-time planning and visualization software package based on ESRIâs Geographic Information Systems (GIS)âin a Vermont town. Hayden Town staff worked closely with the Gates and Orton Foundations to contract a Boulder-based consulting firm to conduct a Community Visioning Workshop utilizing CommunityViz. The Process On November 15th, 2004, over 120 town residents showed up for a Community Visioning Workshop designed around the use of ArcGIS CommunityViz software. According to Russ Martin, Town Manager, many people came out simply because they were curious, as the event had been billed as âcome see the future of Hayden.â It attracted a solid cross section of the com- munity: old and new residents, pro-growth and slow-growth proponents. Citizens were enticed by the prospective âgee whizâ element of the new visioning software and planners used this curiosity to market and publicize the event. It was also billed as a keystone event which would have direct impact on plans and policies, with later Town Council meetings to use the input from this event in decision-making. Participants arrived with the expectation that their involvement would make a difference. The meeting lasted from 6 to 9 pm and a buffet dinner was served. The room was set up with numerous screens and tables with keypads which were used by participants for real-time polling on questions posed and scenarios envisioned (see http://www.yampaval- ley.info/government096086.asp for samples of the slides and real-time voting results). The meeting began with a short presentation and polling exercise on the effectiveness of Haydenâs comprehensive planning, focused on their existing plan directives of (1) fiscally balanced growth, (2) compact growth, (3) compatible land uses, and (4) community character. ArcGIS-based CommunityViz was then used to show a variety of build-out scenarios. Different patterns of growth and different assumptions were shown for various population levels, even one that showed Hayden at a population of 15,000. Three-dimensional fly-overs were displayed for suburban development and compact development patterns. The software also produced real- time fiscal impacts of different growth scenarios. The results of the powerful visualization tools produced in citizens what Martin describes as a âeurekaâ moment. He observed, One thing the November [2004] meeting did was establish a unified âmindsetâ throughout community. This mind- set was now less on pro-growth, versus no-growth. Instead there was buy-in about the importance of how to grow, the need for compact form, growing with connectivity, and ultimately the possibility for growth to be positive. The mindset was a buy-in on growing right. The visualization tools helped produce this mindset immensely. An example of CommunityViz effectiveness occurred when two contrasting street sections were shown, one with sidewalks and trees, and one without. Participants expressed a clear preference for the landscaped, more walkable street section with trees but discovered through this exercise that their existing code made no provision for this preference. The exercise helped them realize they needed to recommend community design performance standards for new development. 48 Appendix BâCase Studies âOne thing the November meeting did was establish a unified âmindsetâ through- out community . . . about the importance of how to grow, the need for compact form, growing with connectivity, and ultimately the possibility for growth to be positive. The mindset was a buy-in on growing right. The visualization tools helped produce this mindset immensely.â
The workshop participants voted the following as their top priorities: preserving town char- acter, encouraging grid streets that extended the existing geometry of the town, improving diversity and quality of retail development downtown and encouraging new commercial devel- opment, developing within the town boundaries (infill) with compact growth first and outward later, and growing with compatible land uses. Results and Lessons Learned The Hayden experience shows that much can be accomplished with one well-planned, well- run meeting using CommunityViz or other similar real-time, scenario visualization tools. This workshop, using real-time visualization tools for polling community priorities, accomplished in one evening what can traditionally take many workshops or planning commission meetings. Martin attested that, as a visioning tool, CommunityViz was more effective than other paper, dot-mapping, or preference polling exercises he had participated in. If one is going to invest much time and expense for an intensive, one-evening session using CommunityViz, it is important to invest significantly in advertising to ensure meaningful partic- ipation. Hayden already benefited from having an engaged population, but planners made sure the word was spread that this would be a key event. They used the public curiosity in the high- tech, visualization tools to effectively market the event, as âcome see the future of Hayden.â One means of generating interest for the session was to communicate to the public that the input received would be genuinely used to inform Town Council decisions. The CommunityViz workshop preceded Town Council sessions with enough time permitted so that input from the workshop results could influence the comprehensive plan updates. The result was that the Town Council was able to expedite the comprehensive plan updating process because of this pivotal meeting. In April of 2005 the Hayden Town Council voted to approve their updated compre- hensive plan. Their land use codes and ordinances were updated by November 2005. The new plan and ordinances clearly required that new development be well connected and that devel- opers would have to provide their share of the cost for new roads, both on site and off. The new codes were not entirely prescriptive on developers and recognized that all new development takes careful negotiation and consideration. Another lesson learned is that it takes strong public-private partnerships to address connec- tivity, transportation, and other access management concerns associated with growth. One recommendation was that existing streets should not have to bear the full burden of new devel- opment. Proposed site plans would have to add to and connect with Haydenâs existing road network. The town has since developed a transportation master plan that proposes a loop road for Colorado State Highway 40. The purpose of the loop road is to avoid additional traffic on existing streets through neighborhoods and to prevent local commuters from having to go through downtown to get to their jobs in Steamboat Springs or Craig. Hayden is currently work- ing closely with developers on cost-sharing for the loop road and other access management strategies. Transferability A key to the transferability of this experience is to assure small town planners, officials, and citizens that it can be worth the extra expense and effort to mobilize the resources necessary to hire competent professionals trained in the use of real-time, visualization, scenario and analysis tools to help communities determine how they want to grow. Obtaining and allocating funding for a visioning process that utilizes high-tech, expensive software and equipment may be diffi- cult to rationalize for many cash-strapped rural local governments. Hayden took an entrepre- neurial approach toward solving this problem. The overall comprehensive planning process Appendix BâCase Studies 49
received private grants totaling over $150,000. The private matching funds both made the process possible and helped planners justify the expenditure of their own limited public funds. Martin attests that the money for the workshop was well spent and that the âeurekaâ moment that CommunityViz inspired was invaluable in building buy-in on growth management princi- ples. Hayden spent one-third of its $40,000 scenario planning budget on that one-evening work- shop. The visioning process clearly benefited from the use of scenario planning tools to help answer the communityâs core questions. CommunityViz is but one in a growing array of tools continuing to develop rapidly in response to transportation and land use planning requirements and resources. Other commonly used scenario modeling tools include GIS-based software programs such as Plan Builder, Paint the Town, CorPlan, Index, WhatIf?, and Places3. These tools also include GIS computer simu- lations to develop alternative future land use scenarios and models to assess factors such as land consumption, travel demand, water and sewer demands, and public expenditures. Communities should be careful when choosing a scenario planning tool to ensure it is appro- priate for their context, budget, and technical capabilities. Each tool is designed to address a specific set of questions, using a specific set of assumptions. Some useful questions planners could ask are: What challenges does the community need to address? What challenges is the tool designed to address? What sorts of characteristics or conditions are assumed as part of the analysis? Do these assumptions conflict with the communityâs vision for the future? Can the model be modified to reflect different assumptions? What kind of data does the tool require and at what scale? Does the community have the resources available to generate the necessary data? Does the planning team understand the âinner workingsâ of the tools well enough to answer questions about how infor- mation was derived? Contact Information Russ Martin, Manager, Town of Hayden, Colorado, Email: manager@townofhayden.org, Phone: 970.276.374 Reference Snyder, Ken and Julie Herman. âVisualization Tools to Improve Community Decision Making,â PAS Memo, November 2003, American Planning Association. Available: http://www. planning.org/egov/default.htm Hutchinson, Minnesota: Implementing a Transportation Plan to Accommodate Regional Growth Major Challenge How to implement a transportation plan to accommodate regional growth Hutchinson, Minnesota, stands out in this guidebook for a number of reasons. This mod- estly growing community of over 13,000 people is best characterized as a âproductionâ com- munity for its reliance on manufacturing as its economic base. Locally based Hutchinson Technology, Inc., and consumer products manufacturer, 3M, are two of the largest employ- ers, with long-term commitments to the region. Thus, Hutchinson is an apparent exception to the trend of production-based economies experiencing decline. Hutchinson also stands out from a number of so-called âRust Beltâ communities across the Midwest and Northeast in this 50 Appendix BâCase Studies
regard. Hutchinsonâs location relative to the Twin Cities metropolitan areas (about 60 miles) also means that, as that region spreads, the Hutchinson region takes on characteristics of an exurb of the larger region. Hutchinson thus has a more diverse economy than many produc- tion communities. Nevertheless, the city faces a number of challenges similar to those of other communities in this guidebook. The growing industrial area is within the city limits and contributes to its tax base, but sections of the downtown are struggling. The Hutchinson Eco- nomic Development Authority and other partners have embarked on aggressive efforts to implement streetscape improvements and provide financing to downtown projects, including the renovation of a number of historic buildings, such as the 1930s-era State Theatre. The city, together with McLeod County and the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT), also embarked on a 2-year area transportation planning process meant to deal with the effects of regional growth. This plan is the focus of the current case study. In this guidebook, Hutchinson also stands out because the plan has already been documented in a previous case study by the Federal Highway Administration. The current case study updates the FHWA report and focuses on the implementation of a number of creative approaches not yet in evidence at the time of the earlier study. The Project The Hutchinson Area Transportation Plan (HATP) was developed in 1998 by the city of Hutchinson, McLeod County, and MnDOT. The plan covered a number of important issues related to transportation in the region. Among the most important aspects of the plan was the functioning of four major corridors in the region: Trunk Highway (THâa designation for state Appendix BâCase Studies 51 Hutchinson City Profile: Population (2005 US Census estimate): 13,722 Annual pop. growth rate (2000-2005): 1.0% Economic base: Manufacturing Community Classification: Production Strategies employed: Regional planning and access management; intergovernmental coordination; pedestrian connectivity; compact growth.
highways in Minnesota) 7, TH 15, TH 22, and County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 12. TH 15 (the primary north-south route and the city Main Street) and TH 7 (a major east-west route and connector to the Twin Cities) were studied to determine whether bypasses were appropriate. In both cases, an origin-destination study revealed that the vast majority of traffic on these routes was local. Thus, bypasses would have little benefit in reducing congestion. To deal with the con- gestion on these routes, the plan recommends encouraging local traffic to use adjacent parallel routes. The plan also called for reconstructing portions of TH 7 and TH 15, including making parts of TH 15 a four-lane road. While the four-lane configuration in the downtown area could present challenges for pedestrians, this is mitigated at the intersection of TH 7 and TH 15 by con- structing neckdowns at the intersections to reduce crossing width, as well as building median strips to provide pedestrian refuge. Construction on TH 15 and TH 7 (managed by MnDOT) is underway and is expected to be complete by fall 2007. TH 22 presents a special case which will be of interest to many small communities with large production-oriented facilities. Until recently, TH 22 ran along Adams Street on the east side of the city. The post-World War II location of the 3M plant on Adams Street SE resulted in the southeast quadrant of the city becoming an industrial growth area. Increased truck traffic to and from the industrial sites on Adams Street became a nuisance to residents along the street, leading to calls for an alternate route to serve the ârearâ of the industrial area further to the east. At the same time, state, county, and city officials were faced with challenges in coordi- nating maintenance on their major routes. For example, MnDOT uses large, heavy snowplows to clear its highways, but these vehicles are inappropriate for road sections in the urban areas, where cars park curbside and street widths are narrower. Further complicating matters, dif- fering lines of authority and different priorities may also mean that MnDOT may decide against plowing on a day when the city decides that plowing cannot be avoided. To resolve these operational, maintenance, and quality of life challenges, the city, county, and MnDOT entered into an unusual agreement. Because the county had available funds, it agreed to con- struct a new TH 22 as an east peripheral route to serve the east side of the industrial area. The county then gave the newly constructed highway to the state, which became responsible for it. The urban section of âOld 22,â now known only as Adams Street, was then transferred to the city. The Process The HATP was undertaken by a partnership of the city, county, and MnDOT. The partners established a project management team which included representatives from each of the three jurisdictions, as well as the Mid-Minnesota Development Commission (a regional planning agency). A planner was retained as a consultant to the team to prepare the plan. The planning process included a variety of public participation techniques, including nine small-group stake- holder meetings, additional meetings with business interests and residents to focus on the TH 7 corridor, and two public open house meetings. The long history of cooperation and coordination among the three levels of government made it relatively easy not only to conduct the plan, but also to coordinate its implementation. High levels of coordination and information-sharing (including sharing information with the public) are evident during the construction phase. Although not directly a part of HATP, other planning practices adopted around the same time have contributed to the planâs success. First, in 1998 the city, county, and the four townships adjacent to the city established a Joint Planning Board, with authority to review zoning decisions and conduct long-range planning in a district extending 2 miles beyond the city limits. This gives the local jurisdictions an opportunity to coordinate land use decisions on the major highway 52 Appendix BâCase Studies
corridors. The city and county have adopted similar access management strategies to maintain the efficiency and safety of these corridors. Second, MnDOT reviews plats, subdivisions, and conditional use permits in the city, to make sure that uses will not adversely impact the high- ways. According to MnDOT officials, âOften we want the city to be aware that a development off of the highway may have an impact to traffic, access, or the operation of the highway if alter- native access to the development is not included. MnDOT generally reviews them all and then only comments on the ones it feels may have an ultimate impact.â This forces planners and engi- neers at both levels of government to engage in early and frequent communication about site design, access, and compatibility of use. Finally, MnDOT reciprocates this consultative approach on TH 22, as the road transitions from a state highway to a local street. For example, in a situa- tion where MnDOT might prefer to require a right turn lane at a new access point, but the city would not think it necessary, MnDOT would follow the cityâs lead. Results and Lessons Learned Eight years after the adoption of the HATP, the governmental agencies have made substantial progress toward accomplishing many of the planâs goals. Construction of the new TH 22 and transfer of âOld 22â to the city are both complete. Reports indicate that the reduction of truck traffic on Adams Street SE has been substantial, and the street has reverted back to a character more in keeping with an urban residential street. Reconstruction of TH 15 and TH 7 is under- way and is expected to be complete in November 2007. Extensive information provided by MnDOT, the city of Hutchinson, and the local media keeps residents, businesses, and travelers informed about the progress and the necessary detours. The stakeholder involvement was important to bringing the community on board with the planâs recommendations. Particularly significant was the downtown business community. According to Patrick Weidemann with MnDOT, business owners were quick to see the benefits of the plan and became champions of it, once they understood what was proposed. It was also important to assure the businesses that the construction efforts would be relatively quick and not require constant change and adjustment. Asked to look back on the process, Weidemann can only come up with two aspects he would have approached differently. First, given more resources, the team could have conducted a more sophisticated origin-destination study. Because the survey was conducted only on one day, it missed weekend traffic heading for recreational destinations in the surrounding area. Subsequent observations have suggested that this is a larger component of regional trips than the surveyâs find- ings revealed. A survey conducted on multiple days might have resulted in a more nuanced under- standing of traffic patterns, but likely would not have altered the crucial recommendations of the plan (i.e., focusing on improving cross-town routes rather than constructing bypasses). Second, Weidemann notes that the original plan made significant headway on making decisions for imple- mentation, but that the subsequent environmental review process âopened everything up again.â This frustrated some stakeholders, who did not understand why settled issues were being raised again during an alternatives analysis. In later projects, MnDOT has used studies similar to HATP as scoping documents for the environmental review, resulting in a more seamless and efficient planning process. HATP and the associated planning processes discussed in this case study build on a long legacy of good planning and intergovernmental coordination in Hutchinson. The results of this tradi- tion speak for themselves. Hutchinson grew rapidly in the 1990s as it became more attractive as a bedroom community for the Twin Cities. Nevertheless, it has managed its growth such that it is one of the few communities of its size in Minnesota that actually grew denser as a result of development, with increases in population outpacing the increase in land area. While the fast Appendix BâCase Studies 53
changes have resulted in concerns about traffic congestion,3 the city retains a high quality of life and a stable employment base. The cityâs comprehensive plan was updated in 2002, providing a further opportunity to deal with the challenges of regional growth. Among the strategies pro- posed in the 2002 plan are working with MnDOT to employ context-sensitive design standards along the trunk highways, developing stricter access management standards, and encouraging urban densities in the designated growth areas and away from places that lack adequate trans- portation infrastructure. Transferability Keys to replicating successes like those in Hutchinson include (1) recruiting local leaders who embrace regional approaches to land use and transportation planning and (2) developing strong public involvement components that engage multiple stakeholders. Their experience was also characterized by close collaboration and dialog among local government, businesses, and MnDOT staff and engineers which made elements of the plan, especially implementation, work effectively. Contact Information Patrick Weidemann, MnDOT, Email: patrick.weidemann@dot.state.mn.us, Phone: 320.214.3753 John Rodeberg, PE, Director of Public Works, City of Hutchinson, Phone: 320.234.4209 Lincoln City, Oregon: Taft Village Redevelopment Plan Major Challenge What can be done to revitalize a small urban village in a rural setting with a state highway running through it? Lincoln City, Oregon, spans eight miles along the Pacific coast. Described as a âstring of pearls,â the city is composed of five villages, or neighborhood districts, linked together by State Highway 101, the most heavily trafficked route in the area. The city was incorporated in 1965 by linking the five previously independent villages together. Lincoln City is primarily a tourist and recreation destination with a number of outdoor opportunities, located 90 minutes from Port- land and near Devils Lake State Recreation Area. Historically, the regional economy had depended on its once-thriving dairy, fishing, and timber industries. Highway 101 bisects all five villages, causing traffic congestion and other transportation-related challenges that conflict with city goals to improve downtown to support the tourist industry. The Lincoln City Urban Renewal Agency is the local government department, which oversees economic development efforts in each of the five downtown districts. Established in 1988, the Urban Renewal Agency adopted a âplan areaâ encompassing 17 percent of Lincoln City and a portion of all five historic business districts within it. The agency generates revenue using tax 54 Appendix BâCase Studies 3While residentsâ identification of traffic congestion as a major problem should not be dismissed, perhaps a note of caution is in order. Recent thinking in transportation planning has focused less on reducing congestion and more on increasing accessibility. As Hutchinson grows and experiences challenges common in larger urban areas, it may be better off adopting demand management strategies, rather than trying to ease congestion with additional capacity in its downtown. See Pamela J. Snopl, âAccessibility: Rethinking the Way We Look at Transportation,â published online at http://www1.umn.edu/umnnews/ Feature_Stories/Accessibility_Rethinking_the_way_we_look_at_transportation.html.
increment financing (TIF) to make improvements to the district. In the late 1990s, the Lincoln City Urban Renewal Agency accumulated enough funding to hire consultants to draw up the first long-term redevelopment plan for one of the five city villages. In 1999, the first redevelopment plan targeted the village of Taft, the most populated city village. The goal of the plan was to create a mixed-use village and implement traffic-calming measures to foster a pedestrian-friendly downtown. Highway 101, a four-lane highway with streetside parking and congestion problems caused both by local and long-distance traffic, was the focus of the plan. Parking, pedestrian safety, and aesthetic issues were of concern to the local residents, who recognized that major roadway improvements would be necessary to redesign the downtown to accommodate all modes of transportation, including biking and walking. The Urban Renewal Agency took on a transportation-oriented project to revitalize the city because of the direct link between transportation and improving the economic base in the historic downtown. The Project The Taft Redevelopment Plan: Rediscovering the Village and the Taft Mixed Use Village Core Zone were completed in 2000 at the end of a 6-month process. The three stages of the process were a baseline report, an intensive 7-day community-wide involvement process, and an eco- nomic development study. These activities were funded by the Urban Redevelopment Agency, which hired planning and design consultants to assist with the process. A team of staff from the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), the Oregon Department of Land Conservation Appendix BâCase Studies 55 Lincoln City Profile: Population (2005 US Census estimate): 7,849 Annual pop. growth rate (2000-2005): 1.1% Special populations: 19.3% elderly Economic base: Nonspecialized Community Classification: Destination. Strategies employed: Context Sensitive Solutions; community involvement; access management.
and Development (DLCD), the Army Corps of Engineers, and local planners and city residents were also involved in all stages of the redevelopment plan process. Almost immediately after the plan was completed, the Lincoln City Council adopted the plan and implementation followed during the next 4 years. In order to maintain the historic character of downtown Taft through revitalization efforts, the Lincoln City Urban Renewal Agency pursued a special designation from ODOT, which allowed officials to treat Highway 101 differently than most state highways because of its joint function as a main street. The Special Transportation Area (STA) designation was recommended in an ODOT publication, Main Street-When a Highway Runs Through It: A Handbook for Oregon Communities, released in November 1999, around the same time the Taft Plan was being developed. Adopting the STA designation was beneficial to Lincoln City because it set an agreement between the local government and ODOT to allow for specific design measures to balance the flow of traffic, local access, and pedestrian movement. Typically, ODOT would have to approve these features on a case-by-case basis, but the STA agreement permitted the entire strip of Highway 101 in downtown Taft to be treated as a main street, allowing for special design elements to be implemented. The Process Creating the Taft Redevelopment Plan was a highly collaborative effort between the Urban Renewal Agency and its contractors, state agencies, and local community. The Lincoln City Urban Renewal Agency utilized innovative strategies to communicate the redevelopment process in Taft to community members and was recognized by the Federal High- way Authority (FHWA), American Planning Association (APA), and Federal Transportation Authority (FTA) for exemplary community involvement in the Taft Redevelopment Plan in 2004. Three months before the consultants began working in the Taft community, the Urban Renewal Agency rented a storefront in downtown Taft and staffed it during the day so that community members could walk in off the street and enter the storefront to speak with city rep- resentatives about the activity that would be happening downtown. It was an opportunity for people to share their impressions of the area, offer suggestions, and learn more about the process. Gaining local support and gathering public input for the redevelopment plan was an im- portant part of the process. An intensive 7-day community charrette kicked off the re- development plan, with a number of different activities to encourage community members of all ages to participate in events designed to gather feedback on how to improve the district. These included neighborhood bike rides and walks, design charrettes, even a middle school logo con- test. A signage preference survey was also administered, and over 30 in-depth interviews were conducted. More than 1,500 individuals participated in these eventsânearly 20 percent of the Lincoln City population. Out of this process, many partnerships were established to build sup- port for the changes downtown. After the 6-month-long process to complete the redevelopment plan, the Urban Renewal Agency distributed and hung visual renderings of a redeveloped Taft village, called vision posters, in the local businesses, the library, stores, restaurants, and other facilities throughout Lincoln City. This way, all residents and visitors could see the plan they helped to create and imagine what the revitalized community would look like. The city also worked very closely with the local media to ensure consistent coverage about all the events and progress of the plan implementation. Results and Lessons Learned Extensive roadway improvements on Highway 101 through Taft were made possible by a $1.9 million ODOT modernization grant. Traffic-calming features were added to improve pedestrian 56 Appendix BâCase Studies
safety. A green median was built, sidewalks were widened to 10 feet in either direction of the road, and crosswalks were added to make pedestrian crossing safer across four lanes of traffic. Parking along the highway was an important feature to retain to support the local businesses downtown and âbulb-insâ were built in front of many of the stores by reducing those sections of the side- walks to five feet, accommodating three to four cars in each section. A number of streetscape improvements contributed to aesthetic improvements to the area and helped to develop a strong identity and sense of place. A gateway was added along the entrance into the village center along Highway 101 and historic-looking lamp posts placed along the street. Overhead utilities were placed underground. Additionally, the agency created a program to offer zero-percent-interest loans to existing commercial buildings for aesthetic and structural improvements. Lincoln City was also able to improve sidestreets off Highway 101 to support local traffic through a $790,000 ODOT grant for off-facility improvements. By improving neighborhood roadways that connected to Main Street/Highway 101 in Taft, traffic flow improved because it created multiple routes for local traffic, relieving congestion on Highway 101. Overall, the roadway and streetscape improvements were successful in achieving the objec- tives to develop the local economy, improve traffic flow, and enhance the downtown. Over $10 million of reinvestment in public infrastructure occurred in Taft since the redevelopment plans were implemented. More than 15 new businesses have opened, many older businesses have grown or been remodeled, and many new jobs have been created. Part of the success in the Taft Redevelopment Plan was the strong emphasis on collaboration with state agencies and other partners from the earliest stages of the planning process until the very end. Partnering with ODOT from the start contributed to a smooth planning and imple- mentation process because it helped to create ideas and determine what changes in the community would work given the context of downtown. This strong working relationship with the state will help future revitalization efforts in Lincoln City. The relationship between the Lincoln City Urban Renewal Agency and the planning and design consultants was also strong throughout the planning process. Lincoln City staff worked alongside them, which was important because, once the plan was complete, they were responsi- ble for its implementation. By working side-by-side, the Urban Renewal Agency was able to understand how the consultants developed the recommendations and suggestions in the Taft Redevelopment Plan. Kurt Olson, director of the Urban Renewal Agency, recognizes that change can be difficult, especially in a small town because the changes may be more apparent. âBy engaging the public as much as possible, it really helped as the project moved forward,â he says. Whether commu- nity members agreed or not with the changes, they were aware of what was happening, meaning there was more opportunity to get involved and fewer surprises in the end. One of the best ideas, Olson claims, was to create a vision poster after the Taft Redevelopment Plan was drawn up. Res- idents were proud of the vision they helped to develop and referred to it. For example, in the vision poster, a traffic circle was drawn with flowers planted in the middle. But when it was built, the circle was adorned with driftwood and beach grasses. A few residents held the city account- able, saying the vision poster illustrated flowers, not driftwood and beach grasses. As a result, the city changed the landscaping to reflect the vision that was designed. Transferability Adoption of a Special Transportation Area is a transportation planning strategy that can be used by small towns, older neighborhoods in larger cities, and rural communities to balance the Appendix BâCase Studies 57
needs of a main street and a major transportation route. This special designation is unique to ODOT, but could be replicated by other state DOTs. Other keys to success in Lincoln City included the strong collaboration between various gov- ernments agencies, consultants, and the public. Frequent dialog and a variety of meeting venues helped each organization and individual determine what the projectâs goals meant to them and how they could help make it a reality. In addition, the use of graphics such as the vision poster played an important part in ensuring that these goals were properly achieved. Contact information Kurt Olson, Director, Urban Renewal Agency, City of Lincoln City, Phone: 541.996.1095 Moss Point, Mississippi: Rebuilding A Rural Community After Disaster Major Challenge How to rebuild a rural community devastated by natural disaster with improved interconnected transportation and land use goals When Hurricane Katrina slammed into the Gulf Coast August 2005, the low-lying commu- nity of Moss Point was devastated. The community had already seen a slow decline of its com- munity and especially of its downtown. The population of the town dropped from 17,000 in 1990 58 Appendix BâCase Studies Moss Point Community Profile: Population (2005 US Census estimate): 15,125 Annual pop. growth rate (2000-2005): -0.9% Special populations: 70.6% black Economic base: Manufacturing Community Classification: Production; exurban. Strategies employed: Road transfers; compact growth; pedestrian orientation; street connectivity.
to less than 16,000 people by 2000. The community was built around the Escatawpa and Pascagoula Rivers and was a center for shipping and saw mills. As the timber industry declined in Southern Mississippi, so did Moss Point. When the state DOT widened the Main Street (Highway 613), it became a major state high- way and included a high bridge over the bayou that connected with Interstate 10. Instead of having a positive impact on the community by bringing economic development, it helped speed the decline of downtown. The widening from a narrow two-lane to a five-lane road forced the demolition of a number of buildings along Main Street. The changes made the corridor less pedestrian-friendly by making the road difficult to cross and removing many of the businesses that were within walking distance of each other. The traffic light was also placed at one end of the Main Street, offering little in the way of opportunity for folks to safely cross from one side of Main Street to the other. Businesses along one whole side of the center of Main Street were removed, making the town center feel open, deserted and uninviting. Rather than improve the declining town center, the state highway furthered the disconnected feel of the community and increased its slide toward disrepair and economic disinvestment. When Katrina hit, it destroyed the city hall and the recreation center as well as homes and busi- nesses. Police cars were submerged and fire and emergency response facilities destroyed. The town experienced high winds; however, the worst damage was due to severe flooding from the wetlands that border the town on three sides. The Project In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour set up a com- mission to begin rebuilding the Gulf Coast. The Governorâs Commission and Mississippi archi- tects asked the Congress for New Urbanism, an organization of planners, architects, and urban designers that advocates for neo-traditional design in city planning, to engage with local com- munities along the coast as they planned for rebuilding their communities. The Commission saw the tragedy as an opportunity not only to rebuild, but to rebuild in such a way that would revi- talize the local communities. The focus was also to get each town engaged in long-term thinking in a time of short-term consequences, such as getting FEMA grants and relocating people from flood-zone areas. The Moss Point team conducted a charrette in October 2006 with the local community where citizens of Moss Point interacted with top quality planners from around the country. The goal of the charrette was to leverage early opportunities through attracting attention to the commu- nity and establishing a plan early on. The project was done very quicklyâorientations, meetings, tours and sketch plans were completed the first week, with clean up and finalization of the plans the second week. The plans were mainly an attempt to get something in motion so that the peo- ple of Moss Point could see their community rebuild as quickly as possible. The charrette cov- ered three areas: the town center, the Creole area closer to Pascagoula, and the Escatawpa area further north. The second charrette was held in December 2006 in the town of Moss Point itself. Much of the discussion focused on the town center and on ideas for moving key facilities out of the most dangerous flood zone. These facilities included the city hall, police station, fire station, and recre- ation center. The idea that emerged was to move city hall and the fire station south along Main Street or McGinnis and realign the street of Denny to make way for a waterfront community park. Ideas for the park aimed to increase use of the town center by making it an attractive place that captured the history and natural beauty of the area, while providing a place to gather and recreate. Just south of the park would be a restored Main Street and town center area with mixed- use buildings and storefronts pulled up to the street in the original style of the town center. Appendix BâCase Studies 59
The planning team returned in May 2006 with transportation planner Rick Hall for a public workshop on rebuilding the community. They met with the Mississippi Department of Trans- portation as well. This process has produced a 90 page report that focuses on transportation and develops a SmartCode4 for the town. The Process Much of the community charrette process centered on restoring the feeling of community and sense of place that Moss Point had before the community saw disinvestment, population loss and the disfiguring of the town center. Through the charrette process, local citizens worked with city planners from around the country to come up with a range of options for rebuilding their community in the wake of tragedy. One of the primary topics of conversation was Main Street (Highway 613). Those who attended the charrette wanted to revive the physical heart of their community as a way to bring revival to the extended community. Much of the plan focused around the blocks bordering the intersection of Main Street and Denny. While residents understood that their Main Street was also a state road, they wanted to focus on bringing down the speed of the road, not on decreas- ing the volume of traffic coming through their community. Residents realized that the road could be used as an asset rather than a liability in the reconstruction of Moss Point. Results and Lessons Learned The first charrette only began to scratch the surface of all of the improvements needed for the community. There was only so much that the planners and citizens could do the first go around. The planning team returned a second time with a more detailed plan that focuses on the town center. Another issue with the first charrette was that many families were still displaced by the hurricane and consequently could not make it to the meeting in order to give input on the townâs future. Public participation was further harmed by the fact that there were no meeting places in good enough condition to hold the event. The charrette had to be held in the neighboring city of Biloxi at a casino that was not damaged too badly. This was an issue that the planning team could simply not address fully; however, the second charrette did try to address some of the issues by having the event in the city itself. Transferability Only time will tell how effective this and similar planning processes will be throughout the Gulf Coast communities affected by Hurricane Katrina. One feature that can be transferred is the use of a charrette as a focused and intense method of meaningfully engaging the public. The charrette compresses what may otherwise be a several month planning process into a shorter (typically one week) time frame where citizens are actively involved in framing the issues, pro- posing or evaluating solutions, and critiquing the recommendations from the charrette team. This technique has proven to be an effective public involvement strategy around the country. It is critical, however, to follow up a charrette with sustained, detailed planning work in order to ensure the vision is truly feasible and can be implemented. 60 Appendix BâCase Studies 4SmartCode is an emerging practice that combines form-based codes designed to achieve a high-quality built environment with smart growth principles. Some such Smart Growth principles are creating pedestrian-friendly streets, providing a diversity of housing opportunities, providing a mixture of land uses, etc. For more information on Smart Growth principles see http://www.smartgrowth.org/about/default.asp. For more information on form based codes see: http://www.formbasedcodes.org
Contact Information: Steve Shukraft, AICP, Email: sschukraft@hotmail.com Colin Greene, Email: colin.greene@hok.com, Phone: 202.339.8700 Abbey Roberson, Email: abbey.roberson@hok.com, Phone: 202.339.8700 The Northwest Vermont Planning Project: Changing Land Use to Effect Rural Highway Improvements Major Challenge How to plan for growth, jobs, housing and transportation on a regional scale The Northwest Vermont Project was spurred by a controversy over indirect and cumulative impacts of the proposed Chittenden County Circumferential Highway road project (known by most as âthe Circâ). âThe Circâ was initially conceived in the late 1970s and funds were allocated in 1982 for the two-lane limited access highway. The highway was to bypass the metropolitan region of Burlington, Vermont, improving the transportation connections to the east of the city. The initial impact statement for the project was completed in 1986, with the first section built in 1993. In 2003, a re-evaluation impact statement was conducted by the Vermont Transportation Agency (VTrans) for constructing the remaining sections. This statement was subsequently chal- lenged in court by a collection of concerned environmental and citizensâ groups. The groups argued that significant changes in the environmental impacts of the proposed roadway made a more thorough analysis necessary. A federal judge agreed and required that Appendix BâCase Studies 61 Northwest Vermont Regional Profile: Population (2005 US Census estimate): 326,168 Annual pop. growth rate (2000-2005): 0.6% Economic base: Nonspecialized; federal government; service Community Classification: Exurban; destination Strategies employed: Regional planning; compact growth; rural land conservation.
a new impact study be done which considered a wider variety of impacts including induced development from the project. The Environmental impact analysis is now underway and expected to be complete by the spring of 2007. In the interim, VTrans saw the need to assist Northwest Vermont communities in establishing a clearer future vision and supporting land use and transportation infrastructure. The state realized that much of the growth problem stemmed directly from a lack of resources for growth-related planning at the local and regional levels. In turn, this created a situation where VTrans was reacting to transportation issues caused in part by poor land use decisions at the local level. In 2004, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and VTrans appropriated funding for the Northwest Vermont Project, a regional project that provides selected municipalities in the northwest corner of the state with resources to help establish a community vision. This vision takes into account expected growth and some of the growth management strategies necessary to achieve the vision are identified This project has been a positive outcome from a litigious begin- ning in that it has provided a big boost in local planning tools for transportation and land use. The Project VTrans asked the five northwest Vermont regional planning commissionsâChittenden County, Northwest Vermont (Franklin and Grand Isle Counties), Lamoille County, Central Vermont (Washington County), and Addison Countyâto identify how selected communities within their regions might address the following questions: 1. To what extent will your community grow in the future? 2. What is your ability to manage this growth effectively? 3. What tools exist or can you develop to effectively manage this growth and support your communityâs vision? The regional planning commissions and VTrans agreed that the $250,000 available for the proj- ect should be spent in the following way: During 2005 and 2006 the regional planning commis- sions would use roughly two thirds of the dollars addressing the first two questions above in phases one and two of the project. The regions could then serve their unique needs and the needs of their respective communities. Some regions are more rural that others. Some communities have pro- fessional planning staff, some do not. The nature and extent of growth pressures also varies. Once the first two questions regarding projected growth and the ability to manage growth were addressed, the regions would use the last third of the dollars during 2006 and 2007 for phase three to identify tools to help address communitiesâ growth management needs throughout the regions. VTransâ overall interest in the project is to provide predominately rural communities facing growth pressure access to sophisticated technical tools such as Geography Information Systems and land use build out models, thus allowing them to think strategically through a scenario planning process. In addition the project strengthens intra- and inter-regional ties including coordination of plans and resources, all of which is needed to effectively plan and address growth at all levels. This will help VTrans create a more efficient and rural-friendly transportation infrastructure that will not encourage urban sprawl and will help communities create the kind of places they desire. Using the project funds, each community has been able to consider a variety of issues includ- ing the largest issue that the area is facing: sprawl and piecemeal development on a very limited 62 Appendix BâCase Studies âThe state realized that much of the growth problem stemmed directly from a lack of resources for growth-related planning at the local and regional levels.â
transportation infrastructure of rural highways and back roads. Under development pressure, this not only creates congestion and the need for additional roads or road widening, it causes access management issues as every subdivision, rural acreage, and commercial development empties onto the same rural highway. With the largest growth in Vermont occurring in and around Chittenden County, many people working in Chittenden County canât afford to live there. As rural areas have become bedroom communities, their infrastructure has struggled to keep up. The character of Northwest Vermont is thus changing permanently. The Process The Northwest Vermont Planning Project seeks to help communities analyze their growth, and evaluate their plans to manage this growth. In the long run this will help the state identify programs to assist rural communities cope with growth. The first phase of the project supplied funding to several communities to undertake a build- out analysis. Each community was able to tailor their approach to the task depending on their needs. Some areas had done little planning for or analysis of their growth, while others used the funds to increase the sophistication of their current efforts at projecting growth. In each case, however, technical tools were used to look at the effects of future build out and/or to evaluate the impact of increased development on major corridors. The Chittenden County Regional Plan- ning Commission used a land use modeling software to evaluate future impacts on Routes 7 and 116. The more rural regional planning commissions used this phase of the project to run growth forecasts for local municipalities, sometimes for the first time. From the analysis done in the first phase, each regional planning commission developed an assessment of their communityâs ability to handle increased growth in the second phase. For some municipalities, there was no planning staff or resources, while for others there was currently an established planning staff and a planning and zoning process. In those communities with few resources, the funds were used to develop tools the municipalities could use to improve site devel- opment, access management along highways, and design guidelines. The Addison County Regional Planning Commission is developing a publication entitled The View from the RoadâPatterns, Principles, & Guidelines for Roadscape. The Lamoille County Plan- ning Commission assisted local towns in adopting highway ordinances, sub-division regulations, town zoning, and separation distance requirements for driveways on Route 15 to help with access management on the corridor. The idea is to more closely regulate the type and number of direct access points to regional roads. This effort is aimed at improving congestion along primary high- ways to improve the flow of goods and services as well as for regional commuters. Central Ver- mont and Northwest Vermont Regional Planning Commission, the latter of which includes Franklin and Grand Isle Counties, compared build out scenarios with the land use goals and visions of selected towns. The third and final phase of the projectâidentifying tools to help address communitiesâ growth management needs throughout the regionsâis currently underway. It will seek to address the issues raised in the first two phases through not only improving coordination among the regions with respect to growth management but also may include improving the build-out model used by several of the project communities to improve economic and population fore- casting for all of Northwest Vermont. Appendix BâCase Studies 63 âThe largest issue that the area is facing is sprawling and piecemeal development on a very limited transportation infrastructure of rural highways and back roads.â
Results and Lessons Learned The project is allowing each of the regional planning commissions to consider both land use and transportation impacts on their rural areas. Each region now has a clearer view of the extent of pro- jected growth, how their communities will be able to handle this growth, and some tools to use growth to their advantage, rather than simply reacting to the growth as it happens. It is in VTransâ and FHWAâs interest to help the localities in each of these regions better manage their growth through land use policies in order to avoid urban sprawl and congested regional roads. This will also maximize transportation infrastructure investments, preserve the environment, and help pre- serve the rural community character that many in Northwestern Vermont desire to maintain. While much was accomplished using the various land use modeling software packages, there were problems with some of the assumptions that limited the effectiveness of the analysis and, in the case of Chittenden County, meant that the results could not be used. Some of the assumptions that proved difficult were the job-growth factors as well as accounting for mixed use development. There are hurdles slowing down the process in towns lacking staff to implement the recommen- dations. A different approach is required for these towns. This involves training local volunteers as well as providing the towns with guidebooks and draft regulations. The project has so far been successful in getting each community to consider land use and its effect on the rural transportation infrastructure. Conducting build-out analyses has caused local governments and citizens to better understand the impacts future growth and development pat- terns could have on their community. Transferability One of the highly transferable strategies employed by this project was to gather the regional planning commissions (in this case, a total of five organizations) around the same table to think about the relationship between land use and transportation and the importance of the proxim- ity between jobs and housing. This process, in which participants learned new approaches, considered their applicability, and shared insights with one another, equipped regional leaders to help local towns achieve their vision through better land use and transportation decisions. Contact Information Gina Campoli, Vermont Agency of Transportation, Email: Gina.Campoli@state.vt.us, Phone: 802.828.5756 Peg Elmer, AICP, VT DHCA Planning Director, Email: Peg.Elmer@state.vt.us, Phone: 802.828.5220 Sedona, Arizona: Serving Visitors and Preserving the Regionâs Natural Beauty Major Challenge What are innovative and cost effective ways to use transportation to enhance the regionâs livability and preserve its cultural and environmental assets? The Sedona/Red Rock region, located 30 miles south of Flagstaff is known internationally for its incredible beauty and natural recreational opportunities. The area currently has from 4-5 mil- lion visitors each year, a number that is expected to double in next 20 years. Not only is the city 64 Appendix BâCase Studies
a popular tourist destination, but Sedona is situated at the base of Oak Creek Canyon where highways 89 and 179 meet, making the community an important transportation crossroads. Transportation options for these visitors as well as community residents were limited to either owning or renting an automobile, causing increasing congestion on the few primary roads in the valley. Due to the valleyâs geography and pedestrian-unfriendly designs, walking within the pic- turesque town was difficult. Increasing congestion on both highway 89 and 179 threatened not only to harm air quality, but also to tarnish the attractiveness of the Sedona/Red Rock region to visitors. Residents were concerned that Sedona could lose its scenic beauty through widened roads and an endless line of traffic in the valley. The Project To address these issues, a consortium of the regions governments including The City of Sedona, Yavapai and Coconino counties, Coconino National Forest, the Northern Arizona Council of Governments with help from the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) and the Community Transportation Association of America organized to look at regional trans- portation alternatives. Through this collaborative process, a transportation plan was created that emphasized the following: creating a regional multimodal transportation system, limiting new highway construction, fashioning an effective public transportation system, and changing community design to create a more livable community for pedestrians and bicyclists. A major catalyst to the project was the hope that creating a true multimodal, livable community would both preserve its natural beauty and character and would increase the marketability of the region for visitors to make their stays lengthier. Appendix BâCase Studies 65 Sedona Community Profile: Population (2005 US Census estimate): 11,220 Annual pop. growth rate (2000-2005): 1.8% Special populations: 25.6% elderly Economic base: Federal government; service Community Classification: Exurban; destination Strategies employed: Local accessibility; community design; compact growth; transit planning; pedestrian orientation; street connectivity.
The transportation solution agreed upon for Sedona includes a mix of infrastructure improve- ments as well as policy changes. The idea is not only to add transit to the mix, but also to make the transit system viable through transit-oriented designs including pedestrian-friendly shuttle stops as well as transit-oriented development. Real time bus arrival information will be at key stops so that riders can know how long it will be until the next bus. Street configuration changes are planned to increase connectivity. Bicycle and pedestrian connections, including trails and pathways, will complement the system. The aim of the entire system is for tourists to be able to park at designated locations and either walk the town or take transit, thus limiting the number of trips on the main roads through the valley. Policy changes include those for parking, road design and a permit system for entering the National Forest. A network of four or more gateway sites complete with wayfinding helps for vis- itors and riders to get information, park, and access the shuttle or transfer shuttles. Through working with ADOT, the 179 highway corridor was turned over to the City to make it more pedestrian and transit-friendly and ADA compliant. The Sedona Roadrunner bus system will serve both local commuters and tourists. The first phase will include both a high frequency shuttle and a commuter bus. The tourist-oriented shuttle will serve visitors from 9:00 am to 6:30 pm in the three commercial hubs of Sedona: uptown, tlaqueapaque and hillside. Several new development projects in the City will be ori- ented around stops on the shuttle. To fully utilize resources, the buses will be housed in the nearby city of Cottonwood where many workers live and commute to Sedona each day. These buses will be used for morning and evening commuter service between the localities to ease affordable housing pressures. The system will be funded through state and federal dollars with a local match from the City of Sedonaâs general fund. Systems like the Sedona Roadrunner are also eligible for additional funding under the 2005 federal transportation legislation, SAFETEA-LU. The Process Planning for a multi-modal Sedona began at a town hall meeting on transportation. The meet- ing sparked a discussion within the community on how transportation options could be improved for the city. Out of this initial discussion a group formed, calling themselves Active Citizens for Transportation Solutions. Through the work of this group as well as extensive coor- dination between the City of Sedona, the County of Coconino, and the Arizona Department of Transportation, the community began to explore transportation options. Active Citizens for Transportation Solutions commissioned an initial Transit Feasibility Study in 1998. Out of this process came the Sedona Shuttle Feasibility Study that was adopted by the Sedona City Council in 2003. As public discussions continued, it became clear that an efficient, tourist- oriented transit service combined with pedestrian improvements would help preserve the community character through relieving the traffic congestion. The community expressed concerns that the transit system keep with the rural flavor of the community and not make the community feel like the big cities that so many of them had moved from. âResidents wanted to make sure that the bus system was at a scale that fit the community,â recalls County Trans- portation Planner Geoff Cross. This is currently being achieved through design strategies that both fit the rural character of the community, yet encourage transit-oriented design and mixed use development that complement the transit system. As the process continued, both the public and elected officials began to realize that a good transit system was not just an additional service to local residents, but it was an economic devel- opment strategy for bringing visitors and jobs to the region. Through continued discussions with the public and intergovernmental coordination, the city council authorized an agreement with 66 Appendix BâCase Studies
Coconino County to examine the feasibility study proposals and create a final implementation plan for bringing cutting-edge transit service to Sedona. Results and Lessons Learned The Sedona Transit Plan was adopted in June 2004, with service expected to commence in September 2006. In addition, the Northern Arizona Intergovernmental Public Transportation Authority, a regional transit authority covering the cities of Flagstaff, Sedona, and Cottonwood, Northern Arizona University and Coconino and Yavapai Counties, is being developed. It will administer the Sedona Roadrunner and other regional transit systems ensuring that providing good quality transit service will continue to be a priority for the region. The process was long and involved and did not lead to a single cure-all solution, rather a plan involving multiple levels of government providing a range of solutions addressing the transportation issue. The community decided not to implement the transportation plan halfway, as they knew tourist and other choice riders would not get out of their cars for an inconvenient transit system. As Geoff Cross puts it, âWe had to do it really well or not at all.â And that is what the City has done: created a plan for a rural, efficient, multimodal transportation system. Transferability Coconino County staff identified a few key recommendations for rural communities looking to replicate their success. First, they began by researching what other communities facing simi- lar problems had done. For example, Sedona looked to Zion National Parkâs transit system and Breckenridge, Colorado, as well as other western resort towns with similar valley geographies and numbers of tourists. Secondly, they paid close attention to public involvement and a high quality process, focused on getting the entire community to see the benefits of a multimodal transportation system that was balanced and tourist-friendly. This process took time and patience, but it yielded a plan that was innovative, representative, and practical. Finally, the solu- tions Sedona reached were a mixture of infrastructure improvements as well as policy changes. This integrated mixture of physical, programmatic and policy changes was critical to success. Contact Information Geoff Cross, Coconino County, Email: gcross@coconino.az.gov, Phone: 928.679.8712 Matt Ryan, Coconino County, Email: mryan@coconino.az.gov, Phone: 928.779.6764 Traverse City, Michigan: Rural Neighbors Sharing Cars to Improve Their Community Major Challenge What can be done to increase local access and transportation options for small town residents? Many rural small towns have tight-knit downtowns that provide excellent opportunities to walk to work, church or to the park. Traverse City is the ideal rural community, with a vibrant downtown center. This center is supported both by tourists who visit the picturesque town on Grand Traverse Bay and a healthy local economy, which is partially based on its status as one of the most important cherry-producing areas in the United States. Local residents Bob Otwell and friend Sharon Flesher decided this walkable, close knit com- munity was a good place to start a community car-sharing business. Otwell was concerned about Appendix BâCase Studies 67
the number of unused automobiles in their little community as well as the environmental impact of 10,000 drivers on the road each day in Traverse City. Extraneous cars take up space and finan- cial resources in a community, for example, Otwell calculated that the space used to house the cars in his 9-block neighborhood was equal to a full city block, a block that could have been used for a neighborhood park. A car-sharing program they reasoned had the potential to increase local accessibility for families dependent on one car as well as those who biked, walked, or took the bus to work. Because the community is sandwiched between two bodies of water and has enough services within walking distance, both felt that a car-sharing program could allow people the option of not owning a car since some of them only needed to run occasional errands or take short trips out of the Traverse City area. The Project When Otwell decided to start CarSharing Traverse in the small town of Traverse City, Michi- gan, the idea had taken root in less than a handful of places in the United States. These included CarSharing Portland, Inc., in Oregon as well as ZipCar in Boston. None of these were rural in nature and most were for-profit business ventures. Otwell and Flesher organized a car-sharing business model that drew from the successes of Portlandâs innovative program. The CarSharing Traverse model broke new ground in that it had no hired staff, did no marketing other than word of mouth, and was one of the first of its kind in a rural community. The Process The business began with two cars and a handful of members and expanded to three cars and about thirty members at its conclusion nearly three years later. In the words of Flesher, the 68 Appendix BâCase Studies Traverse City Profile: Population (2005 US Census estimate): 14,513 Annual pop. growth rate (2000-2005): 0.0% Economic base: Service Community Classification: Production; destination Strategies employed: Local Accessibility
operation âconsisted of lockboxes and a cell phone.â Members would call Sharonâs cell to reserve cars for specific times, would go to one of the three car locations, punch in the lockbox code to get the car keys and log their time in a logbook once they were done borrowing the car. Membership in the program was an inexpensive $25 to join, $2 per hour and $0.50 per mile to rent the cars. Cars could also be rented at a daily rate of $50. Gasoline and insurance were included in these prices. Most of the 30 members used the cars for in-town errands such as kidâs soccer games or getting groceries. For the majority, the program allowed them to be a one-car family, while for four or five families, the program was their only access to an automobile. Results and Lessons Learned The amazing lesson from the Traverse City car-sharing program process was that it worked for nearly three years without any government subsidies or assistance. It was simply a case of a group of neighbors and others concerned about their community and/or in need of additional transportation options working together. While the Traverse City program ultimately ended due to volunteer coordinator Flesherâs move to Boulder, Colorado, and the absence of a volunteer coordinator, a number of lessons on rural car sharing can be learned. Flesher suggests that future rural programs operate on a coop- erative or nonprofit model or with help from a local government. This is not to say that her busi- ness model would not work if there was enough interest. âThe program worked for two and a half years on volunteer labor, but that ran out. It would have needed 100 members to sustain a part-time paid staffer,â Flesher estimates. While one might assume that gasoline would be a major cost in operating the program, it actually represented less than five percent of the total cost. Insurance was the key cost factor for the program; however, unlike many other programs in the country, Traverse City was able to work with a local car insurance agent to have the programâs members be insured as any other business would be. This avoided unnecessary insurance costs. During the programâs entire operation there were no issues with there not being enough cars available, cars being returned late or members not paying their bills. Another key lesson learned was to contact other car-sharing programs to share ideas. The pro- gram would never have gotten off the ground without logistical advice from programs operating in more urban areas. One important ally of car sharing in these communities as well as in Tra- verse City was the presence of public transit. If residents do not have to have a car to commute to work each day, they are much more likely to find a car-sharing program attractive. Two major goals of the program were achieved: accessibility for members was increased and the number of car trips decreased (in turn decreasing traffic and air pollution). Flesher asserts, âThe biggest winner in the car sharing scheme may be the community that hosts it. Thatâs because studies have shown that participation in a CSO decreases the distances driven by its members by as much as 50 to 70 percent. The community benefits by reduced congestion, pol- lution, and infrastructure costs.â Yet, some of the most important benefits of the program were intangible. Members switched to a lifestyle of walking and biking, which in turn led to an increased feeling of community. Says Flesher, âWe built relationships that enabled most of our members to avoid purchasing their own cars when our operations ceased in June 2002.â Transferability Other rural communities have taken a similar approach to the Traverse City model and had more sustained success. For example, the Dancing Rabbit Vehicle Cooperative in rural Missouri owns a small fleet of cars that local coop members collectively use. This cooperative model may work best for a close knit community. Appendix BâCase Studies 69
Other communities may find the Aspen, Colorado, model preferable, in which the Roaring Fork Valley Vehicles program was launched with municipal support. This program operates throughout Aspen and charges similar rates to its members as the Traverse City program. The program, in oper- ation since 2001, has a website and a full time employee provided by the City of Aspen. Vehicles are purchased by the City, but operating costs are paid for through membersâ fees and car rentals. Mem- bers can reserve one of the fleetâs five cars anywhere from 30 minutes to four days. The groupâs sixty members can also benefit from various deals offered through sponsoring companies including Alamo rental cars for longer trips. Director and President, Gavin Seedorf, says that most members do not own cars or have unreliable cars, although local businesses also use the service. Some of the members are also part-time residents who come to enjoy the areaâs scenic beauty and ski slopes. In larger urban markets, car sharing has become big business. Companies such as ZipCar and Flexcar and City CarShare have established themselves as a part of the transportation network. In December 2005, there were an estimated 105,000 members of car-sharing programs in North America5, up from less than a few thousand in 2000.6 Contact Information Bob Otwell, Email: bob@traversetrails.org, Phone: 231.941.4300 Sharon Flesher, Email: fleshertc@charter.net, Phone: 231.935.4003 Gavin Seedorf, Roaring Fork Valley Vehicles, Email: gavins@ci.aspen.co.us, Phone: 970.920.5066 Useful Websites http://www.roaringforkvehicles.com/index.html http://www.dancingrabbit.org/drvc/ http://www.carsharing.net/where.html http://www.record-eagle.com/2000/feb/09share.htm http://www.nelsonnygaard.com/articles/tcrp_rpt_108_execsumm.pdf http://www.zipcar.com/ Unity, Maine: Preserving Farmland Through Strengthening Community Character Major Challenge How to preserve local, community character, and prevent the loss of farmland while going though growth and economic changes Unity, Maine, is not unlike many farming communities across the country. The small town is located in a very rural portion of the state in Waldo Countyâone of the poorest counties in Maine. Unity has a small liberal arts college established in the 1960s that specializes in environmental programs. It also has a concentration of senior and low income housing due to the town having 70 Appendix BâCase Studies 5From http://www.carsharing.net 6From TCRP Report 108 on Car-sharing: http://www.nelsonnygaard.com/articles/tcrp_rpt_108_execsumm.pdf
one of the only sewer systems in Waldo County. The town has seen the decline of agricultural jobs and disinvestment in its small town center. In addition, new homes, businesses and even the new Masonic hall were being built out of town on former agricultural lands. In short, Unity was experiencing what many rural communities have witnessed: disappearing farmland and the end to a rural way of life. The Unity Barn Raisers organization had its start from the townâs comprehensive planning process. In 1989, the State Legislature enacted the Growth Management Act. This act allowed towns across the state to pass local comprehensive plans. Unity adopted its first comprehensive plan in 1993. The town adopted a land use ordinance for its comprehensive plan in 1995 and has updated its plan frequently since then. These updates have provided an opportunity for the community to further define the future they desire for Unity. Through the community vision- ing process of the plan, a number of local citizens became better educated about the future pos- sibilities for their community and excited about shaping Unityâs future. They also realized two things through the community visioning process: The first was that they could not accomplish all they wanted for Unity through the comprehensive plan due to the townâs limited funds for economic development and limited town staff. The second was that the town no longer had a community meeting place. The planning meetings were held in a local church and had to be scheduled around events held there. The citizens involved in the visioning process decided to establish Unity Barn Raisers with the express goal of serving more needs locally and creating a positive social impact on their community. The organization realized that the town was not likely to have a large amount of growthâit had seen perhaps a total of 20 houses added over the last five yearsârather, they could use what growth there was to create pockets of activity within the community. Appendix BâCase Studies 71 Unity Town Profile: Population (2005 US Census estimate): 1,972 Annual pop. growth rate (2000-2005): 0.9% Economic base: Service (institutional) Community Classification: Destination Strategies employed: Transit planning; Compact growth; Pedestrian and cycling connections.
The Project The impetus for starting the Unity Barn Raisers was a realization that their community was becoming essentially a bedroom community. Most services had, or were, in the process of leav- ing the town center. Residents were increasingly forced to work, shop, dine, and play in neigh- boring communities. The Unity Barn Raisers understood that if their community became solely a bedroom community, it would mean the death of both their town center and the local sense of community. The organization set out to combat the trend by revitalizing the center, bringing essential services back to Main Street, improving the local transportation system, and creating a true sense of community in Unity. The overall goal is to improve their community through locally driven projects and land use changes. The aim is to decrease the distance folks have to drive to work or for goods and services. Decreasing the overall âfootprintâ of the developed area will not only increase the viability of Unity as a healthy town, but will also help protect the sur- rounding rural countryside from sprawling development. Some of the expressed goals of the organization are to: (1) Improve the quality of life for res- idents of Unity (2) Preserve the town center and have it continue as the market center for sur- rounding towns (3) Pursue innovative projects that help local businesses, enhance the physical environment, and increase the sense of community (4) Assist existing businesses to thrive (5) Be good stewards of the land (6) Only support projects that foster local self-reliance and will not threaten the natural environment or small town character of Unity. The Process The first project the Unity Barn Raisers tackled was getting a community center for the town. The Masonic hall had moved away from the town center due to a lack of available parking. The organization worked with the town to renovate the old hall and use a number of vacant lots in the center of town for parking. Getting the town to embrace the idea of shared parking for businesses and offices in the town center was a critical step towards revitalizing it. Once the community center was built, the organization focused on preserving existing businesses and bringing back businesses that had left. The town amended the land use ordinance to require that all new retail and most new commercial development locate in the town center. Later, the ordinance was also amended to require all new commercial development of more than 10,000 square feet to build so that it encouraged modes of transportation other than the automobile. Although many slow- growing or declining communities would be hesitant to pass such ordinances, fearing it might discourage new businesses, the affect has been just the opposite. Unity has attracted a number of new businesses to their town center including a veterinarian, a health center, an insurance agency, a credit union, and two new restaurants. When the only local gym closed, the Barn Raisers tried to convince a local businessman to reopen the facility. When this proved to be financially unfea- sible, they bought the equipment and opened a community gym inside the community center. The organization plans to continue assisting more businesses to locate or start up in the town center, but also has begun to work on getting more housing in the town center. The townâs ordinance includes guidelines to maintain the small town character that the commu- nity values so much. The most striking fact about the revitalization happening in Unityâs town center is that before the intervention by local citizens, eight of ten store fronts on Main Street 72 Appendix BâCase Studies âThe organization is seeking to improve multimodal transportation within Unity, not only to allow for seniors and others without cars to get around, but also to allow others to commute and recreate within the vicinity without the use of a car.â
Appendix BâCase Studies 73 were vacant. Now, all have businesses. While there was previously only one restaurant, there are four. The organization is seeking to improve multimodal transportation within Unity, not only to allow for seniors and others without cars to get around, but also for others to commute and recreate within the vicinity. To this end, the organization has begun the CommUnity Trails proj- ect. The network of trails will connect most of the townâs amenities and services. The trails network will have a one mile bikeway that will stretch from a public beach on Unity Pond through the town center and then on to Unity College. This bikeway includes a new bridge that creates a scenic short cut between the town and the college. The bikeway is part of a broader plan to encourage more college students, many of whom rent housing in the town center, not to bring cars to college. Much of the trail system is built, with some still under construction. Unity Barn Raisers has also worked with the town to put in quite a few new sidewalks and streetscape improvements. These have included over 85 trees planted to replace the townâs original street trees that were wiped out by Dutch Elm Disease and had never been replaced. The organization would also like to initiate a van service for seniors, low income residents, college students, and others without access to cars. Results and Lessons Learned The Unity Barn Raisers have had not only great plans for the community, but significant suc- cesses as well. They have used very creative mechanisms for attracting and creating locally owned and operated businesses. The accomplishments of the Unity Barn Raisers have not come without struggles. In the beginning, the organization had to work hard to convince local elected officials of their good intentions. Efforts to encourage new residential growth in and around the existing town center (rather than in outlying areas) have been hampered by the fact that the town center includes a stock car track that is very loud two days out of the week. The organization has also faced opposition from some in the community as well. Most of those who were skeptical in the beginning have now been won over by the organizationâs incredible success in the majority of its undertakings. As is the case with many small communities, the town of Unity has very few financial resources available for economic development. This created a place for a civic organization like the Unity Barn Raisers to write grants, hold fundraisers such as silent auctions and a golf tournament, and use a team of community volunteers to see their vision for Unity accomplished. Through their work, the organization has been able to secure several Community Development Block Grants as well as several foundation grants. The organization is to be congratulated on the incredible success they have had in achieving a clear vision of revitalization for their community. They have begun to create a revitalized, beau- tified, and truly multimodal town center. They have been able to offer numerous community programs and events. Most importantly, they have come a long ways toward meeting their goal of creating and preserving a sense of community in their rural town. Unity Barn Raiserâs found- ing executive director, John Piotti, who also chairs the local planning board, explains that after each successful program or project, âThe community gets more excited about the power of planning.â Transferability Rural American towns facing the same challenges as Unity can learn from their experience in strong civic engagement. Cultivating strong local leadership and empowering citizens were key ingredients for their successes. The enabling growth management legislation passed by the State encouraged this level of involvement in planning. But perhaps the most important ingredient
for success has been the communityâs continued public and private investments in programs and projects that inspire community residents and foster ongoing participation. Contact Information John Piotti, Email: piotti@uninets.net, Phone: 207.338.6575 Tess Woods, Email: ubr@uninets.net, Phone: 207.948.9005 Virginia Creeper Trail, Washington County, VA: Leveraging Transportation Improvement for Revitalization Major Challenge Southeastern Virginia contains some of the Eastern United Statesâ most beautiful landscapes, quaint villages, and rugged mountain terrain. As the area was settled, good trails through the Appalachian Mountains were important for commerce and migration. These routes continued to be important in the 19th and 20th centuries and many became rail lines for the purpose of extracting iron ore, harvesting lumber, and transporting the regionâs growing population. Shortly after the turn of the century, one such line, the Virginia Carolina Railroad, was constructed from Abingdon to Damascus, Virginia, and on into North Carolina. The line was christened the 74 Appendix BâCase Studies Abingdon and Damascus Town Profiles: Population (2005 US Census estimate): Abingdon 7,925; Damascus 1,083 Annual pop. growth rate (2000-2005): Abingdon 0.4%; Damascus 2.1% Special populations: 20.7% elderly Economic base: Manufacturing Community Classification: Production Strategies employed: Pedestrian and cycling linkages; land development regulations
âVirginia Creeperâ after a local plant species (as well as the fact that the line moved slowly up the area mountainsides carrying many tons of iron ore and lumber, not to mention passengers and supplies). The line ceased to be profitable after the Great Depression and operations ended in 1977. Led by two citizens, Dr. French Moore Jr. and Dr. Dave Brilhart, the local community actively worked to get the right-of-way preserved as a multi-use trail. Because the land between the Abingdon and Damascus is all privately owned, and in some cases only 80 feet wide, there was a strong backlash from some landowners at the suggestion of building the trail on the old railroad right-of-way. Threats and intimidation were used to stop the project, including a mysterious fire that burned a good portion of one wooden trestle. Washington County was hesitant to support the project due to pressure from land owners; however, in 1982 both towns bought the trail right-of-way for the first 15 miles with Tennessee Valley Authority grant money and help from the railroad company and the Virginia Commission for Outdoor Recreation. The USDA acquired the right-of-way for the remaining miles in the Jefferson National Forest. The trestles were also purchased from the salvage company that had been sold the rights to their lumber. Construction of the trail began shortly after purchase, with the work completed and the trail inaugurated in 1984. The Project The Virginia Creeper trail stretches a total of 33.4 miles long from the town of Abingdon through Damascus and on to Whitetop Station to the east. The trail begins at an elevation of 2,000 feet in Abingdon, climbing to 3,600 feet by the time it reaches Whitetop Station. There are an impressive 47 trestles along the trail as it makes its way through the mountains. Although a major regional transportation link in terms of length, the trail is not for motorized vehicles. Only biking, hiking, and horseback riding are allowed. It is currently managed by the towns of Damas- cus and Abingdon, with the portions in the Jefferson National Forest managed by the Mount Rogers National Recreation Area. The trail includes three visitor centers. A survey and economic impact study done by the USDA and the University of Georgia in December 2004 found that local users live, on average, eight miles from the portion of the trail they use. Of the local users, 65 percent were from nearby Abingdon. Local users were also found to use the trail about 11 times per month, with 55 percent taking fewer than 10 trips each month. There are some local residents who use the trail very frequently including one older gen- tleman who bikes to White Top multiple times a week. The main activities on the trail were walking (nearly half of local users), followed by biking and jogging. The opposite was true for out of town visitors to the trail. Three fourths of these nonlocal users came to bike the trail for an average distance of 17 miles per trip. Although the trail could be used for commuting between Damascus and Abingdon, the area has a small population. No survey has been done to determine the recreational usage of the trail versus using it for trips that would have been taken with an automobile; however, it is estimated that few locals use the trail instead of driving. The town of Damascus has reinvented itself from a quiet small town to a center for recre- ational tourism along the Virginia Creeper Trail. The town now boasts bike shops, restaurants and other services that cater to those coming from across the region to use the trail. Damascus has been called âTrail Town, USAâ due to the fact that five major trails intersect at the town. The town of Abingdon has also benefited from the trail. Since it is a larger community, there are more local residents who run, walk or ride the trail. It is also a known tourist destination, a fact that is increased by its location as the start of the Virginia Creeper Trail. Washington County has been working on an overlay district for portions of the trail. This would direct land uses and design guidelines to improve the area of the community around the trail in a manner that would enhance the character of the region and its attractiveness as Appendix BâCase Studies 75
a regional destination. Most of the zoning around the trail is agricultural in the more rural sections. Results and Lessons Learned After over 20 years of use, the trail is more popular than ever and successful in terms of pro- viding regional recreation opportunities and economic benefits to Washington County. Over 100,000 annually use the trail, bringing in somewhere between $2.3 and $3.9 million dollars annually to the area. The communities of Abingdon and Damascus have successfully used the trail to improve their historic areas and attract tourists from the region and far beyond. Transferability The Virginia Creeper Trail is a model for other communities in that it successfully employs a transportation facility, mainly used for recreational purposes, as a tool for economic develop- ment. The Trail is also a model of intergovernmental coordination. Half the trail is owned by the federal government through the National Forest Service, half is owned by two local communi- ties, and much of the maintenance and promotion is through the Virginia Creeper Trail Club, a strong grassroots organization. By using a transportation planning process to help disparate groups come together, establish mutual goals, and work together toward implementation, the project has established a strong base for long-term success. Contact Information Charles Horton, Washington County, E-mail: chorton@washcova.com Virginia Creeper Trail Club, www.vacreepertrail.org Western Piedmont Region, North Carolina: Managing Highway Corridors and Guiding Development Major Challenge Finding innovative and cost effective ways to use transportation to enhance the regionâs livability and preserve its cultural and environmental assets The Western Piedmont region is located approximately 50 miles northwest of Charlotte, in the foothills of the Blue Ridge mountains. The four-county region is defined as the Hickory, N.C., metropolitan statistical area by the Census Bureau. While much of the regionâs land remains in agricultural production (particularly in Alexander County, the smallest), agriculture accounts for less than 1 percent of regional employment.7 The regionâs economy has depended on manufac- turing in recent decades, particularly in furniture and textiles. Downturns in both industries have led to the loss of more than 20,000 jobs in the region since the year 2000, slowing economic and population growth.8 According to the Catawba County government, âcomprehensive efforts are being directed at identifying and recruiting new sectors in manufacturing such as bio- medical, pharmaceutical, technology and building products, and identifying and recruiting non- manufacturing sectors such as retirement and retail development.â9 Two major highway links 76 Appendix BâCase Studies 7http://cmedis.commerce.state.nc.us/countyprofiles/default.cfm 8http://www.wpcog.org/files/variousPDF/einsummer2004mainbody2.pdf 9http://www.catawbacountync.gov/misc/profile.asp
cross the region: Interstate 40 (built in the 1960s-70s) and US Highway 321 (completed in 1998). Both highways increased the potential for economic development in the area, by providing more access to the region and by providing opportunities for business locations (such as retail outlets for locally manufactured furniture). At the same time, development along these corridors created challenges, including managing access to properties along the highways, threats to scenic land- scapes and the natural environment, and concerns that development would detract from the com- munityâs character. The Projects Over two decades, local governments partnered with the Western Piedmont Council of Governments (WPCOG), which houses the RPO/MPO for the area, to develop three corridor studies along these two major routes. Each study resulted in a corridor plan (the last plan is still in draft form) designed to (in the words of the I-40 plan) âpromote safety, traffic efficiency, aesthetics, economic development, and compatible residential uses.â The first plan, completed in 1996, covered a newly built section of US 321 in central Catawba County. The corridor was largely undeveloped, so it presented planners with a nearly âblank slateâ to ensure that new development would be appropriately sited and that access would not impede the functioning of the highway. US 321 in Catawba County is a limited- access freeway with only four interchanges, so development along the highway itself is not a major issue. Instead, the plan focuses on siting, design, and access points of development at the four interchanges, and along the intersecting thoroughfares close to those interchanges. The major accomplishment in the plan was the creation of an economic development (ED) district with uniform classifications for mixed-use development in nodes at the interchanges. Appendix BâCase Studies 77 Western Piedmont Regional Profile: Population (2005 US Census estimate): 355,654 Annual pop. growth rate (2000-2005): 0.8% Economic base: Manufacturing (furniture and textile) Community Classification: Production Strategies employed: Regional corridor planning, access management, overlay districts.
The district encourages residential development to take shape in clustered and zero-lot-line developments. The I-40 Corridor Plan in Burke County (adopted in 2003) addressed a different problem. I-40 has been functioning since the 1960s. Along the corridor in Burke County (the westernmost of the four), it has already become inundated with commercial strip development. Like US 321 in Catawba, I-40 is a limited-access freeway. Thus, the major access management challenges are on other major thoroughfares in the corridor. However, the plan also addressed problems at the interchanges on I-40. An important issue was that the 15 interchanges were built based on 1960s design standards, and each had its own safety deficiencies. Prior to the Corridor Plan, no one in the county had been able to agree on the priority of fixing these interchanges, given limited resources. A major accomplishment of the plan was to recommend improvements and a rank- ing of priorities. For example, for Exit 111, considered the most dangerous in the county, the plan recommends that it be first in line for a redesign of the ramps, and calls for reserving right- of-way for ramp expansions. The plan also recommends holding off on zoning changes around this interchange until the redesign takes place, to highlight the importance of addressing this problem. Like the US 321 Plan in Catawba, the I-40 Plan sets common access management standards, design guidelines, and zoning regulations for property along the corridor. Property owners are required to limit the number of driveways and site them to avoid conflicts at road intersections. Owners are also encouraged to create common access points and share parking. Parking is to be located behind or at the side of buildings, and buildings are required to have their entrances oriented toward pedestrians. The US 321 Corridor Plan in Caldwell County, like the I-40 plan, deals with an older highway with established land use patterns. But US 321 in Caldwell adds the additional challenge of land use and access management problems on a thoroughfare not built to freeway standards. For about 20 miles, from the county seat of Lenoir south to the county line at the Catawba River, US 321 is a four-lane divided highway. Like I-40, the corridor has attracted a great deal of commer- cial development, including industrial parks and furniture outlets. Many of the commercial establishments have driveways with direct access to the highway. Also, residential development in the corridor requires buffering from larger non-residential uses. The solution proposed here, as in the other two plans, includes buffering new development with landscaping, restricting the number of driveways and the distance between them on newly developed sites, and requiring interconnections between adjacent sites. On already-developed sites, a change in ownership or an expansion of business would trigger the new standards. Many existing sites already have three or four separate driveway access points, so planners wanted to prevent owners from building additional driveways. Finally, as in the other plans, the draft plan promotes mixed-use and clustered development. The Process Modern corridor planning in the Western Piedmont region had its genesis in a 1990 report issued by a US 321 Task Force formed by Catawba County. The task force recommended a num- ber of changes to planning practices, in anticipation of the rapidly approaching construction of the limited-access segment of US 321. The recommendations included the establishment of a corridor plan for the new highway segment, and uniform land use regulations to be adopted by all local jurisdictions in their sections of the corridor. The Western Piedmont Council of Governments, as the lead planning agency for the Unifour Rural Planning Organization (RPO) and the Greater Hickory Metropolitan Planning Organiza- tion (MPO), took the lead on the US 321 Plan in Catawba, as well as the other plans which 78 Appendix BâCase Studies
followed. The process and the outcomes pioneered during the first US 321 Plan created a successful model that was adapted for use in the other two plans. Each planning process shared similar characteristics. In all cases, though WPCOG was the lead agency, the local governments along each corridor played significant roles. Because all participants agreed that a major goal was the adoption of uniform land development and access management regulations, these plans would not have succeeded without the participation and buy-in of all affected jurisdictions. Stakeholder buy-in was also important. In both the US 321 Plan in Catawba, and the I-40 Plan in Burke, the chambers of commerce, the local Realtors, and the environmental community were all able to agree on the uniform standards. During the I-40 planning process, planners also held open public meetings where citizens could âdrop inâ to see the status of the plan. Once the corridor plans were completed, it was up to the county and to each city and town along the corridor to adopt zoning and other regulations to implement the plans. For example, the US 321 Plan for Catawba developed two new economic development zoning districts (one for mixed-use, one for industrial) for key places along the corridor, while the US 321 Plan in Caldwell recommends an overlay district along the entire length of the corridor. The counties, the RPO/MPO, and the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) must also take steps to implement the infrastructure elements of each plan. In the case of I-40, NCDOT is undertaking a feasibility study of changes to two of the most dangerous interchanges. Along US 321 in Caldwell, NCDOT has started the planning and environmental study to widen the highway. Results and Lessons Learned The corridor plans in the Western Piedmont region demonstrate how corridor planning can be a flexible and effective tool. All three plans had common objectives, but in each case the plan- ners adapted to local conditions and needs. The plans also show the importance of a collabora- tive relationship among the local governments and the regional planning agency. Another important lesson is the value of good research. Particularly for the first plan on the 321 corridor, the planners drew extensively on the existing literature on corridor planning, landscape designs for commercial parking, and zero-lot-line development. Because of their relative newness, the plans have not had much impact yet on new development in the corridors, but there are already a few encouraging examples. On US 321 in Caldwell, Wal-Mart originally proposed a site plan for a store that requested its own signalized access point on the highway, even though the driveway would be less than 600 feet from an existing traffic light. After discussion with planners, the company agreed to adhere to the draft access management guidelines and provide access at the road with the traffic signal. Along US 321 in Catawba, two industrial properties have been built that meet the signage, buffer, and other requirements in that corridorâs plan. And the I-40 Corridor Plan produced a previously unreachable consensus among the local governments in the form of a priority list for improvements to the interchanges on the corridor, resulting in the first positive steps toward addressing these safety concerns. It is as important to note what these plans do not try to achieve as it is to say what they do. Planners and stakeholders were under no illusions that they were trying to create âMain Streetsâ on these busy, yet still rural, sections of highway. Rather, the goal is to create nodes of develop- ment that are amenable to a âpark onceâ approach. The strip development patterns along much of the I-40 corridor and the US 321 corridor in Caldwell are often not pedestrian-friendly, and have poor internal connections. As one planner noted, âwhen my 80-year-old mother goes shop- ping at the furniture outlets on US 321, she wonders why she has to leave one store, get in her car and drive back out onto 321, and then drive back in another driveway only a couple hundred feet away.â The nodal development patterns and the internal connections for pedestrian and Appendix BâCase Studies 79
automobile travel will, at least, make it easier for customers to conveniently move on foot among different business establishments within a cluster. While this may seem like a modest accom- plishment to planners familiar with more urban environments, it represents a significant achievement in the US 321 corridor. Finally, these plans demonstrate the importance of reaching a community consensus in a cor- ridor where multiple jurisdictions have authority. In the I-40 Plan and the US 321 Plan in Catawba, all the relevant local governments bought in, as did all major stakeholders. The result in both cases is a uniform set of standards that can prevent developers from playing jurisdictions against each other for advantage. In the US 321 corridor in Caldwell, the plan is still a draft as of summer 2006. Part of the reason is that some major property owners raised concerns about restrictions on billboards and other aesthetic requirements. While some of the local governments have already adopted piecemeal parts of the plan they like (such as the access management stan- dards), the corridor plan awaits a complete consensus before full adoption. Some planners acknowledge that concerns over a weakening economy in the region can trump the desire for good planning. Nevertheless, many stakeholders in the Western Piedmont region appear to have reached the conclusion that high standards actually increase the potential for desirable economic development, and they are prepared to base the economic future of their most important travel corridors on that conclusion. Transferability The Western Piedmont case study demonstrates the use of the corridor study as a way to encourage regional collaboration between multiple jurisdiction to jointly manage the effective- ness of transportation facilities that are vital for the local economy. Corridor studies are now in common use, while the use of overlay districts such as the âeconomic development districtâ are becoming more and more prevalent. Applying corridor studies and overlay districts concurrently is a valuable way to integrate transportation and land use in rural areas to make the most use of major transportation facilities while also using those facilities as economic development tools to encourage appropriate land development along a corridor. Contact Information John C. Marshall, AICP, RPO Coordinator, Email: john.marshall@wpcog.org, Phone: 828.485.4232 Ext. 232 John C. Tippett, Jr., AICP, Planning Director/MPO Coordinator, Email: john.tippett@ wpcog.org, Phone: 828.485.4237 Ext. 237 80 Appendix BâCase Studies